Anyone thinking about camera cases/backpacks, I standardized with LowePro years ago and they have been pretty good cases given the miles that I put on them, but they are getting long in the tooth so I have been doing a lot of research on replacements. A couple of weeks ago I took my rapidly growing Westcott lighting kit down to Competitive and played with a number of manufacturer's products, but ThinkTank stood out and one of their cases was the perfect size to put three FJ400 units, two FJ200 units, and some accessories, so I loaded it up and rolled out with it. I've always been kind of a case geek, never could stand to roll up on an assignment with disorganized or worn cases, just feels like starting out on the wrong foot.
I've been looking for a rolling case for my Sachtler video sticks for a couple of years and never could find just the right case to properly protect an $8,500 tripod and head. Not having a case made it difficult to travel with, impossible on commercial transport, so I had to do something. My good friend Eugene at Competitive always steers me in the right direction. I was fiddling with "Tundra" and "Liteware" but nothing fit or felt right. I asked Eugene what he recommended and out he popped with the perfect ThinkTank rolling video tripod case. The Mavic 3 Pro immediately went into a ThinkTank backpack when I unboxed it, and I have a bigger ThinkTank backpack that I customize for different assignments and airline travel. These cases aren't inexpensive, but when you consider what they are protecting and their great design and longevity, they are a relative bargain.
JWilsonphoto wrote:
Pretty good looking camera isn't it Jan Arie? I'm waiting for an update from my Canon guy re: possible release timeframe. I am guessing that the body will run in the upper fours, which is reasonable.
Sure looks good for now ill keep to my 5Dmk4, that body isn't probably going to be in the upper fours over here if it's being released curious to see when it comes what your price is going to be compared to ours..
Well, I just couldn't let all of flight jocks steal the show. So, for better or worse (and in some cases, the latter), I decided to renew my pilot licensing. My doc will likely green-light me for recreational, and that's all I want anyway. Fact that Phonak is now got their Lyric 24/7 hearing aids available, I have more hearing in what I thought was my "dead left ear." I got a hearing exam coming up from my Audiology doc that will duplicate FAA's requirements. In the meantime, I'm "flying" XPlane 12 on my MacOS. Getting the damn flight controls to replicate what my brain recalls about how input and output should match has been a major challenge. I have a set of Redbird rudder pedals that "should" work with the setup I've got. If not I'll just offload some extraneous camera gear I've got and then get their dedicated setup. Right now my task after a couple more control issues are solved is going to be to learn the G1000 (X1000 adaptation version).
They were flying for our cameras so they lifted, sucked the gear up and accelerated to 500 knots , then pulled. One of the guys complained because his jet only got to 400 knots prior to pulling.
fotoactvst wrote:
There must be quite a bend in the intake port to accommodate the landing gear within that part of the undercarriage. Hadn't noticed that before.
What's the take off speed with all that attached to the wings?
Nicely done.
About 160kts.
WAG: Takeoff speed = 145 kts w/centerline vs 160 kts with 2 external tanks (assuming maximum takeoff weight)
I used the "add 5% to the airspeed for each 10% increase in weight" rule of thumb.
Disclaimer: A guess by a century series fighter crew chief who didn't crew an F-16.
Thanks for that post Ray, I didn’t really answer the question. Thought that it was interesting that, with that loads they were carrying the F16 could be at 500 knots by the end of the runway. Lots of thrust there! These guys go out loaded and play for an hour, then come back on fumes.
