mccordia

Agreed...and also eager to see what a 25 to 50 person group of wingsuit flyers of the same skill and level of the 108 way headdown record (but within their own dicipline of wingsuit flying) could acomplish. And than using that accomplishment as a basis to test, try and further explore wingsuit formation judging. Wingsuit flying has come a long way. But in terms of both skill level and decicated practice of close relative flight/docks etc, few people compare to the extreme levels of dedication (and windtunnel practice) we see in other diciplines. A seasoned 4 way VRW flyer or FS jumper will spend 90% of his/her jumps practicing the close relative flying, in actual jumps. We are still trying to hold a spot 3 meters away from eachother. Eager to see where we will be in a few years time. And how the past acomplishments (incredible as they may be) compare to the things we'll see by than.. Ive beeng flying wingsuits for 7 years now, and the stuff done these days makes the initial formation flying look like beginner flocks. Which doesnt detract one single thing from that acomplishment. It just shows how far we have come. And at the same time, how far we still have to go.. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

That is actually something we also found, and also something especialy helpfull in debrief. Showing overal accuracy level in %, really shows if one jump was particulairly better than the other. Even though both maybe didnt yield a complete formartion. And the red lines highlight problem areas. A briefing/debriefing tool was our initial setup. Though you dont want to push accuracy too far, and end up being like one of Japaneese kids playing Tetris But lots of cool options we are eager to play with and further explore.. More soon.. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

hmm...maybe jarno had a point when he said that FAI document didnt explain the full method, and it was just a lead-in to the actual presentation..? We do have some vallues which roughly seem to make for good formations (not the ones mentioned by Andreea), but again. Have a week or 2 of patience. We have several things to try in terms of measuring and setting the distance. Using distances and angles measured on the formation as a whole. Or just set by lines drawn through the formation. Or by certain people. Plenty of things to play with. But not anything thats The default vallues set, are just that. Default vallues. We do have an idea of which vallues work, and from which point on it goes more towards 'anything goes'. But we'll get to all that later. Again...whats the sudden rush...give it a week or two (deja-vu..again) till after the FAI presentation. If thats what the method fully was...yes.. but as you are probably guessing by now...it isnt. otherwise a simple photoshop layer with two lines and a circle would suffice. And it (luckely) goes a bit beyond that. Especialy when looking at further measurements and assesments we can include. Not really...but again...seeing only half of what will be presented in a week or two, its an easy conclusion to draw...sadly a wrong one for what we are aiming for. A week or two of patience, and more will be shown (getting deja-vu x3 here) which you THEN are fully invited to pull appart, disect, modify or wipe of thre table... JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

We're presenting something to the FAI for further development. Again, if you want to actually see the thing in use. Have a bit of patience. Dont draw conclusions based on a brief overview written to/for the FAI, to only gloss over the system. Otherwise it would kind of take away the reason to actually present there. Wait till after the FAI presentation, and you'll see detailed pictures, theoretical 'worst formations', video of the thing in use, the whole shebang. And you'll see you're making assumptions based on only knowing half the details. Again..dont disagree, just for the sake of disagreeing. FAI presentation Public presentation Further development (including all methods proposed if its promising. Including this one, Zachs, yours.) Test, play, modify, repeat. We're not under time pressure (unless other people decide we are, which would make ANY effort or words written by you, me or anyone a waste of yime). Take it easy. Have a silly 1,5 week patience before 'judging' JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Ah...which tollerance levels for angle and distance did you use? I dare you to drop by Spot or Andreea and actually play with the system instead of theoretical BS. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Gransee (the performance competition) is 3 days after the planned dates for the Wingsuit Competition, so for overseas people, already a good chance to go all-out in Europe. I havent heard anything about a EU bigway as of now. Last year there was also some Spanish invitational thing many people asked about about, but I also never heard details on what/where/who. So you probably know more than I do about that one:) I do know there is an invitational formation event planned in Belgium for later in the season. Specifics for that one will follow. But the aim for that one wont be 'record' though, but just 'visualy pleasing' and seeing how tight it can be flown (spacing it within/max one meter). I update the boogie calendar on wingsuitnews.com this weekend, to show the EU scedule in more detail. If you know of planned weekends or boogies, let me know per PM or email to news@flylikebrick.com For the wingsuit competition, the above dates are set (many people mailed, liking those dates, none against), so hoping to see everyone there for the competition! If you have a team or need teammates, give a shout! JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

