xtheowl

Hey Normiss, Asking questions on forums is one way I put in effort to find information. How hard is it to say "Tax Fraud" Are you saying the only questions that should be asked are those that have NEVER been posted on the site? Seriously? Maybe someone new joined since the question was asked who might have some new information or a fresh point of view. If you don't feel like answering me then by all means keep quiet. Chris, don't have any feelings for you at all.

Ooohh!! I love a research project! Thanks for simply not telling me what he's in jail for and ruining the fun for me!

Actually no, I didn't know that. Details?

I just noticed Start Skydiving in Lebanon (should read Middletown) is listed in red on http://www.1800skyrideripoff.com/dzs/. I've got to say they are the nicest most professional DZ I've been to (although admittedly I've only been to 5). Do they really belong on the naughty list?

http://skydivejersey.blogspot.com/

I think I found a pretty good snag-free solution to fly a small hd camera; Let me know what you think: Doesnt work with an HD Pro, but it will work with a flip or sony bloggie or even a smart phone. Buy one of the jogging cases that people strap ipods to their upper arms with. Cut it down so it straps tight to the inside of your left wrist with the lens facing the same way as your palm. Cut a small 1/4" dia hole for the lens to see through. If you wear a jumpsuit with the elastic wristbands, slide the sleeve over the bottom part of the strapped-on camera to the point where it doesnt obstruct the lens. This setup is as impossible to snag as it gets; The altimeter on the back of your hand is 10 times as likely to be a problem. It also faces the ground in a box, and a slight twist of your wrist will let you sneak in a quick mug. Under canopy, the images is rotated 90 degrees with your arms raised to the toggles, but still very easy and natural to have aimed forward or turn left and right. You just need to rotate the image afterwards in movie maker or whatever video editing software you have. (Of course I would never jump this with my lack of experience) -XTO

Wow, where was this? I've heard most places won't allow sub-C camera flyers...

Hey I found some of my old 35mm pics! Kinda grainy, but oh well... http://i.imgur.com/KVcDK.jpg http://i.imgur.com/BfE8b.jpg http://i.imgur.com/uLVl6.jpg I have some other nice under canopy shots, but I'll have to dig them up...

I may of course be completely off base, but I think what’s going on is this: The people who are objecting most strenuously to

OK, I lied. But only because I'm still getting flak for wanting to assume personal responsibility for my own safety. Once again, I did NOT want this discussion to have anything to do with my own personal qualifications/abilities or lack of thereof. But again people keep asking... Once again I will state in no uncertain terms: Everyone here knows more about skydiving than me. I am not saying I am some kind of expert on skydiving. I am saying this: I will not get distracted by a camera. I know my limits because I have participated in and am licensed in several activities in which my life depends directly upon my ability to think fast and not get distracted. Skydiving is not the only dangerous or mentally demanding activity out there. So dave knows far more than I do about skydiving. Granted. I know FAR MORE than dave as to my own limitations. (The degrees in physics and engineering help a little too.) I don't think I can say anything more to argue my point, and since I've been made aware that it actually is up to the DZ operator to let me have a camera or not, I now agree with Jeff that this is a stupid discussion. (If anyone else would like to express what a maniac I am, please PM me so this thread can sink off the front page.) Sincere thanks again, xto

Thanks jrjny! That was my misunderstanding. I had thought that DZ membership in the USPA required adherance to "recomendations" to maintain good standing, (despite the meaning of the word) and that no DZ would allow it soley for fear of losing membership rights. (If they still don't think I should, id respect that decision fully, no hard feelings.) Ill shut up now.

