mccordia

First a disclaimer: Seeing as most discussion here seems to center around no-grips flying, lets try and avoid that whole discussion. If you do have a bone to pick, do it in one of the 50 other threads on that subject and lets talk about docked formations here! Docks in a wingsuit are difficult. Especially with our whole body acting as a wing, and smaller, independant moves of the arms and legs influencing our speed, angle and direction. In FS (to a degree) free movement of arms and legs (pulled one way or another a bit) is possible. In freefly formations much less. Both advocate 'fly your body, not the grip'. Meaning you should put as little tension on the grips as possible, by not 'hanging' on someone else. Atmonauti (steep track or seperate dicipline, again> another thread/discussion. Not here) is quite compare-able to wingsuit in a lot of ways. You are also traveling forward, and flying your whole body. And also comparing it to wingsuit in terms of acomplishments, we see a lot of symilarities. It took a long time for simple 3 to 4 way docked lines to be achived. Strugling with movement, tension etc. it was clear it was a hard thing to do. But they worked hard. And these days, the records are getting bigger and bigger. One of the last 'records' I could find, was a 13 way formation, which was (appearantly) flown complete for 3 seconds. Click here for a photo (not completed yet, showing a 9 way line, one still out, with 3 people docked on the feet in a 2nd row) Click here for the video (record formation at 2:30) In wingsuit flying, the push for docked formations is much smaller. People try, but generaly, a dock gone to sh*t will result in finishing the rest of the jump with playing, whipping eachother through the skies in scary rolls etc etc. But the few times a few semi-skilled people got together and tried for some bigger formations, these where the results: Docked wingsuit formations 5 way line 'un-official world record' Skydive Spa, Belgium, April 20, 2009 Flyers (left to right)Tristan Whitmarsh, Jeff Nebelkopf, Patrick DeGuilebon, Jarno Cordia, Kristiina Boole Camera: Costyn van Dongen 5 way line Location unknown, April 22, 2006 Flyers (left to right): Justin Shorb , Brian "Lurch" Caldwell, Purple Mike , Steve Harrington, Brian Soby Camera:(?) As you can see, there are options. And it would be interesting to see different type of docks. Did anybody come close to flying a 4 way diamond? Or even just a 3 way with ankle docks. My question to everyone here is. What have you done in this realm before. What do you think is possible, What do you see happening in the near and far future. And will this be the future of formation records, and why? Again, not wanting to discuss the non-docked stuff. But interested in the people who want to advocate this style of formation flying. Past acomplishments, plans, ideas for the future. And who wants to joing me at Z-flock 6, in trying to make the 'world record' docked wingsuit formation a 6 way (or bigger)*. Docked flight, small groups and creative play is the theme for the boogie anyways.We couldnt set ourselves a better challange * gay 'atmo style' matching wingsuit, helmet & rigs optional JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Already had a chat with Tom (our programmer) about incoorporating your method in the software as well, and will try that for more methods that people come up with so we can see how they compare in results, and if we can maybe do a hybrid of each one...or take one thing from one system, one from the other... btw. We do need names for each system. We have 'the grid' We have our briefing tool, which now has the 'flex grid' system embedded (next to the other planning, points, seperation planning we orginaly designed it for). Seeing your thread title was 'modest proposal' lets call it the MP system JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Attached a 100 way flock, more perfect than I think anyone will be able to fly this for a while (and with far more spacing between flyers than Id want to ever see...but thats a whole other issue..) Curious to see how this one would rate.. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Im not refusing to disclose anything.. Just have different things that actually matter, in terms of the future of this entire concept, your or anyones, on my plate right now. Not really. A shit formation, or a formation which is (in terms of spacing) perfect, but in terms of ones grasp of math, not 100% in accordance to your system. Im asking these question in an interested way, trying to see where your concept can be taken. Take that 25 way, copy the lines/flyers so you create a 100 way. And also, take into account, the deviations in each line, that will grow/expand as it gets bigger. And than judge again. Im not asking these questions to say your system is BS, im asking those question to see/understand how it works on a bigger scale... I dont think the picture shown was the one I refered to. But imagine a formation like this one, but flown tighter (I dont think this one rates as 'good/perfect'). But how would a little (and less obvious, but on a much bigger formation) skew, influence judging. And could you also judge the base/front 9 way of that 25 way seperate, and see what vallues you get? again (you really seem to need people explaining the same thing 25 times before they sink in do ya), all out of interest in further expanding on the idea. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