People still refer to big suits as 'tarp', 'carpet', 'garage door', 'sunblock', 'matras' and more silly terms. So not much has changed there Id even say the opposite. I think in part it also created an awareness that you 'need' a big suit to fly a certain performance. And it has created a market where people will rather upgrade their wingsuit, than honing their skills with more practice. Big suits can be an amazing thing in the right hands. Though at the same time, for a beginner can be a severly limiting factor, in learning to fly his/her body properly. Especialy for lighter people.. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Though in terms of look, the SM1, Stealth, Ghost, XS etc seem to share a lot of design-acpects with the GS1. Though having flown most of the suits, I do have to say there is some definate difference performance-wise. When comparing slower fallrates and especially forward drive, aforementioned suits all seem to perform a bit better than the GS1. I think its mostly related to the wing design. Im not sure if that was the case with the GS1, but the hanging person under the wing (in wingsuit design) seems to limit the suit, once fully spread, to form a completely smooth underside. Causing air to bleed out from under the legwing/armwings. Not properly putting the pressure/power on. Instead of a flat wingsurface, it felt a bit more like the hull of a boat (be it greatly exaturated). The 'hanging' legwing attached to the heel, seemed to cause problems putting propper pressure/drive onto the wing in designs made by Birdman/Tony (who called it the Mercury wing if I believe), or at least did in one of the earlier Blade prototypes we flew. Even a fully outstretched leg ment the legwing was still slightly pointing up. Having the legwing on the 'front' of the legs, where its able to almost go into de-arch when the legs are fully stretched, is where it seems to create a more powerfull drive. I definately think the GS1 was one (if not THE) first 'big surface' wingsuits. And do think it was key in initializing a line of thought/public image that enabled TonySuits to succesfully create and market these bigger wings. Which PF, FYB and BM also followed. Which also goes for the 'drop in' zipper style rigging (although I believe the S-Fly was actually the first one with that feature) For newer Jii-Wings designs, I do encourage you to take a good look at the more recent design improvements done by each manufacturer. As there is a noticable difference, (especially cellpressure/inflationwise) seen in more recent wingsuit designs, thats definately a big improvement in many ways. Strength needed, and lack of flapping being the 2 most important ones related to that. In relation to a canopy, a 15 mph flare already looks like level flight/climbing, Visa however managed several (GPS data validated) horizontal flights last week on his Stealth2. And even climbing with speeds of 4km/h on a few jumps (all after massive dives). Which is (I think) the first time we're actually seeing proof for this type of flare. And people are getting equaly impressive results (be it not always with actual data) from other suits. Comparing it to the GS1 (and suit performance in general, from a few years back) it really does show a significant increase in suit performance in the 'slow fall' arena. Which makes me believe we are still not at the peak of wingsuit design in its current state. Though for sure, other design directions are currently being explored. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

I will include the mention/idea in my presentation together with Ronald. I want to show/highlight there are so many areas left to explore, to find a final method that works. Ignoring ideas because they limit the chance of acceptance of current methods is not the way forward, so also not what we intend to do. I cant promise Ill have a presentation that makes everyone 100% happy, but do promise to try and aim for the time/room for further development, and not corner ourselves by accepting a certain system or method at this point, JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

In fact, Id go as far as saying bigger wingsuit will work against light people. Lacking the wingload to fly a suit at a forward speed matching normal/heavy flyers. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

*** For most people that dont seem to remember milk comes from cows, this kind of measuring does take a tad more work. Again, look past any (non existant) commercial interest, and try and see how this stuff could make life easier, instead of more difficult.. In the end, we're all working towards the same goal.. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

And again...this kind of thought IS what we need more. In short, we have a mesh/dots over a bunch of flyers, and the equation used to measure the flying is what we really need to work out. And I see some promise in several things mentioned. And (promise) will also mention this in the FAI proposal as one of the areas to further explore. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Its funny that the initial comment was that placing dots on each flyer would take to long, and now its measuring the distances between each one by hand. Thats even more work. I hate to break it to you (respecting your age and all). But its 2010...not 1910 But regardless of method. A ruler in combination with one of those school geo-triangle thingies (measuring the angle, which you seem to forget, and IS an important part in formation shape), and just doing those 2 vallues on each jumper, will work just fine. But if you have a choice of 5 hours per formation judged, or 5 minutes. Ill go with the times, and create some actual software for the porpoise. But again, its not mandatory. Depends on how you prefer judging to be done. Fast, to the point is my prefered method. Much like the judging on 4 way formation often using a specialized system in competitions. Wonder how ritch the people are now that designed that one... JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Some good points. For sure. Ill be sure to include a few of the things you mention in the document Im working on at the moment, in the list of potential areas to explore. I think a lot of these things are easier than you think. We have the basic measuring 'device' in place. Its just a matter of coming up with good equations/methods of measuring the actual shape and form of the points we gave the software. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

