FAI, Wingsuits, and the Grid

[kallend 1,621]

Quote

Quote

Jarno, all we know is what you have written. we are not mind readers.

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

You can now return the favor:

www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view&post=3781087#3781087

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mccordia 73]

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?

[kallend 1,621]

Quote

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.

I think my method is particularly easy. I could do it without a computer for, say, a 25 way in just a few minutes. You seem to forget that I grew up in the era of abacuses and slide rules.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mccordia 73]

Quote

I think my method is particularly easy. I could do it without a computer for, say, a 25 way in just a few minutes. You seem to forget that I grew up in the era of abacuses and slide rules.

***

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?

[kallend 1,621]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Fallacious argument.

Jet fighters aren't designed for formation flying either, but millions of people like to watch the Thunderbirds, Blue Angels, Snowbirds, Red Arrows, etc. doing it and I gather there's a high demand from pilots to get on those teams.

Not fallacious argument.

Currently there are world records for aircraft speed, highest flying, distance, time through obstacle courses, etc. Are there attempted world 'records' for how many aircraft have gone flocking together? How many airplanes have been in the air together?

www.b2osh.org/Magazine_Articles/06%20August%20ABS%20collins.pdf

"1995 — B2Osh set a world record for a
civilian formation flight of 134 airplanes!"

Also

www1.oshkoshusa.com/Oshkosh-Stories/News/EAA-Airventure-News/RV-Formation-Flight-at-AirVenture-2007-Was-a-World-Record!

My point exactly! Pretty lame shit!

YOU asked the question. Sorry that you didn't like the replies, but that's no reason to be rude.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[SimonBones 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Fallacious argument.

Jet fighters aren't designed for formation flying either, but millions of people like to watch the Thunderbirds, Blue Angels, Snowbirds, Red Arrows, etc. doing it and I gather there's a high demand from pilots to get on those teams.

Not fallacious argument.

Currently there are world records for aircraft speed, highest flying, distance, time through obstacle courses, etc. Are there attempted world 'records' for how many aircraft have gone flocking together? How many airplanes have been in the air together?

www.b2osh.org/Magazine_Articles/06%20August%20ABS%20collins.pdf

"1995 — B2Osh set a world record for a
civilian formation flight of 134 airplanes!"

Also

www1.oshkoshusa.com/Oshkosh-Stories/News/EAA-Airventure-News/RV-Formation-Flight-at-AirVenture-2007-Was-a-World-Record!

My point exactly! Pretty lame shit!

YOU asked the question. Sorry that you didn't like the replies, but that's no reason to be rude.

You're the one that skipped past every point in an argument to answer a question with a ridiculously obvious answer. Everyone knows there is a pretty silly world record for pretty much anything out there, and you proved that point perfectly. There is a difference between setting records that pushes a sport further and challenges 'top' performers to have to perform better, then there are records out there that have been done just for the sake of setting a silly record even though it achieves nothing significant.

Did you know there is a world record for how many t-shirts worn at once? 121 t-shirts.

Did you know there is a world record for how many body piercings performed in one sitting? 1,016 piercings.

http://www.oddee.com/item_86932.aspx

Setting world records for ground distance covered from x exit height to y altitude is a record that pushes people to perform more and pushes the development of better performing wingsuits.

Setting world records for amount of 2 way docks performed from x exit altitude to y altitude pushes wingsuiters to fly better at higher performance to increase the work time. This pushes the discipline to reach new levels of performance and flying skills.

Setting a 'world record' by being all in the air together wearing similar suits and making a computer image fit a 26.5' slop factor does not promote the advancement of higher performing suits nor does it provide the structure to seek more advanced techniques in wingsuit piloting. Chasing after silly records like this only promote piss poor flying and dumbing down the 'art' of wingsuit flight. If people are wearing weights and flying with their feet on their asses, what the hell is the point anymore?

Wingsuiting has a much lower retention rate as a discipline then it should have. I know dozens of people who bought a wingsuit, put a couple dozen jumps on it, then sold it in boredom because there was no direction to take the 'discipline' other than this sloppy flight flocking grid bigway nonsense. It's like it all celebrates mediocre performance from a pilot and his wing.

In 10 years time, which path will generate the push for better piloting and advancements in suit technology? Which will advance wingsuiting to new levels? Dumbed down weight wearing legs on ass grid flying for the sake of setting a no-contact 'world record'? Or a high performance demand of precision maxed out piloting?

I found the 100 way RW sequential and 400 way RW world record much more impressive and performance demanding than the silly 'just for the sake of it' Thailand 960 or whatever mass exit record.

But hey, it's your discipline right? You can support advancing it if you'd like, or you can let it stagnate in silly grid records.

108 way head down world record!!!
http://www.simonbones.com
Hit me up on Facebook

[kallend 1,621]

Have you been taking lessons from Yuri?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[LyraM45 0]

Quote

Fallacious argument.

Jet fighters aren't designed for formation flying either, but millions of people like to watch the Thunderbirds, Blue Angels, Snowbirds, Red Arrows, etc. doing it and I gather there's a high demand from pilots to get on those teams.

