DSE

Consult your rig manufacturer prior to adding anything to your rig that they didn't put on it, or offer to put on it. Many manufacturers will spray a rig with Scotchguard, for example, if you're worried about having a dirty rig.

Video has now been updated to include more information and call-outs. What I didn't put in there, was that the jumper would have likely been better off not unstowing toggles, as there was RPC/Bridle housekeeping to do. Having the canopy fly more slowly would have eliminated the turn (that increased pressure on the RPC) and allowed for a more calm response to the situation. It wasn't a good place to be, but there are several actions that could have happened after the deployment that may have further reduced risk.

I've nearly finished an edited version speaking to each of the issues, but felt it's worth getting out there for discussion without my editorial input. The jumper has been in the sport a long time, but I wouldn't call this person an "active jumper." One of the questions asked upon examination of the rig was "Should I have cut away after my main deployed?" Some answered that "The main would merely have been a MARD deployment." I'm not so sure this would have been that simple. It almost seems we need Safety Day in June.

https://vimeo.com/68934659 Discuss.

Ian, this is an important point, IMO. Not defining the specifics of the topic up front makes it hard to follow at times. It would actually make the video shorter, not longer. Everyone *should* know this, but obviously not everyone knows that a hard deck, decision altitude, last alarm, etc are the same thing, and perhaps they haven't really thought about it much since they started. Shannon saying that the team has committed to each other and themselves that they'll always observe that deck is a powerful statement, coming from the Flight 1 team. I've come across several people that have lowered their hard deck as they've become more experienced. Thank you to the team for doing this.

Ron, it's not USPA that hasn't done anything. It's *us.* USPA is an organization that follows the directive of the BOD. We elect the BOD. And unfortunately, we have had, and still have some BOD elects that are there to protect their DZ's interest, and nothing else. Safety isn't an issue for them, and they're afraid of not being re-elected for taking tough positions. I respect the sh** out of people like Rich Winstock, Tony Thacker, Sherry Butcher, Ray Lallo, Jan Meyer, because they're willing to take unpopular positions and try to move them through S&T and then the full board, but there are at least 50% of the remaining board members that believe (some quite loudly) that "USPA isn't in the business of teaching or regulating experienced skydivers."

Get one of Scotty Burns old wingsuits. Put a tandem rig on it. Put two people inside, because 98.6 +98.6 = 197.2 degrees. This temperature is somewhat close to what is happening inside of a hot air balloon's envelope and you're lifting a lot less weight. The person on the bottom needs to hold really still/be inert. They're only there to provide body heat. You'll want Cameroon fabric though, because it is the lowest porosity per ounce fabric available. Conversely, you *might* be able to achieve a similar effect with stick-on heating pads (the disposable kind). I had some of these on my ass at one event, and they got too hot. Drogaline stuck em' to his head and shoulders after they'd been on my ass all morning, and he was definitely flying pretty damn high after that, so I'd say it had a positive affect. On the other hand, instead of a Montgolfier/heated balloon, one has to ponder if a Rozier balloon might make some sense (Helium instead of hot air). It has met with success for professional lawn-chair pilots... Then, kinda wonder what might happen if you *mixed* the two types, it would sure be a helluva show. Adding methane and a fast-back igniter may reduce the need for fuel packs (less weight to lift). Give it a whirl.

These two things are not necessarily exclusive. The OP could: -Watch a video -Read a manual -Find an answer on the internet And then have someone check it. I'm not reading where the OP says "I want you to tell me so I can do it and not have someone check it. Who is 'unreasonably upset?" I'm laughing at most of what you posted here, because I can picture you hunched over a keyboard pounding harder on the keys as if that'll make readers understand your words better. Both you and Chris D need to take a timeout and stop with the straw scenarios and judgements. A guy asked a question, the complete reason for which most of us are clueless. Instead of providing answers, it turns into "you don't know to do this by this date? You must be an idiot." "Attacked," "jumped on," "redirected with vitriol," "shamed..." All fit. Chose your poison, but I'm sure not "upset." I'm embarrassed for the OP's treatment over an innocuous post.

no helmet cutaway.