check.. You are looking for advanced methods of judging, yet hope to find it implemented in standarddized software. And software IS NOT part of the judging METHOD. Its a simplified/easier way of doing so. check Who does everyone fly towards on a bigway (FS/Freefly) Who sets the speed/Fallrate? and how do people call that person.....'base' by any chance? Could you name the software package that has this feature available (in a 100% correct and easily acces-able feature?). Though as mentioned before, something we can (and will) include at a later point in time. Though these are practical issues, that dont have anything to do with the actual measuring method. They just limit the cameraman in terms of distance he/she flies and what (non fish-eye) lense to use, to minimize distorting. But again, a more than possible feature for later inclusion. check.. check.. as thats what actually happens when all flyers fly to a neigbour, but also have a minimum and maximum vallue/distance they are allowed to fly. Though (and hope you care to think with us, instead of rebelling) we are more than welcome to also ad additional measuring parameters to the flex-grid on top of a formation. Measuring most extreme corners/angles at the edges for additional validation of overal for and shape. Is it? Its not that hard to get a close to accurate distance with a simple (digital) tape-measure on top of a known proportion of an object. be it a rig, helmet or arm-length. Even displaying that vallue next to all jumpers. And refering to your point number 2 again, have fun measuring that one for all jumpers in image editing software. Dont forget to switch of the lights when done... check..also possible for multiple points. In future, we could even see if judging on video (moving) is possible. though thats still a long way of for now. Good one (elliminating the rest of the quote). one thing to play with. In essence, its the same method we now use. Only getting the base distance/angle from the whole formation (it shouldnt just be distances you judge, as that permits a V formation to fly as a straight line or vice-versa, and still count as a succes. Angle also counts.) Lots of good stuff to think about. And once you get passed the scare of creating a custom application to assist in doing 5 weeks of work in an image editing application, give a shout, and we'll gladly have you think along. Thats the whole intent. Happy to see this post. As its highlights things to work on, to improve. A process that should have been initiated a year ago in this 'assertive' way....but a good one.. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

planes_01 - Just took the picture into the judging ap. Seems like a good formation to me. The one plane is sadly out (according to the distance/angle specs we are using now, but the actual allowed tollerance is one to test/play with the coming time to see which vallues make the difference between good/bad formation/slot flying. But being strict, I could see the guy moving an inch or so back to be concidered 'in slot' a bit better.. planes_01 - a detailed look at the 'flight zone' of the 'faulty' flyer. The green boxes show the area in which he should have his next flyer (left/right). The boxes behind him are the flight zones for the next row (if there was one). Each flyer has these 4 boxes. 2 in front (indicating where he should be flying on/to) 2 behind, for the next flyer. If everyone flies the outer (or inner) extremes, it creates a rip/tear in the middle of the formation. In the end, everyone has an exact place on a grid, thats ever so slightly move-able at the joints. But the overal integrity is always maintained. planes_01 - wingsuit silhoutes turned on. planes_01 - wingsuit silhoutes displaying colour/name (dirtdive, and move-able overlay for debrief) JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

What is written in that PDF is for the FAI. A more public, in depth informing of the further delopment track, ideas and invitation to comment is sceduled after the FAI presentation. So keep the tar and feathers in the shed for a few more days if you can JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