OK, lets drop the temperature down a bit. Regarding snags: Yes, I am sure about the snag hazard of the camera I was thinking of jumping. It is NOT a boxy gopro, it is a keychain camera with a width less than a quarter of an inch. I had actually thought of mounting it inside the glove with a pinhole to peer though, so that it would be nearly invisible save for a 1/4 inch bump. But again, I think the primary concern here is people getting distracted, based on that being the key issue of the overwhelming majority of the stories DSE posted. Regarding distractions: Having 200 jumps (or 2000) does not instantly impart you with the ability to multitask, cooly deal with the uexpected, and perhaps most importantly, to know your limits. This has a great deal to do with the temperament and mental faculties of the person. (I do not know a lot of camera jumpers, but I'm betting there are many of you who have met some with much more than 200 jumps who you do not feel safe around.) Bottom line, I do not feel that "number of jumps" is the appropriate criteria for deciding who is responsible enough to have a camera on. Now, to address Mr. Lepka, My own personal abilities are not the issue in this discussion, rather the manner by which one decides if someone should be allowed to use a camera. But since you brought this up: I do not profess to have the skill and experience of a professional camera jumper. I am well aware of my lack of experience, and never would argue that I have 16 years of experience. (Why you brought that up I have no idea.) I do profess that I have the ability to know my limits, and that jumping with a small camera does not exceed them. In response to your question, "What's to stop you from looking into your little camera and smoking right through your pull altitude?": My reply is, the same thing that saved me from smoking through my pull altitude when my altimeter failed and when my helmet strap once broke. The same thing that keeps me from getting distracted when doing formation flight, trying to sitfly, and watching the sun set as I fall. PRESENCE OF MIND. Again, most people have it, some don't. Regardless of number of jumps. (If having a camera on is all it takes to make someone unsafe, than they probably shouldn't be jumping in the first place.) No, I was not going to "shit can" my canopy flight. I was going to attempt to fly safely to the ground while the camera silently rolled. I do not suffer from the urge to put on a show and geek for the camera. (Maybe that should be in the USPA recommendations.) Sorry if I came off as "a guy who's been jumping 'for years'". Let me say for the third time, I will NOT violate rules just because I disagree with them. So please calm down. Rational back and forth arguments are a good thing. As a final note, I noticed when reading over the SIM that there is an established procedure for waivering BSR's. Are recommendations waiverable as well? Thanks again to all, (even Dave)

Great discussion! OK, first thing I will say is that I respect the rules, even if I disagree with them, so I will, of course, NOT jump a camera until I have permission. Having said that... The snag issues from a camera the size of a key-chain secured to the back of ones right hand are almost non-existent and a HECK of a lot less than the snag issues from a full-on camera-fliers rig. Likewise, the concentration needed to focus on filming people who are paying you to do a good job is much, much more than that needed to make something just to throw on facebook. I really cannot believe anyone truly thinks these are the same thing. I fully agree that some people should NOT be allowed to fly with a camera. It is, however, my very humble opinion that a blanket ban on anyone with less than 200 jumps is not the answer. The ability to maintain presence of mind is a largely innate thing, and also varies from person to person. I believe it should fall to the judgment of the DZ owner as to an individuals temperament that determines who is allowed the responsibility and who isn't. I also think it would be a great idea to have a standard list of rules regarding camera operation. (Mounting requirements, being briefed on hazards, hands off once on jump run, etc.) Again, I will always follow the rules. I'm mainly just venting a little bit of frustration here. I have the same issue with my inability to buy some new lawn darts. :) Thanks again for all the feedback, xto

Yeah, I hear you. (In my defense, it was many new parachute bag bands, pull tested to >50lbs with no give. Plus I had the wrist cord anchored tight.) At any rate, maybe IQ is the wrong metric. Maybe I'm thinking of presence of mind, which the people in these stories have a demonstrated lack of. If a camera doesn't distract them and get them in trouble it will just be something else. Trying to sit fly. Goofing around with a buddy. A stuck altimeter. Or maybe a pretty bird will fly past and they'll fly their chute into the side of a water tower.

I just read all the small format camera stories. All I can say is WOW. If these are the kind of people jumping nowadays, I am in FULL support of this recommendation. Might I also suggest a new recommendation of an IQ score>80 before boarding a plane. Might make a lot of the other rules unnecessary...