mccordia 73 #26 January 23, 2010 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? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mccordia 73 #27 January 23, 2010 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? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #28 January 23, 2010 Quote 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 Suggest you google "A Modest Proposal"... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #29 January 23, 2010 Quote 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.. Me too, especially since I seem to be flying 4 slots in it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuperGirl 0 #30 January 23, 2010 Quote Me too, especially since I seem to be flying 4 slots in it. now THAT must be some damn good flying!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #31 January 24, 2010 Quote Quote Me too, especially since I seem to be flying 4 slots in it. now THAT must be some damn good flying!! Anyhow, to respond to Jarno's statement, I measured the angle from the extreme left wingman, through Purple Mike, to the extreme right wingman on the 68 way (using heads as the measuring points). It was designed to be 90 degrees. It was 89 degrees. For the Summerfest 25-way the angle was 88 degrees. In other words, two large formations have been flown with very small angular errors. Personally I see no reason to make allowances for angular errors, since we have already demonstrated that we can fly very precise angles. However, if the consensus is that significant shape distortions are OK, the method I proposed can allow for that too with only a trivial change. The "100-way dots" lattice Jarno earlier provided is distorted anyway (at least on my printer) -the angle at the apex is not 90 degrees. Maybe he's already allowing for overall shape distortions.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Costyn 0 #32 January 25, 2010 Quote Suggest you google "A Modest Proposal" Yea... Ever since I saw your thread title, I have been trying to figure a way to throw the eating of children into the thread, but have so far come up empty... Costyn van Dongen - http://www.flylikebrick.com/ - World Wide Wingsuit News Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