Yeah, they'll fit, with a small amount of hang-over. The GoPro can go on the front of the helmet. It weighs so little, it makes no difference.

I don't know of anything in the incident reports. I do know a first-hand account of an RSL-deployed main catching on a fairly large camera. The person ended up possessing the super-human strength required to tear the camera off his helmet. The 1/4 mount ripped out of the bottom of the plastic camera.

Yes, kudos. I'm sure it was simply an error of omission when you forgot to emphasize that hands-on with a knowledgeable rigger or skydiver is best for learning. I'm sure it was simply an error of omission when you forgot to emphasize that learning by video is not a means to an end in and of itself. I'm sure it was an error in judgement that you alienated someone for seeking knowledge without first being aware of what resources they have access to, and quality of information they have access to. You've tweaked on learning over the internet in several posts; you do realize you're encouraging and supporting the very institution you claim is not appropriate? Video, postings, social sites are all great channels from which we can all learn. It doesn't replace face-to-face testing, yet how many times have you also attacked what someone has learned face-to-face (hint; several). So...if the face to face learning is shit, online video is shit, posts on a website are shit...where is one supposed to go? BTW, the world trend is FLEX learning. Even in skydiving. Deal with it. If the guy can watch a video, read a manual, and then articulate what he's seeing without ever having spoken to a rigger, is the information he possesses any less valuable? Again, kudos to _anyone_ for seeking knowledge in whatever means possible.

It's likely there are oblivious, basic things you do each day (speaking English, for example) where you miss the very basics. It's less likely you're ripped up over it. Many do not know exactly how their gear works, and that is unfortunate. Hopefully their DZ has ways and means of encouraging people to know more about their gear. Not every student driver is taught to change oil or tires, but it's unlikely they'd be called "stupid" for not knowing this. Kudos to the OP for looking for more information, and nothing wrong with searching the web for information. It's one of the many paths to learn new things.

New software update seems to have fixed a few, certainly not all the cams. I have one that is working correctly now, and another that isn't. Both have the same updates applied. Perhaps when they send the next update (that allegedly kills 4K), we'll have a working model.

I think the opposite. More is more IMO. More is more overall, and in sports, that's the general attitude. IMO, Super shallow DOF doesn't really work in skydiving, and supershallow DOF annoys the hell out of me in cinematic work. Shallow DOF...great in anything. The over-the-top that is becoming popular with the f1.4 crowd... Yes, I agree. I also think shallow DOF isnt really going to work in skydiving. This is (among other things) why I prefer the smaller sensor over Full frame. Of course it works. It may be the flyer can't get themselves to the correct distance for the focal length to be appropriate, but blurring the ground, other skydivers, or clouds surely can work as a creative tool. My issue is with the super shallow, where someone is looking to get a nose in focus and the helmet out of focus. It doesn't add art to the shot, IMO. Not in our giant fishbowl, anyway.

Even Jay Stokes keeps a logbook of sorts, and manages it fine. Kinda bullshit for anyone to think they're above whatever rules a DZ wants to enforce. In this case, the guru knew the rules before visiting the DZ. Kinda interesting, the contrasts. Jon DeVore shows up at our DZ with his new wingsuits. He shows cards, e-logbook, goes through the entire briefing. Didn't ask for specials even though he's exceptionally well-known. Humble, complied with all rules, did his thing, had good words, left us with a smile because he enjoyed our DZ, aircraft, and wingsuit program.

My advice would be to stop jumping the camera wings with tandems until you have refined your exit technique/timing. Getting hit by the drogue is a big deal, and can pose a real danger to the tandem if it gets snagged on any part of your body. Make sure that your exits and subterminal flying are 100% before taking the wings out with tandems. This.

I think the opposite. More is more IMO. More is more overall, and in sports, that's the general attitude. IMO, Super shallow DOF doesn't really work in skydiving, and supershallow DOF annoys the hell out of me in cinematic work. Shallow DOF...great in anything. The over-the-top that is becoming popular with the f1.4 crowd...

where are you making nearly 100 skydives a week?

