Re: [Lee846] (blimp on a string)
Gee, I wish Carl Boenish was still alive to lead us out of this . . .
Carl was a very progressive thinker, and if we are to ever figure this out, we should try to carry that progressiveness on.
I know when sneaking in a jump from Basic Research’s tethered (at 600-feet) balloon in the pre-potato days of their FJC, it sure felt like any other BASE jump I had made. I mean, I was wearing BASE gear and the spot where I'd crater, if it all went wrong, wasn’t moving. It just didn’t feel like skydiving, at all.
However, a few years prior, while making skydiving balloon jumps, I did an emergency exit from a balloon, that blew its top on the way to 4000-feet at 1200-feet. I knew, going over the side, that I was skydiving
I personally like to think a BASE jump is anything that’s not a skydive, and that includes rollovers and the like. The new definition of a BASE jump might be something like how the Supreme Court defines pornography. You know it when you see it.
When Phil Smith, BASE 1, jumped from a moving train crossing the Pecos River in Texas in the early 1980s, it was certainly considered a BASE jump, so the “fixed” part has already been a murky concept for years.
You can’t say BASE has to do with low altitude, as there are many (relatively) high ones.
When we tried to get the FAA to grant us a waiver to exit the Otter on a pass down the runway at 500-feet (for air shows) the only reason they even considered it, was we convinced them we weren’t skydiving, we were BASE jumping.
But, that wouldn't square with (green) Jean Boenish's fondness for BASE, because it didn't involve carbon-spewing airplanes.
In the end I like to think Carl would have left it this way - "A BASE jump is a BASE jump. A skydive is a skydive. And I think everyone here already knows the difference."
Nick
BASE 194