Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Low building

  1. Header
  2. Header-59

BLiNC Magazine, always served unfiltered
  1. #1
    n0gear
    Guest

    Low building

    Whats the lowest Building you've jumped?
    Got 1 building on my sight but think it might not be high enough.
    Not 100% but think its c. 70m - 210ft.
    Would you have a go on that?

  2. #2
    BLiNC Magazine Supporter (Silver) E Raist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Soft Cock
    Posts
    39

    Re: Low building

    160ft with a required 90degree left turn.
    ...for BASE jump #8...

    I jumped, overamped the deep brakes, stalled out the canopy and had to make the choice:
    a) Hook it into the ground
    b) crash into the tree.

    I took the tree, and emerged completely unscathed, and even the canopy did great.

    I do have to say that's probably (if not 'THE', 'one of the') stupidest things I've ever done in/with my life. I've toned down my jumping a lot since then...

    210 is probably fine in terms of height, esp as a static line (i.e. you'll have a flying wing) now it's just a matter of figuring out the rest of the jump (flight path, landing area, obstacles, getaway, etc.)

    Good luck!

    -=Raistlin
    -=E - R A I S T

  3. #3

    Re: Low building

    As already said, the height is fine, absolutely no problem there, even for freefalling BUT few buildings have uninterrupted expanses of soft landing area spread out below them. There's usually something down there waiting, fences, railings, trees, cars, lamposts, bins, benches.......Freefalling it would mean you have miniscule time to do anything other than register your heading and preparing to flare (and possibly not with your toggles). In a congested urban landing area this could mean a trip to A&E (ER).The better odds are to static line it or get your big balled mate to PCA you before he freefalls it. Plenty of canopy time to correct a small off-heading and get the toggles popped and a chance to consider where to try to land plus more chance of an on heading opening too.

    For what it's worth i've freefallen a 250ft B and staticed a 160ft B. If the right conditions came along i'd be confident to shave 10ft of both options.

    good luck.

    ian

  4. #4

    Re: Low building

    Agreed - 210' no prob's as far as height goes for f'fall or PCA but as SABRE210 said there's rarely a B with clear air all the way to the LZ.

    Unless you have clear air all the way down I highly recommend the PCA given the better heading performance- if f'falling and you get a 180 all your efforts will be on avoiding object-strike at the cost of anything else - unless you have clear air all the way down you may end up turning your 180 away from the B only to hit a tree or some worse obstacle.

    Something that will add in your favour on lower stuff is if the LZ is grassed rather than concrete. ...and watch out for those fences that have those nasty upward-pointing arrowhead thingys - Ow!

    g.

  5. #5

    Re: Low building

    Further thought on my above post...
    ..... if you have a 180 after f'falling 210' you won't have time for a full 180 correction and landing setup of any kind.

    g.

  6. #6

    Re: Low building

    For what its worth, I have freefallen a 240ft B (hey Ian are you sure about the 250ft reading on that ? ) several times and most times I have had on headings, once I had a 90 off and with the correction to make the landing area I had a pretty fast just avoiding the fence crash onto concrete (nothing too serious other than a scuffed arse and ripped coat). I have been with 2 people on sperate occasions who both freefalled it and had near 180's on it. They both landed at the foot of the B after hanging off their rears to sink in and avoid strikes, both had pretty hard landings.

    As most others have said, depending on the LZ and flight path and outs and avoidance paths, judgement will need to be made on whether you SL or FF. For example I would prefer to freefall the 240ft B I mentioned as I think that less canopy time (on an on heading) is preferable to more canopy time for making the flight to the LZ easier (ask Faber about too much canopy time on this B), but then again too little time and a near 180 you cant do much other than landing at the foot of the B so not to hit anything nasty on trying to turn it around.

    Its a judegement call on what you are happy with. These days I would not jump this B again as I am not happy with the risks associated with freefalling 240ft (I used to be happy freefalling down to 200ft exits), never mind a 240ft B with hazards (although the visuals are really kick arse!).

    Just for fullness of information, I have only jumped 2 differents B's (240ft several times and 340ft once) - so take my opinion with a pinch of salt!


Similar Threads

  1. B.A.S.E. - B For Building
    By mknutson in forum Video BASE
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: April 30th, 2010, 03:00 PM
  2. Building
    By mknutson in forum BASEWiki
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: December 29th, 2009, 05:57 PM
  3. Building to Building Base Jump
    By blinc in forum News Feeds
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 26th, 2008, 06:30 AM
  4. B is for Building
    By georgechurchill in forum The 'Original' BASE Board
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: October 22nd, 2002, 10:02 AM
  5. Building Height
    By guest in forum The 'Original' BASE Board
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: April 18th, 2002, 08:16 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •