3mpire

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    733

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    0%

Posts posted by 3mpire

  15. Or how about this, everyone wears one of these transmitters in their helmet and you connect your smart phone to your audible altimeter and it gives you a warning if you are under canopy and another user is detected within 100 feet of you. no more blind spots.

    same thing could happen in free fall. if you are below a predefined breakoff and another user is within 100 feet of you you get an audible warning. would help warn you close to deployment if a possible collision is imminent given proximity to another jumper.

    just spit balling how you could use the technology.

  16. Keep watching bluetooth low energy as it develops.

    currently the range for items tagged with bluetooth low energy transmitters can be picked up at a range between 100-160 feet. that in itself isn't great but not bad. if they can in future versions extend the distance to 300+ feet you'd be in business.

    plenty of consumer products are being conceived that could be re-purposed for this use-case (finding a lost main).

    the advantage to this is the size and cost of the tags is small and all it requires for detection is a bluetooth enabled device (like a smart phone). imagine buying tags for 5 bucks a pop and you can now find your main, your free bag, your helmet, your jumpsuit, your log book, your altimeter, your car keys, and even the beer cooler.

    http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/sticknfind-bluetooth-powered-ultra-small-location-stickers

    http://securityadvancement.com/2012/11/bluetooth-low-energy-tracking-for-wallets/

    update:

    http://www.bluetooth.com/Pages/low-energy-tech-info.aspx

    according to this you can get a range of up to 100 meters (300 feet):

    Quote

    Range – Increased modulation index provides a possible range for Bluetooth low energy technology of over 100 meters.

  17. Quote

    The '85 Bears defense is without a doubt one of the all time great defensive teams in league history. But they were only dominant for that one year. Why is it that nobody talks about the '86, or the '87 Bears teams.



    This. Seattle has depth and many of their players are still on their rookie contracts. Manning made more in a single game this season than russell wilson made all season.

    We will be able to keep most of the guys we need to, and we have a GM and coach who can turn a 5th round cast-off into a pro-bowl player because they know what kind of player will succeed in this program.

    The national media HATES the idea of giving the Seahawks credit. It was inconceivable that a team they ignored and disrespected all season would ruin their narrative that had Payton walking into the sunset with the lombardi trophy before the game was even played.

    seahawks are just a bunch of loudmouths with no respect, the fans aren't any good and won't travel, they pump in sound to their stadium, wilson is too short, sherman talks too much, marshawn doesn't talk enough, etc. etc.

    just in the post-season the seahawks dissected drew brees, took the 49ers to the mat, and took the most powerful offense in history and shut them down (notice nobody questions whether the broncs offense was one of the best all time... weird). you can't deny that.

    So now the conversation is where do the seahawks rank in all time greatest defense, and nobody wants to give them their due. Which is fine. But they are in the conversation.

    This team plays best when they have a boulder on their shoulder. And my money is on this team answering that question so decisively that it won't even be up for debate. this team is just getting started!

    go hawks!!

  18. We have a lot of respect for the broncos--manning personally checked on sherman after the game to see about his injury. He's a legendary quarterback and this game aside he will be rightfully looked at as one of the best in the game--it was just our time. Go hawks!

  20. Quote

    So the key seems to be organizing small bits (helmet, googles. etc.) in sewn-in pockets.
    It is easy to sew extra pockets into military-surplus gear bags.



    Hey i like that idea.

    Would need to be fairly rigid, though.

    I went with plastic bins for organizing the loose stuff because soft-side containers would end up with altimeter buttons being pushed draining batteries.

    I also have kroop-style goggles that get bent out of shape if they aren't in some kind of rigid container.

    however sewing panels on the inside that can hold the boxes or have stiffeners is def an option i will look into.

    The ogio/osprey bags are an option too though more spendy.

    edited to add: THANKS for the feedback everyone I appreciate it B|B|B|

  21. I'm curious what kind of "system" other jumpers use to organize their gear bag that they take with them to the DZ.

    I'm currently using a large bag I got at a military surplus store:

    [inline 41rKVYPS9CL.jpg]

    Inside I use stuff sacks for my RW, FF, and WS.

    I also have a few plastic containers about the size of a shoe box that I keep things like extra batteries, altimeter, screwdrivers/tools, etc.

    In theory this works well but in practice the inside of the gear bag is a big mess. Even though things are compartmentalized in side of some kind of container, every time I need something I end up having to take half of the shit out of the bag. As things shift around, the lids of the smaller containers can pop off and the contents end up in the bottom of the bag.

    In short, things move around and the inside of the bag is not orderly enough.

    I've thought about using something like a rigid bin/box with wheels but I don't need to have a rolling rigging loft I just want to keep my shit organized.

    Anyone have a good system that might be a better solution?

  22. Quote

    Kansas City Chiefs don't have a good defense? Huh?



    The first 9 weeks of the season, sure, they only allowed on average 12.3 points per game.

    But going 2-5 over the last seven games allowing on average 22 points per game looks like a collapse to me.

  23. Quote

    Denver has got some horses on the offensive line. They give Payton 30 minutes to find a reciever and you can't give him that kind of time to find recievers or the end result will be the same as it was when they played NE Pats, and they have a great defensive lineup. Seattle will lose b/c of their qtr back, he has no experience in super bowl play, and he'll be nervous and the Broncos will eat him up. Broncs by 10.



    Denver hasn't faced a real defense all season--if you think our defense is the same as the Patriots you're smoking crack ;)

    Manning is going to need time to find open receivers because our secondary isn't "just good". Their stats this season are '85 bears legendary.

    Your offensive line has only had to give Manning less than 3 seconds of protection as that is how long he holds onto the ball. Any offensive line would look good because nobody can get to the quarterback that fast.

    But with a physical seahawk defensive backfield, manning is going to have hold the ball longer giving our pass rush more time. It's going to knock manning off his rhythm, which is not good for him.

    I know it's hard for a broncos fan to believe a world exists where the quarterback doesn't make 5,000 pass attempts a game, but seattle is a run-first offense. :D

    lynch is going to get his carries, and wilson is going to make his passes when he needs to. percy harvin is going to open up the field and you're going to see baldwin, kearse, and tate getting better looks.

    the denver defense hasn't had to play at an elite level this season because they're usually just protecting a lead. i expect them to have to step up in a way they haven't had to all year, and I don't think they're up to the challenge.

    seahawks over broncos 28-24.

    edited to add: if we're talking who will win the 420 bowl, I would say we already have: http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2022764427_potbeastxml.html