No, far from that. But adding 5 more rows toward the outside on that 25 way, you will also start seeing bigger and bigger deviations from where people should be. Mostly related to the ability to draw a straight line through an entire row. You're approaching formation like they are lego's. Especialy in case of just a single line, there is a big chance it wont be anything like the angles wanted. And sloppy flying wont be the reason. Just the fact that not everyone has a built in laserguided assesment for distance and angle. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Do how would that work in case of a big wedge, with the same shear, increasing deviation to the outside? Allowing the objevtive judging to be cut into pieces you can twist and bend to get the shape you want, allows for quite some deveations to be 'fixed'. People dont fly like math-grids, with exact placement. Depending on diveplan, quite some bend/twist/skew can be there, while visually flyers may have a perfect formation, and their relative positions to one and another may be perfect as wel.. Judging a formation with the same deviations possible in docked flight (and also obvious 'break' when someone is too far away) is something you should try to incorperate in some way imho, to allow for real life aplication as wel. Or maybe we should just try and fly docked ;) JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Great idea... Ill be there Scott :) JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

The 71 way had no official record title, yet had bigger attendance, and the same sense of acomplishment during the event for everyone there. And the lack of official validation didnt prevent anyone ftom claiming it as a 'world record' either. And it got everyone exited. The grid didnt do a thing. YOU GUYS DID! Organising it, getting people exited, doing great stuff. In fact, the sometimes iffy validation was the only negative thing about it all. Saying the grid was the source of all things good is severly underselling all the organisers energy, enthousiasm, skill and effort. And looking at the grid in a way to close and personal way. Give yourself a little more credit.. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

I actually ment compressed, accordeon stylee. Small variations that will happen, even more-so in bigger formations. Stretch, skew and squash/compression may affect a whole or part of a formation, so its not square (even though it should), or may have one wing/stinger/whacker be a little off. Especialy a large (100 person) V formation. If its supposed to fly at 45 degrees, with 1 meter spacing, than just a few degrees off will have people be way of their proposed position. Yet (like FS) actually DO show a picture perfect formation, with perfect spacing. In real life there are only few people who can draw a 'perfect circle', but most people are only human... We dont want to have a system so strict, it punishes people who cant judge an angle or distance down to the cm/degree, in the V formation example, or even in the aforementioned 9 way (for which that same effect could be much more pronounced in bigger formations, or sections/wings of bigger formations. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

The comments and suggestions are aimed at the method/system. The past year there have been several requests to withhold further pushing of 'the grid' pending evaluation and further development. You (Phill) called me a liar for suggesting FAI submittion, and now Im spending my own money to travel there and ask to please give the community (instead of two people who, much appreachiated, put a lot of effort in) some time to first internaly figure this stuff out. Its such a shame this is turned into 'us against them' while it actually is 'a system needing re-evaluation vs the wish to be able to give community input. The drama is created by turning this into personal attacks, instead of realising a 100 letters to the USPA/FAI by active wingsuit flyers, people getting fired from the USPA and a ton of other controversy may say something about the need for a clear, emotionless, and fair look at weather FAI submittion may mean something. We're grasping to ratify formations, while still learning how to fly them. Give it some time...whats the worst that could happen.. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Matt had a nice 'compressed' 9 way, that optically was a beautifull formation, but grid-wise, caused issues. Not fitting the 1:1 aspect ratio the judging method only recognised. That would be a nice one to test with your method. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

According to the method I have outlined in a different thread, the maximum position error in this formation is 52% of the defined spacing between adjacent jumpers. The average error was 25% I was thinking that an appropriate error threshold for the maximum error would be more like 35%. Good stuff. But try and read between the lines, and see what that formation and this thread are actually about (there is a good hint in the title of this throad). Your numbers mean nothing is the underlying issue isnt adressed. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Do explain why we'd give you info on an idea in development, instead of showing it when we think its ready for public commenting and further development. None of your stings regarding closed development have any truth to them, as there IS no system submitted for approval or acceptance. Its an idea for to SHOW that FURTHER DEVELOPMENT IS 100% NEEDED One needs to have the ability to test multiple vallues and tollerances. We have an idea of vallues that work and dont work. But you'll be the last to hear it, untill we actually present something for feedback. Agreed...and when its an actual proposal, instead of a lead-in to a development track (much like a synopsis for a film) ANYONE is welcome to test, comment and give input. But you choose to not understand the actual concept of whats being presented to you. So read it, and try and graps whats being told (as most other seem to) Nobody is proposing ANYTHING to you to comment on AT THIS TIME We just want to show the FAI that there is more stuff beyond the narrow horizon formed by the USPA proposal. Is it sinking in already...? Your comment and input is greatly appreachiated...when we present something, and ask for it...and thats a few weeks away from where we are now.. I hope you understand.. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

