Basejumper.com - archive

This is still a bit unpolished, so please excuse any errors. I wanted to get this posted, and start a discussion on it as soon as possible.

In public discussion, especially on-line discussion, I avoid naming BASE jumping sites, as well as BASE jumpers. I ask everyone else in this forum to do the same.

I will edit posts which include site names or precise locations, with the exception of a few extremely popular legal sites suitable for beginners, where instruction and supervision are often available. Examples include the legal bridge in the Western United States, and the popular big wall in Southern Norway.

Please remember that the appearance of a site in Skydiving Magazine (or other public venues) is not an expression of support for site publicity from the BASE community. Skydiving has done much to widen the rift between Skydivers and BASE jumpers by publicizing sites despite direct requests from local BASE jumpers to the contrary.

I will remove the names of BASE jumpers who either (a) request that their names be removed, or (b) have made such requests for privacy in the past.

My failure to edit a posting is not an expression of support. I'd recommend avoiding names altogether, whether they are well known or not.


Sites

Inquiries about sites serve as the primary gatekeeper of the BASE community. If a prospective jumper has to locate experienced jumpers to learn about sites, there is a far greater chance that they will receive instruction (of any kind) and use appropriate gear. If a site is publicized, pretty much anyone can run out and throw himself off of it. He can jump with no training, with improper equipment and with no supervision. This is a recipe for disaster, and has resulted in multiple accidents, including more than one fatality.

Any discussion of a site can easily be held by referring to the site descriptively, rather than by name or location. It is easy to discuss "the Bridge Day site" or "the popular terminal wall in Northern Italy" for example, and using such labels detracts nothing from a technical discussion.

Accidents occur at legal sites, as well as illegal ones, and this reasoning applies equally to either. In fact, the majority of BASE fatalities have occurred at legal sites. The ease of access to these sites, as well as the frequency of accidents, argues, if anything, for greater site secrecy at legal sites.

Some BASE jumpers feel that preventing accidents is important because it keeps sites open for jumping (whether legal or illegal). This concern is a distant second to preventing injury.


People

I also generally refrain from naming people. Many BASE jumpers are very shy--especially since they may face legal consequences for some jumps, and those consequences could have major ramifications for their lives. It would be extremely unfortunate to cost a fellow jumper their livelihood because you inadvertently mentioned their name in an internet discussion.

I often use pseudonyms, sometimes drawn from other places (particularly easy for people active on-line, as they often have screen names) and sometimes the product of my fanciful imagination. The informed can often decipher my references. By referring to the Little Aussie, or Space, or 460, I can allow each jumper to choose the level of their own name recognition. If they want to be known, they can publicize themselves. If they prefer to remain anonymous, I have not disregarded their desires.


What's in it for me?

All of this may seem to be a bit much. But it costs you nothing to refrain from naming names, and it may gain you much.

By acting respectfully, you will gain the respect of experienced BASE jumpers, both in your area and elsewhere. This is invaluable in gaining mentoring, support, and guidance, as well as easy access to established jumping sites. Very few experienced BASE jumpers will take you to new sites if they know that the next day the sites name and location will be spread across the internet (or around the drop zone).

Refraining from naming sites is quite easy, and the potential costs of naming them are huge. Why take the chance?


I'm sure I've overlooked some things, and I'd love to start a discussion on this topic.

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

here here.
coming from one of those 'shy' jumpers, I certainly don't like my name being mentioned on the internet--at all (Tom you have any and all permission to edit a post with my name in it).
As for site naming, why would you? What purpose does it serve? Discussions about a particular site should be taken to PM. Let me be the 1000th person to point out that NPS and other legal types monitor these boards on a regular basis. Why? Because they are the AntiBASE. They think that we belong behind bars for our blatant disregard for our own lives and the lives of others. [aerial deliver THIS punk!].
I'm with ya Tom...even though you're soft.

