TommyBotten

I would also recommend optical stabilization. It makes it easier to spot small movements on the skydivers input and/or canopy response that would otherwise attributed to a shaking camera.

Our DZ has used the Ares 2 since March for student and rental purposes. We have not had any students, instructors or funjumpers report any issues with them. The Ares 2 is a civilian version of their military spec altimeter and as such, I would be surprised if L&B have not fixed the issues they used to have with the 2nd. gen Viso2. Also note that there is another post on the Ares 2 that has some more information.

As I travel a lot with my rig (for safe keeping, not for a bailout scenario) I must admit the idea has humored me on several occasions. If the aircraft were to have a catastrophic failure at cruising altitude (33.000 - 40.000 feet) the time of useful consciousness for a non-trained person performing physical work can be down to a few seconds in a depressurized cabin. Even a trained person and with a low (25.000) cruising altitude will likely not have more than 30 seconds of TUC. And no, comparing it to holding your breath at sea level won't work ;) If you are able to get your oxygen mask on it will help, but you may still end up unconscious especially if performing work, as the mask are merely designed to keep you alive until the pilots can get the aircraft down to lower altitudes. You are also likely to face heavy fogging in the interior of the aircraft for a time as the cabin air cools and the relative humidity rapidly changes. If you are able to handle all this and miraculously get your rig on, you need to get out of the aircraft. Since you mention catastrophic failure, I'm going to assume that there is a big enough hole in the fuselage to get out. This will most likely also mean that the aircraft is not behaving as usual, which means moving around in the cabin and getting to the outside will be eventful. Depending on where the fuselage rupture is will determine how easy it will be getting out and not getting caught in an engine or struck by the tail as you exit. Great. You made it. You are miraculously outside the aircraft with your rig on and if you had a calibrated altimeter, it would now show 28.000 feet. Now what? Even if you have not up to this point, you are very likely to faint within the next few seconds. If you deploy your main right of the bat, you will be spending too much time in a low pressure environment and will likely die. If you don't, well, you'll faint and it's unlikely that you will come to before it's time to deploy. But how about turning on the AAD before you exit the aircraft? That won't work either, as any modern AAD will self test and calibrate as you turn it on, and it will not be amused by the fact that you are in a (very) low pressure environment, quickly descending. Unless you have one of those mechanical AADs, in which case, congratulations, you come prepared. So what can you do? Perhaps pulling your PC holding it in your hand until you faint is an option. You will be unconscious anyway by the time you're slammed by the hard opening caused by low air pressure and high opening speed. And maybe you will survive and even come to before landing, so that you may hook your 270 into the local college campus and impress the girls. Or maybe not. Either way I wish you luck!

Awesome that you guys are active on the forums! If you don't mind me asking, what is the GPS update frequency on the X2? I've had good results with the old flysight revision at 5hz using Dan's gswoop software.

They've been saying that for at least four years now. My two cents are also on the Vector, albeit I'm a bit biased since my last three rigs have all been vectors. In addition to them being one of the more freefly friendly rigs, they also have some of the best customer service I've experienced for any skydiving related company.

Seems like the soloshot3 is finally shipping. There are a few reviews out, and the results looks varied. From the very negative skydiver who films his swoops on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z66ZYX8zXu4 to the more positive and somewhat relevant drone tracking on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Co5-NQXcAU. Are there any other hands on experiences with this device and skydiving?

Hi! I haven't rummaged through the flysight data to support these claims, so take them with a grain of salt. I find that it varies with wings. The Petra/HK/Peregrines can be loaded quite heavily and I like them best around 3.1-3.2. The VKs i like at around 2.7. Tried a 67 with 3.5 which was not my taste. As for VK-PS, I've only have around 50 jumps on them with a few different WLs, but I think it's right up there with the PI, perhaps a tad lower.

I have the same experience with mine. The VK with ~800 jumps feels even more worn than my old VE at 2000 jumps. The VK with 400 jumps feels comparable to the VE, but as you mention, the canopies still flies nicely. Easier to pack though ;) I did get to test a side-by-side comparison with two same size VKs, one at 350 jumps DOM 2016-12, the other brand new (less than 10) DOM 2017-04 jumping every other for two days, about 15 jumps. The difference was bigger than I expected. It's hard when I don't have any numbers to tie it to, but the newer canopy felt crisper, faster and more rigid. Do note that there were differences in colors (and possibly fabric batch) that also might have an effect.

PD themselves say that the degradation of the sail fabric in the internals are less than or equal to that of the ZP used in their regular VKs, which in imho makes sense.

Better or worse is hard to answer. They are different canopies with different characteristics. In my experience (on a zulu 122/xf3-119 at about 1.7) the zulu has a lighter and more responsive toggle stroke and almost feels a bit twitchy whereas the XF3 has a longer recovery arc and much more input responsiveness and power on the rear risers.

Thanks for the link. I'm familiar with the SIM, and I believe it has been a source of inspiration back in 2007 during the last revision. I've attached the source lesson plan and a rough translation using google translate.

I'm looking into updating the Norwegian federations material for teaching first time AFF and static line students to fly their canopies, including pattern, observation and landing techniques. I'm hoping to find a sufficiently simple yet good enough way for our instructors to go about the ground course that gives the students the tools they need We currently have a 10 hour ground school where 1.5 hours are used to practice pattern flying, observation, landing technique, control inputs as well as the simple theory behind downwind vs upwind flying. We do not currently use radios on any of our DZs. Our entire lesson plan can be read using google translate on http://nlf.no/sites/default/files/fallskjerm/dokument/vedlegg_1_600_juli_2013_elev_grunnkurs_line_og_aff_1.pdf . ymmv. Any tips and tricks on how people out there are organizing the ground course in this respect and if applicable any standard lesson plans from the DZs and federations out there would be greatly appreciated. Any language is interesting.

Add to your list that the cutaway and reserve handle will likely move from the position you know and have trained for and further back. I recommend watching Brians take on this as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PU1mL3YLOIY

Not at all. It's merely a personal preference, and many, if not most CP competitors have their favorite direction of turn :-)

Even with a quick rotation, no surge/double fronts it _sounds_ a bit low... A few right hand 450s from my first half of 2016. No swoop training jumps as my competition/training turn is left. My setup is 1350 for the VK-PS ([email protected]) and about 100 feet lower for the regular VK([email protected]). https://youtu.be/PSd1LH6zl8E