I don't think he was trying to argue that people don't like to watch wingsuits, because they obviously do-- just as they like to watch the Thunderbirds, Blue Angels, Snowbirds, Red Arrows, etc. And yes, I'm sure there is a high demand for pilots to join those teams as I am sure there is a high demand for wingsuit pilots who want to make a sponsored team or some other bad ass team, but that is totally besides his point. I'm not a wingsuiter but I'm going to chime in on Simon's back here-- I have to agree with him somewhat on this. I've been stalking these "grid" threads for a while and vicariously through Matt living the "record" jumps and all.

To go a little OT and get in to my opinion real quick on the whole grid thing-- there is no possible way to judge it IMO without seeing it in ALL dimensions. Not just one shot from the bottom. Just one shot from the bottom doesn't show if everybody is on level with each other vertically. And what really got me about this years formation is the fact that a few people were 90% of the way out of their grid and yet because they had their fingertips in their grid it counted. Just imagine if every single one of the flyers were 90% out of their grids. The formation would look like crap, right? I think what Simon is saying here is there is no room for stuff like that on an actual record jump. You don't see belly fliers, crew, or freefly record formations with room to look like crap and still get accepted. The formation is already allowed to be flawed and, other disciplines that leave no room for flaw, have a hard time taking that as seriously if you want to consider it just as much a record as theirs without their flaws.

Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

[kallend 1,621]

Just for the record, the current USPA grid method is NOT my invention, nor did I have anything to do with its development or approval. Please stop writing as if it's mine. I don't agree with those that think it fatally flawed; it does have its problems but they are fixable.

As you may have noticed, I have my own ideas about how the degree of perfection of a formation should be measured.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DSE 3]

And your ideas are closer to what makes sense than the grid. Unfortunately, your ideas aren't going to be in front of the FAI representing the USPA in about 72 hours. And more unfortunately, the USPA BOD competition committee members that have read this thread have little they can do about posts on DZ.com.

This thread (and the others) amply illustrate that the discipline simply isn't ready for a judging system. Yet. But so far, this has been the most valuable discussion that's been held on the topic, at least in an online manner.

[mccordia 73]

Quote

And your ideas are closer to what makes sense than the grid. Unfortunately, your ideas aren't going to be in front of the FAI representing the USPA in about 72 hours.

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?

[DSE 3]

It's terrific that this issue has spawned a sense of cohesiveness in the wingsuit community, that we want something better/more, and that we want to have an opportunity to discuss the judging options that brilliant minds like Kallend, Jarno, Zach, FastEd, Stoney, Andreea, myself, and others have come up with. Perhaps we'll find an amalgam of ideas in these discussions. It's sad that the current system was accepted without that dialog (since we didn't know it was happening).

The bigger issue right now, IMO, is stopping the camel from getting its nose under the tent at the INTERNATIONAL level. It's not about getting the FAI to accept one method over another. It's about stopping the world-wide wingsuit community from being saddled with a very infantile and flawed method.

If the grid was a good idea in July, it'll still be a good idea next January during the next conference. It'll be an even better idea if we all have input to how to improve or replace it. There should be no rush, as we'll be stuck with whatever we allow to pass. For a very, very long time.

The politics this damn thing have generated are absurd.
For example, Larry Bagley (FAI and USPA judge) was ORDERED yesterday, to ratify a Florida State Record 7 way wingsuit formation even though there is a submitted 8 way record that occurred at the same time, also in Florida. He initially ordered a stop of all wingsuit record ratifications because he could see the community was not of a majority in accepting the grid, and he realized the grid proposal was not at all complete.
His words to me yesterday were "Douglas, for 8 years we've been telling wingsuiters "No No, No," because nothing of merit had been placed before us. Yet here we discovered the answer in 45 seconds? I'm sorry, but I don't buy it."
Yet he was forced by the head of USPA to ratify the smaller record because "it's pretty and the other one isn't."

There alone, demonstrates the problem in the grid. it's mostly subjective. We need objective, repeatable results.

We must stop the grid at the international level, which will make it easier for the USPA to repeal their error from July, 2009, and we need to have a dialog about what are willing to accept.

[notsane 0]

For what it's worth, I need to go on record as one of those who does not like "the grid". My reasons are many, and they've all been presented in this thread.

As far as I can see, the largest wingsuit formation record stands at 5, with grips, like every other skydiving discipline. I don't understand the rush to reach 100 and I think "the grid" makes us a laughingstock by granting us "special consideration" that we don't need grips.

That's the end of my discussion on the topic.

IMHO

Scott

[kallend 1,621]

I don't think the USPA grid method is "infantile" or particularly flawed. I don't see that it lacks objectivity either (in principle, "best fit" can be mathematically described very precisely by a linear least-squares method).

It could do with a tune-up.

(And I think my method is better.)

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DSE 3]

Quote

I don't think the USPA grid method is "infantile" or particularly flawed. I don't see that it lacks objectivity either (in principle, "best fit" can be mathematically described very precisely by a linear least-squares method).