I agree 100 %. When I inquire about sites when traveling, I don't even mention the exact cities I'll be visiting.
No local wants to see "Hi, I'm going to 'your home town' between these dates and was wondering if we could hit that B downtown?" all over the net.

Thank you Tom, for putting it all down. I do not mind my name being used at all. I work on the Bridge Day video, where my name appears for NPS or whoever wants to buy a copy can read it. I avoid site names, even to BASE jumpers I do not know. I am a very inexperienced jumper, and respect from my peers and mentors is a two way street. Guidance from a BASE jumping mentor has given me insight into site naming I want to share. We were talking to a wuffo, and I mentioned a specific, legal, site. This mentor wisely ignored what I had said and steered the conversation away from BASE jumping. After the conversation ended, he politely explained site naming like this:

We do not name sites. Inquiries into actual BASE jumping locations are, by far, the first avenue of contact with a potential jumper. These inquiries open dialogue to determine a potential jumpers skill/training/knowlege. It allows us the opportunity to guide each other in the direction of what's safe for each of us. What's tested and proven. Without this opportunity, there is the possibility of a "everyone's jumping off this thing - it must be safe" mentality [since this conversation - this scenario has happened - tragically].

The internet is a double-edged sword in our world. It is a great place to find information. It is also a terrible place to find information. Site inquiries should be discreet - even if they are legal.

OK Philip Kronsky Junior, my lips are sealed.

Tom, I'm sure you can figure out who this is, If at some point in the future my name is used, please remove it.

Thanks

Here here........... I know of one skydiver "friend" who decided to take the BASE journey alone - and very nearly killed himself in the process. If sites are made known to certain people then I think that perhaps more fools would try this route to chase a false dream.



Be Safe........ be phuking scared $hitless of this sport cause you will enjoy it more!!!

???

I personally don't mind my name being mentioned, but I also completely understand why many prefer to maintain a lower profile.

I've been pretty open about the fact that I BASE jump... even at work. My personal thinking is that I'll know up front who does & doesn't have a problem with it. Plus, since my co-workers know that I BASE jump, and that I might get injured or busted, it becomes far less of an issue if either of those things actually does happen.

But I realize I'm pretty lucky in that most people seem to be pretty understanding. About the worst reaction I get is from those who think I have a screw or two loose. But I can see why other folks would need to keep their jumping under wraps.

Well said Tom . I go to great lengths to keep video and photos of myself and my crew from being shown or published as well as our sites . Those of you who don't , should start . I recently lost access to a real nice A because someone could not keep quiet about it . They just had to bring a big group with them , leave a big mess and attract attention . We had been jumping that site for over three years without detection . Now it's gone and it sucks . Protect your sites at all costs .

Well said Tom

Tom,
I am with you on any point you made!!!
It is never enough the recommendation to people to refrain from naming sites!!!
Hope you are well indeed and to see you soon!!!
Yesterday night we (myself, #724 and #726) jumped our A "you-know-where", very, very dark indeed, used a powerful handheld flash light (left alone on the ground...) to light up the landing area of our personal drop zone!!! Very nice exit in complete darkness, very nice flight, very nice landing!!! BASE is a state of mind!!! Next time you are around, we MUST jump together!!!

Bumpity, bump.

I think I may bump this topic up top, from time to time.

Thanks for reading it!

<bump>

I have a question. How do you BASE jumpers feel when you see BASE jumping on T.V.? Do you feel differently about legal/illegal sites when you see them?. I'm curious as to your response due to the amount of banning site names on these forums. I just watched some BASE jumping on 'Real TV' today then wondered how you felt about that sort of coverage? At this point I'm not interested in taking up BASE jumping as I am still very new to skydiving. Thanks for your reply.

     Most tv coverage usually only shows jumping when somthing goes wrong, same as skydiving.


I believe in not naming sites publicly but I find it very strange that some people post pics of some of their non legal jumps. I've come across a few pics on the net where a newbie like me (58 jumps) has recognized at least half a dozen sites. If I were to ever post a pic of me jumping, I think I'll blur out any noticeable landmarks. Too few objects in my area and even if there were a lot, I wouldn't want to burn one.