This is becoming more the common view. Thanks for doing your part. If we can work together to get WS to fly 'right', perhaps we can stop/reverse the trend. (BTW, I don't moderate the WS forums, in here, i'm just an asshole like everyone else)

Agreed. Problem solved at the local level. Sorted. Except that earlier, you're exhorting that "pressure to land on the DZ is hurting lots of people." So, which position are you taking this time? Is this another "we've been saying the same thing the whole time, but I've been saying it different than you" conversation?

Yes, at the time I had around 500 WS jumps, second WS jump after my accident, following someone else. It was stupid. And even more stupid that I (at the time) was proud of landing on the 50 yard line. Do that today, and I'd be grounded from the DZ. I'm not suggesting I've not made mistakes; rather that I've learned from them and realized that the culture I was associating with is not good for our sport. I'm on a DZ where the DZO banned WS for a brief period, simply due to that sort of stupid. Where/when are the several wingsuit off landings where 'a lot more people' were hurt due to an obstacle? The fatalities were not due to hitting an obstacle. We disagree, apparently by quite a bit. I believe that not knowing how to navigate (backflying included) is a very, very basic skill that is part of spotting skill. We are unpowered aircraft with long reach range relative to other skydiving displines. If being "pressured" to land where we're supposed to is "hurting a lot of people," then perhaps they shouldn't be skydiving. "Deadly" isn't the problem. The bigger issue is the drain on DZ resources, community relations, and the stigma that landing off brings to our discipline. It puts us on the DZM/DZO's radar, and not in a positive way. It can get the pilot into conversations with the FAA that they'd rather not have.

Wingsuit off-landings have caused fatalities in the past, and likely will do so again. "Pressure to land on the DZ is killing people?" You're kidding, right? The only legit reason for an off landing is for an emergency. If one can't spot to put oneself on the dropzone on a jump, then wingsuiting likely isn't the best choice of discipline. Most of the 'instructors' out there don't seem to be teaching navigation, understanding spots, tailwinds, and line of flight. That's just plain fucked up. Those kind of ass-clowns, landing people miles away from the DZ, out in the ocean, into military reservations....they're damaging our discipline. It's not a badge of honor to post "Dude, I landed 5 miles away from the DZ." It's a mark of stupid. Most of us have landed off at some point. My favorite off-landing story is when a 47 way went the wrong direction at Pepperell. Homeowners weren't thrilled to see us dropping in. It was stupid. Every off landing in a neighborhood causes concerns in the local community. This can turn into pressure on the DZO to better police his patrons. Do I understand you feel rapidly upsizing suits is not part of the problem we face in our discipline? We're in complete agreement on an AAD fire. If you're not unconscious or otherwise incapacitated and you have an AAD fire, probably a good time to hang up the gear.

of the two fatal canopy collisions where I knew the deceased AND the person causing the death, both of the pilots thought they'd 'demonstrated they could fly and land my parachute safely without hurting other people yet both of them had strong negative attitudes towards safety conversations. In the case of the other two, I didn't personally know the decedent nor the person causing the collison, but posts here on DZ.com indicate they'd been talked to about canopy choices and their aggressive flying. Most everyone in the sport has demonstrated they can fly and land their parachute safely without hurting other people. Until they demonstrate otherwise. In the last couple of years, canopy collisions, mostly involving smaller canopies, have been a significant killer in our sport. Swooping/low turns are the other killer at the fore. Attitude plays a strong role in how one learns to play in the sky with others, and manage their own airspace. The natural process tends to slow bad attitudes down sooner than later. Hopefully it comes in the form of just a tib/fib or perhaps a femur vs something much worse.

Fatalities, off landings, loss of altitude awareness causing AAD fires (just happened this weekend again), two outs due to poor rigging (just happened last weekend) also make DZOs leery of what we do. Big suits use to overcoat weak skills are a huge part of the problem, but nowhere near all of the problem. Doing the math as a DZO is pretty easy. Sit down and do it, and you'll quickly realize why wingsuiting doesn't make sense to some DZOs. In terms of good business, it's not a good thing in many locations. Learn to fly your body before upsizing. One would never downsize their canopy under the same progression so many are upsizing their wingsuit...