No it wasnt. Someone linked to it. Even though its only there for the FAI, and showing a proposal for alloted time to present a concept. Its not a hidden thing, or problem for anyone to see/read. But there are reading materials, that function as a lead-in to presentations held next week at the FAI. Nothing more, nothing less. Thats just your statement, and you ignore the question: What about skew in a formation? your method doesnt allow for this, even though its something that exists in any real world flock/formation. Id be more than eager to include this method of yours in software form, and maybe even see if some hybrid is possible. Taking the best from any method. but I hope you have the patience, and decency to also allow for some actual time to work on things....as you may be at home with a ton of time on your hands. But trying to make sure we can develop this further, some of us have other things to attend to (while jugling a day-job and social life) JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Why not? Is there no point, because it doesnt work? It was a serious question. Only in a mathematic world, does everyone fly like pieces of lego. If we fly a formation with V (60 people). 10 cm spacing. But the left wings is a few degrees off, and the last person because of that (according to your system) ends up being 15 meters from where he should be. Yet the picture looks incredible, and as tight as could ever be. What would your system say? Again, asking for a way to include these kind of (everyone would say) succesfull formations in the validation. Funny..I wanted to ask you the same thing about your hearing-aid. Your top post in this thread reads> A modest proposal (though having difficulty with the 'modest' part, but lets ignore that one for now) You posted a proposal for feedback. "Scotty dont..." We will. You'll be able to comment. Give input. Anything you could want. But untill we actually post a proposal. And publicly show it. And ask for feedback/input. But at this point in time, completed and flawless proposals are not important, if nobody is there to SHOW there ARE alternatives to the one system that IS being presented for acceptance, WITHOUT input. As a professor, I may hope you also dont grab any piece of paper that you see a student walk around with, and start rating and commenting on it before they even finished a first draft. You also wait untill somebody hands it to you for feedback (given they promise to actually do that) JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

picture And maybe take one whacker (all facing the same way, roughly), and judge it like it was a wingsuit formation with your system. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

No, its just a method of keeping something you are working on yours, untill you deem the time right to show a first working setup to the world, and open it up for further development. Who said there are no secrets? There are no secrets AFTER we present the system to everyone, and when we open it up for comments/feedback. I didnt see any of those things yet. All Ive seen so far is an FAI document, to request speaking time? Again, your input is GREATLY appreachiated, once you see the whole thing, and are able to give us your informed oppinion. But at this point in time, I wish you could look beyond the petty subject you are stressing, and see the bigger picture.. I dont see why we have to? We havent presented anything to you or anyone yet for feedback. That will come, but not now. Again, there are more urgent matters at this point in time. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

That aside, it would be good if there was a way you could incoperate/allow for any skew or slight off-heading aim in one wing of the formation. Take the FS 300/400 way records, and try and copy/paste that one on top of a photo. You will see some of the wackers are rotated quite a bit of their axis. If it wasnt for their relative positions to eachother (grips) and the ability to judge them on that account, it would for sure not match any predrawn/scaled map/image you could overlay. What if only one (say the left) side of a 100 way 'scales' out, because of people flying 30 cm too far from eachother. Would that put the person on the far left corner so far away from his/her slot, it would be deemed 'out'. Even though the overal picture could maybe look incredible? This really is serious interest, but could you take a diveplan such as this one and use your method to judge the actual positions and succes of the formation (ignoring docks). Would it be a good thing to judge the formation as a hole, or would it be better to judge people on their own position relative to other flyers? And is there maybe a hybrid way of doing this? JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Cool...shows promise. Maybe you should somehow see if there is anything you could do to actually try and have some room for further development and testing. As there is this FAI thing next week, where some people are trying to get a different system accepted. Its nice to see you have it all worked out. If only there where some people going to the FAI meet to show there ARE alternatives. *sigh* JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