Just my measly .02

 How do you BASE jumpers feel when you see BASE jumping on T.V.?

It makes my palms sweaty.

Gives me the heebie-jeebies...

...it starts the slow adrenaline drip.
Gardner

p.s. skin that's good that your palms are sweaty.. any lube is better than none.

It makes my palms hairy.

If it could only make your head hairy too.....

<bump>

Please read this thread before posting in this forum.

Thanks!

Bumbeti bumbKeep thouse sites UN named,thanks

And, we'll keep this on the first page for just a bit longer...

Hey Tom, maybe you can make a "Forum rules" post and sticky it to the top of this forum stating that site naming is frowned upon. Or perhaps it could be included in the forum rules section?

And again...

Thanks Tom.

Y'all are often saying that NPS etc. are monitoring the BASE jumping forums. But isn't it possible that the NPS or another agency will implement the well-known scenario: using an insider ("spy"?), who's willing to BASE jump, but only for purposes of collecting info on the objects and then burning them all at once? This would be a disaster to the community, and it can be done, considering this technique is widely used in anti-drug wars or whatever. Especially if tensions between BASErs and government grow higher.

What are you suggesting we do?

Should we ask every BASE jumper we know... "Are you an officer of the law? Are you associated in any way with Law Enforcement?"

I don't think we're important enough to draw this sort of attention. Keeping an officer undercover long enough to get "in" with any substantial number of BASE communities would be hugely expensive.

BASE jumping is not the sort of crime that drug dealing is. We are not affecting anyone other than ourselves. So long as we follow good BASE ethics (a word used strangely correct, here) and don't leave behind evidence we were even there - I see no reason we would come under any special sort of scrutiny.

Leave only footprints...

- Cajones

As a sidenote, an officer of the law enforcement can do anything to gain your confidence, i.e. use illegal drugs, distribute illegal drugs, buy illegal drugs, jump from illegal spots, smile and politely say that he is not an officer, and THEN ARREST YOU. Sorry, I just hate when people say that all you have to do is ask someone if they are a cop or not to narc out a narc.

dont think any "spy" would have it in them.. it would look weired that they has to do aprox 2-300skydives and some ground crew to burn 5 objetcs or so,dont think they would spend that kind of mony while they just could set cameras up evry were if they wanted to..
Rember we dont hurt or harm others,its a minor elegal activity,if its an elegal object..

Might make a good movie though... Hmmm, who would we put in the starring role? Or the love interest?

No apology necessary. I was aware of this, in spite of the television portrayal that it constitutes entrapment. You actually have to prove the officer enticed you to do something you wouldn't have done on your own. Difficult, at best, when it comes to BASE jumping. My premise was more in - how do we check out the background of newbies? We generally don't. We don't care where they come from, or what they do for a living (unless they happen to work for a tower company or can bring some form of stimulation to the parties). Our community carries enough cautious suspicion of anyone interested in BASE jumping, as is. We don't need to further this with a questionnaire.

Just out of curiousity (and so that my posts don't get edited again) - what constitutes burning a site?

I posted about Felix jumping in SA and I named the site which was subsequently edited out. I saw the jump on a TV program which was broadcast nationwide as well as all the way across Africa up to Egypt. The insert had so much detail that it had an almost documentary feel to it. The particular object was named and shown several times. It is one of the best-known landmarks in Johannesburg and even if it hadn't been named, every viewer in the greater Johannesburg area will have recognised it. Skreamer followed up my post with an Internet article quoting verbatim the entire TV insert's dialogue - this (unedited) article is obviously available to anyone surfing the net.

I recognise that one of the rules of this forum is to not name sites (and for breaking that rule I apologise), but how far does it go?

Might make a good movie though... Hmmm, who would we put in the starring role? Or the love interest?

