brent@poseidon.UUCP (Brent P. Callaghan) (03/01/86)
Don't forget to watch "Skydive into the Rain Forest"
Tues March 4th on PBS "Nova".
It documents an expedition of 12 skydivers who parachuted
onto a remote plateau in the southern Venezuelan state of
Amazonas.
The plateau rises 4,000 feet from the floor of the rain
forest and features a system of caves at the 3,000 foot
level.
The expedition's members and 5 tons of equipment were
delivered via parachute to the plateau from a DC3.
Sounds like good watching!
(For further info: see Bill Booth's article in
the March Parachutist magazine)
--
Made in New Zealand --> Brent Callaghan
AT&T Information Systems, Lincroft, NJ
{ihnp4|mtuxo|pegasus}!poseidon!brent
(201) 576-3475markp@valid.UUCP (Mark P.) (03/10/86)
> Don't forget to watch "Skydive into the Rain Forest" > Tues March 4th on PBS "Nova". > > It documents an expedition of 12 skydivers who parachuted > onto a remote plateau in the southern Venezuelan state of > Amazonas. > > The plateau rises 4,000 feet from the floor of the rain > forest and features a system of caves at the 3,000 foot > level. > > The expedition's members and 5 tons of equipment were > delivered via parachute to the plateau from a DC3. > > Sounds like good watching! > (For further info: see Bill Booth's article in > the March Parachutist magazine) > -- > > Made in New Zealand --> Brent Callaghan > AT&T Information Systems, Lincroft, NJ > {ihnp4|mtuxo|pegasus}!poseidon!brent > (201) 576-3475 This reminds me of a piece "Believe it or stuff it" (sic.) did a few months ago about a group of skydivers who parachuted off of Angel falls (sic.) in South America some place, supposedly the tallest waterfall in the world. So, as long as we are promulgating discussions, how about this and other BASE activities (legal or otherwise)? Is there not a canyon bridge where it is legal once a year? Just how risky (i.e. stupid) is it? Or is this something frowned on discussing here... Mark Papamarcos Valid Logic {hplabs,pyramid,..}!pesnta!valid!markp P.S. Yes, I'm just a beginner, and wouldn't even CONSIDER doing anything this crazy, but that doesn't mean I'm not interested.
wmartin@brl-smoke.ARPA (Will Martin ) (03/10/86)
I watched this program, and I must say that I would interpret it as being the most "anti-skydiving" thing I've ever seen -- not from bias or editorializing, because I think all involved were in favor of skydiving, but in the facts reported. Two critical members of the exhibition were severely injured in the skydive landing; one (the only woman) had such a smashed leg that she was permanently crippled. She was evacuated by helicopter. If they could get a helicopter there to lift her off, there was no reason to skydive to that site in the first place (at least that was never explained -- I started out by assuming that there were few heilicopters in the region, or the site was out of the flight range of what there were, but this cannot be so, since at the end, they were all evacuated by helicopter when the government cancelled their permits!). It was never clearly stated why they *had* to skydive to this place instead of being helicoptered to it. My general impression, after watching the program, was that the whole exercise was a waste of time, pain, and money, with little or no scientific benefits gained to recompense for this cost. Maybe this is not true, but that is what this viewer gathered from watching the program and not having any other info about the whole thing. Will
hartsoug@oberon.UUCP (Mike Hartsough) (03/15/86)
> but in the facts reported. Two critical members of the exhibition were > severely injured in the skydive landing; one (the only woman) had such a > smashed leg that she was permanently crippled. She was evacuated by > helicopter. If they could get a helicopter there to lift her off, there > was no reason to skydive to that site in the first place (at least that > was never explained -- I started out by assuming that there were few > heilicopters in the region, or the site was out of the flight range of > what there were, but this cannot be so, since at the end, they were all > evacuated by helicopter when the government cancelled their permits!). > It was never clearly stated why they *had* to skydive to this place > instead of being helicoptered to it. > > My general impression, after watching the program, was that the whole > exercise was a waste of time, pain, and money, with little or no > scientific benefits gained to recompense for this cost. Maybe this is > not true, but that is what this viewer gathered from watching the > program and not having any other info about the whole thing. > > Will My thoughts exactly...additionally, they seemed pre-occupied with convincing the viewer that "there once was a river here, 3000' above the jungle floor", the only message they could provide...personally, I get the impression that a bunch of skydivers wanted to make a jump onto the mountain, decided that they could get PBS to fund it if they made it into something "scientifical", and once there they all chickened out of the jump to the forest below, so they called the cavalry (i.e. pistoleros in a helicopter) to come and rescue them. What a joke. -- Michael J. Hartsough hartsoug@oberon.UUCP It is to the interest of the commonwealth of mankind that there should be someone who is unconquered, someone against whom fortune has no power. ---- Seneca That's why I'm here.
brent@poseidon.UUCP (Brent P. Callaghan) (03/19/86)
>My thoughts exactly...additionally, they seemed pre-occupied with convincing >the viewer that "there once was a river here, 3000' above the jungle floor", >the only message they could provide...personally, I get the impression that >a bunch of skydivers wanted to make a jump onto the mountain, decided that >they could get PBS to fund it if they made it into something "scientifical", >and once there they all chickened out of the jump to the forest below, so they >called the cavalry (i.e. pistoleros in a helicopter) to come and rescue them. An article written by Bill Booth (one of the participants) in the March edition of Parachutist attributes the conception and organization of the project to the British Broadcasting Corp. It would be incorrect to surmise that the expedition was the whim of a bunch of skydivers. I think they did a pretty good job getting 5 tons of equipment and 12 people onto the plateau. The unexpected turbulence encountered by the last two to land and the landing injuries were just bad luck. Up to that point I can't fault the preparations nor the qualifications of those involved. Whether or not they BASE jumped off the plateau, they had enough climbing equipment and supplies to climb down and make their way out to a river rendezvous. They didn't request the helicopter which finally evacuated them. I certainly wouldn't refuse a helicopter when it arrived. The expedition was no more scientific than a climb in the Himalayas. I'm sure the intention was to film an exciting adventure and capture people's imagination. Adventure isn't always without risk - and persuading a foreign government that such expeditions aren't irresponsible is a task on it's own. Would we be better off without an occasional "Skydive into the Rainforest" ? -- Made in New Zealand --> Brent Callaghan AT&T Information Systems, Lincroft, NJ {ihnp4|mtuxo|pegasus}!poseidon!brent (201) 576-3475