(And I think my method is better.)

It's new, has been applied to very few formations, ie' infantile. The behavior of the authors when discussions of improvement fit the same description.

Objective?
Take the two Florida State record attempts on the same day.
One a 7 way. One an 8 way. Both fit criteria of the grid. One is pretty, one is not.
One is ratified, the other is not.
The Exec Director of USPA demanded that the 7 way be ratified after the USPA (and FAI) judge refused to ratify it.
I suspect that with the emails that have landed on his desk this morning, the USPA will be forced to ratify the 8 way now too, but the truth is, Larry Bagley was ordered to ratify the 7 way record, in spite of his nearly 40 years experience as a judge and his decision to not ratify it, knowing an 8 way had also been submitted from the same day.
Nothing "objective" about that. It's called "Politics" and that has been the point of the grid.
Pick up the phone. Call Larry. Get the story straight from the horses mouth. Dial USPA headquarters, "Larry Bagley's office, please?"
Or you could do as I did and sit across a table with a coupla Cokes between ya.
Time for gridlock to end.
Let's get back to wingsuit flying, not wingsuit falling.

[kallend 1,621]

Quote

Quote

I don't think the USPA grid method is "infantile" or particularly flawed. I don't see that it lacks objectivity either (in principle, "best fit" can be mathematically described very precisely by a linear least-squares method).

(And I think my method is better.)

It's new, has been applied to very few formations, ie' infantile.

Well, it seem to be considerably less infantile than any other method according to that definition.

By the way, I have been playing with the "netherlands" method as described in the FAI document (I don't have the software). It will also approve some ugly and distorted formations, that are just ugly in a different way from USPA ugly.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,621]

Quote

For what it's worth, I need to go on record as one of those who does not like "the grid". My reasons are many, and they've all been presented in this thread.

As far as I can see, the largest wingsuit formation record stands at 5, with grips, like every other skydiving discipline. I don't understand the rush to reach 100 and I think "the grid" makes us a laughingstock by granting us "special consideration" that we don't need grips.

That's the end of my discussion on the topic.

IMHO

Scott

\


The Thunderbirds and Blue Angels don't take grips either.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mccordia 73]

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?

[kallend 1,621]

Quote

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.

"Dropping by" involves a trip of over 1500km.

"Theoretical BS"? I used the pictures on your FAI presentation. If you want to tell us the values, we won't have to resort to believing the "BS" in your "BS" presentation.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mccordia 73]

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?

[kallend 1,621]

Quote

Let's see a screen shot of the ugliest formation that would still be acceptable as a record with this program. That was a good way to illustrate the problems with the grid.

OK, done by hand since they won't release the program. The tolerances are measured from the diagram in the FAI presentation.

64 way diamond - what it should look like

64-way something - apparently acceptable as a 64 way diamond under the Netherlands proposal. The angles and distances all meet the tolerances illustrated on their diagram.

It illustrates a fundamental flaw in any system based only on local analysis, that errors can accumulate without being detected, leading in the end to gross distortions.

Plenty more examples like that.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,621]

Quote

Again..dont disagree, just for the sake of disagreeing.

I'm disagreeing because I believe your method has a fundamental flaw. The details of your method are irrelevant, the whole concept on which it is based is flawed - the assumption that you can evaluate a large formation simply by local analysis of the immediate neighborhood of a jumper.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[SimonBones 1]

Quote

Quote

For what it's worth, I need to go on record as one of those who does not like "the grid". My reasons are many, and they've all been presented in this thread.

As far as I can see, the largest wingsuit formation record stands at 5, with grips, like every other skydiving discipline. I don't understand the rush to reach 100 and I think "the grid" makes us a laughingstock by granting us "special consideration" that we don't need grips.

That's the end of my discussion on the topic.

IMHO

Scott

\


The Thunderbirds and Blue Angels don't take grips either.

The thunderbirds and blue angels don't fly in formation for the sake of trying to set silly formation records. Formation flying is a small part of a wide range of stunts coordinated for visual entertainment at an airshow.

Is this a summary of your argument?

Quote

The blue angels and thunderbirds do some formation flying so therefor a 2D picture of skydivers all wearing winged suits (even if not using very much of their wings) falling somewhere in a loosely defined formation without grips is justification for a serious world skydiving record.

108 way head down world record!!!
http://www.simonbones.com
Hit me up on Facebook

[kallend 1,621]

Simon, no one is forcing you to participate in wingsuit flocks. Some people would consider diving headfirst at the ground holding hands with 107 others to be rather pointless.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[SuperGirl 0]

okay let's see
just tried a few lines and already no worky.
I have the tolerances set at whatever the default value was... is this the same as the proposal? i can't be arsed to dig that up right now. lemme know if i gotta redo it with different values. (and as far as tolerance goes, this being work in progress, these values have been tested about as much as the grid... i.e. a bunch of formations seem to work fine with this. not thorough enough)

but I see the idea you're trying to illustrate. I'm gonna play with it some more and see if I can tweak your diagram into something still ugly but accepted... there might be one somewhere in between... feel free to send updated versions.