I would like the role of Me, played by .. Adam Sandler.
Hmmm,.. and my love interest by...J-Lo Ya..Ya. O-baby
And then our love child born out of wedlock (played by).... Brittney Spears.
Conceived on the exit poit of xxxxxxxx (self edit) Fill in exit point of conception with your fovorite object.
Then to end our jumping crime spree.
with the N.P.S. and tracking dogs, hot on our heals
We would Crater-In together, hand in hand, Screeming.
The End

...Ray Losli

That's actually a big question. There are various degrees of "burning". Sometimes a site is just a little "hot" (so you can jump it, but you have to be careful), and sometimes it's entirely "burnt" (just about impossible to jump ever again).

As regards your specific case:

There is an unusually high density of "BASE-dangerous" people around this site. That means that we have a huge pool of people who have some desire to BASE jump, have some gear that might work (typically skydiving gear) but have no training or experience.

In my opinion, posting site details here is more dangerous (to the readers who could potentially jump it) than even showing a TV documentary across an entire continent. How many people in the "BASE-Dangerous" phase saw that documentary? I'd guess fewer than saw your post about it here.

The point is not so much to protect the site (except incidentally). It's to protect those people who might go launch themselves off the site.

I recognize that it's unlikely that someone is going to fly to SA just to jump that site. On the other hand, I do know several people who have visited SA to jump. Such people can show up without contacting locals and do some very bad (from a local jumpers perspective) things to the sites--like, say, bringing in a documentary film crew for their publicity stunt.

It's better to be safe, in my opinion, than sorry. Why assume that the object is "burnt" so it must be ok to spread the info around as much as you want? What does that really help anyone?

Point taken.

There's a lot of good stuff out there, you just got to know where to find it!

Hey Tom, surely naming legal sites in RSA is not a problem, the Captour (Cape tourism company) talk about BASE jumping from the cable car and mountain as a bit of a tourist attraction. There are the obvious E's for anyone in the Western Cape, 'BASE dangerous' or not.
Naturally contacting a local who could advise you about a specific site would make sense, but other than that, 'BASE dangerous' people are going to jump anyway. Besides if you die in RSA no one in authority (police etc.) are going to care that much.

Have you asked the SA guys how they feel about it? I haven't but I'd expect their opinions would be the most important.

Still, if you want to discuss specific sites, I'd recommend taking the conversation to BLiNC. I'm not very interested in changing the rules here, so until Sangiro overrules me, I expect site names, legal or not, will keep getting edited out of posts here.

" but how far does it go? "

It should go as far as you can take it. Period.

Oh can I say "Andy calistrat

You are one funny mo-fo, Ray! Thanks for making me laugh (again!)

Peace
K

bumpity bump

I'm barely a skydiver and do not plan to BASE jump. I do appreciate the lesson in this thread though because as obvious as it may be to everyone else, it wasn't to me. Of course it is now! Thanks for the etiquette lesson. I hate going through life as a dick.

Good point. Naming a site could cause someone living nearby to say "I can do that", go out and buy surplus military gear at a flea market, then get hurt, or worse. The incident will then be reported in the media as "BASE jumper....", damaging the image of your sport.

>>Good point. Naming a site could cause someone living nearby to say "I can do that", go out and buy surplus military gear at a flea market, then get hurt, or worse. The incident will then be reported in the media as "BASE jumper....", damaging the image of your sport.<<

Valid, but only up to a point. As far as I know there has never been a case where someone who just lives nearby, finds a rig, and goes ahead and hurts or kills themselves. Maybe I'm old fashioned but I tend to believe people are smarter than that. (Now watch that thought come back and bite me in the butt).

And let's face it, how much of a secret is BASE anymore. It's in the movies, in print ads, and on television. Ask any teenage boy what BASE jumping is and most will come close to getting the answer right. What stops them from looking around for something to jump from just like we do?

The image thing is a tougher nut to crack as it used to be we never cared about our image. That sounds cavalier, but that was the very essence to the freedom of BASE jumping. We spent our lives worrying about our image first as skydivers who had to deal with the FAA, local airport boards, and so on. When we started BASE jumping it seemed something we did purely for ourselves, a reward of sorts after skydiving. The thought was skydiving could be shut down by the powers that be, but BASE jumping was outlaw already, so what could they do, and how could anyone stop us? Protecting the image of BASE jumping was a laughable goal. Today a skydiver will say, yes, I'd like to BASE someday, or no, that's not for me, but rarely do you hear the kind of vitriolic hatred for BASE that used to came from the skydiving side of the house. We outlasted all our early critics and this is certainly no time to start begging people to let us BASE jump. I would call that going backwards.

But the whole dynamic of the sport has changed with the advent of legal sites all over the world. Now we do have a stake in what image we project. We now have something to protect and it's those sites. Call it the price of progress, but there it is. The biggest difference in BASE now and BASE in the 1980s is not the gear, not the techniques, not the aerials, and not the tricks. It's the fact we sold our BASE souls for access. Okay, I'm down with it, I'm a progressive, and I know nothing stays the same forever.

However, I'll admit to missing those days when the only reason we protected sites was to keep those few BASE jumpers who were glory hounds from day blazing the site on the five o'clock news. I miss that time when people could do whatever the heck they had the knobs and imagination to do without risking being ripped apart on some web site. I miss getting phone calls from around the world in the middle of the night where a brother breathlessly details his latest adventure while still wearing his rig. I miss that time when you never had to explain rudimentary parachute behavior to a prospective BASE jumper, as back then most were well past that point before they would even consider the sport.

The far bigger question is, are we better off now or then? I suppose you'd have to say we now have the potential to be safer, we are much more knowledgeable, and we are doing very cool and interesting things. But it's a different sport now so as far as being better off, well, the jury is still out and only future history will give us that answer. Stay tuned, it should be exciting . . .

NickD
BASE 194

As far as I know, this has actually happened in Washington, involving Ebay and a much lower bridge a few miles from where the poor jumper should have been. I'm sure somebody can fill us in...

But I agree; the main reason for not naming names is in my opinion to prevent jumpers going there without the required background knowledge (access guidelines, best times to jump it, potential dangers).

wasnt it the bidge in the video"34_meter102_ft" or one close by?

Bwahuahuauha. Yeah, what the hell was up with that? The son of mr. Aiello dayblazing and burning two trees...

_________________________________________________

That could lead you to think it just might be a good idea to lean over the rail and look down before you jump....

Actually, I think the lesson there was "have some idea of how long it takes a parachute to open, and what constitutes an acceptable landing area." I'm pretty sure that even had that guy leaned over and looked (I'm actually assuming he did), he would have had no idea whether or not that bridge looked good.

NickDG,

"damaging the image.." may have been poorly phrased. Any publicity of unapproved activities is bad for the activity, whether good or bad. Ideally there would be no reason for anyone other than successful jumpers to know that a jump has been done.

As far as BASE being secret in light of all the film clips, etc. on TV, I think that most people are of the opinion that it is only practiced on rare occasions by "stuntpersons" for special event or movie footage. The frequency of jumps and the number of persons associated with BASE are most certainly not well known. The first time I crossed Sx just after it was built, my first thought was that it would be a great place for jumping. It was not until ~20 yrs. later, after meeting BASE#XXX, that I found out it is regularly done. Ditto for an A and an E.

More interesting, though, are your comments about "the old days" (not quoting) and now. Mainstreaming and public acceptance of an activity are not necessarily good for the activity, especially when sites are so limited and the results of either poor performance or bad luck are so severe. It would be interesting to see a thread on the future of the activity concentrating on how mainstreaming and public acceptance might be in conflict with the philosophy of most practitioners, who are definitely NOT in it for publicity, accepted or not.

Thanks

Jim