If some people (unlike you) hadnt gotten of their ass, and actually worked to present to the FAI, to show there are multiple paths to explore (including yours), there would be a pretty straight-forward (mostly hidden) process already hard on its way to lock down ANY other validation, briefing or debriefing system, as the USPA grid would have been proposed as the ONLY method of validation/judging to the FAI next week. I hear a lot of crying and yelling about the lack of input, and presented methods/systems etc. But (again), we are showing there are alternatives. We are not out to get anything accepted. You can work all you want on your amazing system that triumphs every other effort, and discredit every other thing on the planet. But whats the use, if there is only one process/method highlighted (without showing flaws) to the FAI for worldwide implementation next week. You state you've proven our 'concept' doesnt work. Yet complain you dont have all the info. Which one is it? While we (where 'we' is a group of +-100 people that have written letters to the USPA and FAI) actually try and do something about the possibility of not ever having ANY say in what gets accepted at the FAI. You just do your thing, and keep complaining about aspects of a subject-matter that are NOT open to discussion, presentation or even comments AT THIS TIME. Once we know for sure we have the room to work out (ANY!) judging, briefing or validation method, without time and a flawed system getting accepted as a worry. THAN we have allll the time and room in the world for comments, input, screaming, yelling, bitchslaps, and proposition for 50 other systems/methods. That thread you posted with your proposal. great. But nobody at the FAI meet next week would know about it, if it was up to you. And if your answer to that is "I dont care...in the past lesser systems also won over better ones" (like you said a few posts up), than why even waste anyones time posting here. Hope to speak to you again in a week or 2, when we will post all details, and look towards opening a forum for further development of our briefing tool and hopefully a (be it ours, or other) community approved judging method. Hopefully by then I see someone with a more open mind in your posts, willing to look ahead, and work together as a community. Instead of screaming loud, claiming a ton of ideas, yet doing nothing. Here are all the details you need for now. If you have any further questions after that...than first try understanding the difference between presenting a concept for free development, or presenting a closed/finalized judging method for acceptance. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Adding a flap of fabric, sewn flat against the (front) mesh, (3 stitches) with only one open side, will create an airlock. Adding a similar vent to the back (mesh/flap) will give the suit backinflation as well. Though in terms of pressurisations, the newer wingsuit designs will make the older generation suits such as the GTi look like old cars. Great to fly/drive. But the newer ones make it so much more effortless, faster and easier (talking suit design, not suit SIZE). JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Thats a bit narrow... There are several different Artistic (2 way + camera) competitions, there are three different performance based competition formats. But also agreed, that though bigways are great fun, the urge to classify jumps as records, this early in our development is a tad premature. Take the 60-something people that flew the recent record in the USA. Let that same group do that same jump again in 3 years, with each person having 300 to 1000 more wingsuit jumps under their belt. Will they fly the same formation, or will they fly it much, much tighter. When we get to the point where we can fly 9 ways linked, it wont mean shit (in the public eye) as we already flocked with 100+ people by then in 'records' And when a formation is flown without grips, but with 30 cm spacing, at a 3.0 glide/40 mph, it again wont mean much. And I look forward to 'us' explaining 'them' how this smaller formation, bigger technical acomplishment, and greater show of skill and precission flying, doesnt qualify as a record. Its a shame the urge to qualify records, to label it 'official', has led to a knee-jerk reaction, and formation ratification thats far from ready for actual use. We (as a community) havent even figured out the stuff ourselves. Yet next week, there is one group presenting at the FAI for acceptance. Why? For the community, or personal fame/gain? Im really sadened that we actually HAD to go to the FAI to try and prevent that from happening. Though glad, that (through critique on what we wanted to show) it made people finaly think about what the USPA grid would mean to wingsuit flying, if it got accepted in its current form. A 1 to 2 year pause, in terms of ANYTHING being accepted in terms of official FAI wingsuit ratification is what we will be asking for. And showcasing our concept (and highlighting other ideas) to just show that effort IS being taken to create something that works. Though I personaly feel we have to mature a lot as a community. In terms of being a more unified voice to the outside world and developing the dicipline further, both in terms of planning, goals and flying. Look at how far freeflying has developed the last 5 to 10 years, and the leaps we, wingsuit flyers, have taken the same last 5 years. Freeflyers have been at it for 20 years, and share much more with diciplines such as FS, which allows them to lend/borrow concepts in terms of ratification and competitions. We lack 10 to 15 years of development, and the ability to take a lot of things from the record and competition circuit. 1 on 1. Keep and open mind... JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Aside from some s3 prototupe suits, I dont think any suits predating 2004/2005 had backvents. The Acro and Phantom (Dubbed Phacro in the beginning for the backvents) where the first ones. Closely followed by the Birdman Firebird which came out around thevsame time. These days its pretty much standard on all manufacturers suits designed for all-round flying... JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Kallend, you are judging based on images, used to illustrate a working concept we want to explore, and develop. Who knows, into something completely different. You are missing a large piece of the puzzle. Again (deja vu #12). Wait a while till you understand the whole concept and have seen the actual workings of the system. And again, from there on, we will welcome ANYONE to develop this into a working system. In any shape or form. Anyones idea. As long as it works. How hard is it to wait judging, untill you have the full information. Or just continue bitching with a nice mix if theory and assumption thrown in. Again: we will present ideas for development. Not a lockdown or even dedication to one system or method JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Teams FlyLikeBrick - The Netherlands Team Oden - Sweden Oxygen Wingsuit Team - Belgium JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?