The FAI document includes a large part of reasoning as to WHY there is a need for a working validation/judging system, and whats wrong with the one currently being pushed, which will not be present in that shape or form in the actual presentation. If you want to present at the FAI, you need to show why they should invite you in the first place. If it had been a pink, perfume-scented document, with flowers drawn in the corners, and didn't in brutally honest way mention the points you criticize, we would have been at home next week, and I wouldn't be buying airline tickets to Swiss to be present. Im real curious why this same uproar of yours isnt aimed at the other (by your own words) flawed system, their push for worldwide acceptance, and total lack of attention with relation to that systems shortcomings. You keep bashing a system of which we ALSO say> WE NEED TO DEVELOP THINGS FURTHER WITH THE WHOLE COMMUNITY UNTILL WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT WORKS. And thats the big reason we will be there. We want to show development, en (regardless of who's rules it will be in the end), have something GOOD to show to the FAI when there finaly is a community developed, tested and approved system. Instead of a pushed, flawed system that ignores the short-coming by just not mentioning them. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

The first thread on the forum, and this FAQ on our website may be a good startingpoint (as well as some articles in that section of flylikebrick.com JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

We are investing a lot of time and money into this, but not to get ritch and pay for a new car. I have an actual job for that. The little cost there will be, is one we are trying to cover as far as possible by sponsoring or other means (if and when that time comes). Money isnt ANY objective here. And that aside, even when used as a judging application, only the judges would need the software. Not every single participant. Though making it available to everyone is our aim in the long run, money is not any part of that goal. It absolutely amazes me what conclusions people are drawing, and how much critique there is as to the workings of the system (which is presented as a work in progres), while the USPA grid got accepted with worse errors and flaws, without a single negative comment at that point on time. We are working on something that also enables people to plan their (multipoint) dives, breakoff, suit colours, and the ability to mail eachoter (animated) formation files before a boogie or record event. In what shape or for this will finaly see actual use, and to what purpoise, I dont know. But it would be a good one if people could think about the actual development of a judging method more refined than current available options. Scott Campos made an exelent observation. Why rush to let other judge a formation dicipline, we as a communitu cant even figure out among ourselves yet. We dont ask acceptance, we dont ask your money. We ask your time and brainpower to further work out a solution. As to Kallend, the measuring of adjenct flyers to set distance and angle tollerances creates a overal mesh that ensures a good formation, as lines/connections 'break' otherwise rows away from the dock monitored. After the FAI presentation, we will place all info online. And people wanting to testdrive the software, drop by Spot or Andreea to give it a go. They'll gladly show you how it works, and whats possible. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

No it doesnt. If you fly only to the two people in front of you, the people behind you, and besides you WILL push the formation out of whack, and break the chains. You fly relative to a person next to you, but ALSO have to keep an eye on overal spacing, distances and line orientation. Where you didnt fly a slot relative to to the person, but only kept the same distance to the base, down to the cm. Would love to see if the outisde wackers stayed in their 3x3 box, or if they decided to stick to the grips presented in front of them, with each flyer doing their best to keep overal integrity in terms of distance. Something I expected someone of your experience to understand, but I guess it takes actual seeing/playing with the software, (judging formations on the overal shape, and not just distances between flyers) to see that. Several flyers who played with the software initialy had the same question, and all of them revised that oppinion. But disagreeing for the sake of not agreeing is fun as well JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

I think its still 5, done in Spa (Belgium), and repeated a week later in the USA. AFAIK nobody has done bigger so far (though not completely impossible to) JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Looking at the time thats passed since the GS1 thats made, in terms of slow fallrates, the avg (sustained) speeds have gone down from 40-ish mph to low 30's. And flare speeds have recently given the first actual possitive climb after a dive (Visa did a few km/h positive speeds for a few seconds in his Stealth2, without jet turbines:). Wingsuit design is still in its teens, and slowly maturing...but definetely not on a standstill.. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Thats exactly the same in the other grid/lattice system as well. Cummulative error quickly (within two or three rows) 'breaks' the formation, not allowing skewed formations beyond what compareable in fs/ff. Flying a slot/grip in RW is the same. If a wedge is skewed, only an idiot flies to a position 20 meters to the left (because thats where he expects his slot to be). If you want to compare flying a slot/grip to FS bigways...simple..start flying grips! The grip is a virtual 'dock' in your position relative to another flyer. In FS, your arms and legs allow for some movement in/out, relative to another person. When that goes out max. or min. possible distance, it breaks the grips/docks a few rows further/back. Exactly the same as in the lattice grid we use. People fly a slot, as if it was linked/docked. Minor movement in/out (min and max! Also not getting to close) is possible, yet only to a few %, as to not break/tear the virtual docks a few rows up/back. JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?

Ill be there just showing some judging proposals, not defending nor trashing anything. Depending on my agenda, a heli-load would be fun! JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete?