Buried

There's an option to start anew but not this time around with what was presented at the BOD. We have interest and support of a new judging system once there is more consensus in the community and we can compare what is out there. For the time bring, everyone involved took steps to tighten the requirements. Are they perfect no, not at all. Are they better than what we've had the last 7 months? yes. As said, the new method will help fix some issues we see today and push people in a direction of flying better.

There are other methods out there today. some can be combined to make new ones and others may appear. This year is a year of applying ALL these methods together to any formations that are done and discuss the pros and cons of them all and see which direction to go. If ready, we will have time at the next BOD in July to discuss these and provide a direction or directions where we want to focus on more. Fnd is just the start of these discussions. There SHOULD be a few discussions taken place before the July BOD anyhow.

We probably won't see another change for the next year. Winter BOD meetings are the best time to change competition and record rules. I know there are quite a few people who want to see a single point of reference measurement and we can probably get there in time. We'd all need to talk about this more.

the 'new' standard will probably not work with the frenchie picture because of the angle and how some people 'appear' to be overlapping eachother. I will say it will work with recent red bull flying that was nice and close.

*edit i'll try to fill more in later

Quote

Does anyone know what were the slight modifications?

- the height (head to foot, not ws tail) of the base flyer must meet or exceed 27% of the height of the flying box. Updated grid to include height markings will be available on USPA website.

-flyer must be 100% within grid space


to my knowledge no current records meet these added criteria. I know the summerfest one does not for sure and that was the cleanest one out there

Quote

There will be a workgroup created to investigate, report and work as spokespersons for the community.

consisting of who/what types of people?

i thought about using the center of a person, but then it becomes overly complicated to find the center of each flyer and where their center truly would be in the formation before you start plotting. That's were a % or somehow exact measurable tolerance comes in to allow for that.

There are quite a few things that are nice and absolute about this method. It would still be great to explore docks more since more and more people are learning to fly and hold docks. I still also believe we need to have a max fall rate so things don't get like what Jarno described in another thread.

what I am hearing are that there are three vars/tolerances that need to be defined for a "record". All those must be met. These are: overall uniform formation distortion, the maximum position error of any jumper of inter-jumper spacing and avg error.

It prob be good that uniform distortion be around 5-6%. We;d have to allow some distortion to occur since a person flying off a 5' person is different than flying off a 6' would be a little different in terms of position.

max error needs to be low, as well as avg error. a max error of 48.5% that you mention occurred at summerfest is just too high. That person does look out of place. Avg was 24.9%. Would 15% be more acceptable for avg and max? We'd need to play and test to be sure and look at the impact of each var better.

>>>>Should there be an "intermediate" and "Advanced" set of values as there is in other classes of competition?

yes and this is a great idea. higher tolerances would be allowed.

>>>>Should there be a differing set of values for say, a 9 way vs a
>>>>multiplane load?

No

>>>>Should all experience levels, formation sizes adhere to one
>>>>standard?

Sizes - yes
levels - not necessary if it comes to competition, but should for records



where would these "dots" be placed? On their heads? On the rigs? How significant is the placement of the dot? If I move it a smudge this way or that. that tolerance needs to be considered in the % we come up with.. so if we say it's 5%, it's really 1% allowing for placement error on the rig and 4% for flying. It may not be that much, but you get the idea. Maybe Jarno can make rig icons we place over the rigs

How well would this method hold up to a formation picture that is skewed since the photographer wasn't flying exactly below or above?

but then again.. it requires software (are you going to make a mac version? ;) ) but then again so did the grid. If it could be easily dummy proofed that alone would already be better than the grid method. the tolerances based on levels (beginner,int,adv) would probably need to be hard coded in a final version for it to be that way then.

nice post decompresion.

Quote

Anybody wanna do a 6-way docked diamond wedge this spring?

Docked lines and other docked dives are already beeing planned at Fnd. Be there

Quote

Quote

I'm pretty sure I too have managed to alienate friends on both sides of the battle, with my refusal to take sides even though I kind of agree with certain points being made on BOTH sides.

The entire "battle" long ago went from being about a system used to judging wingsuit records and instead is about ego's, personal grudges and screwing with people.

The truth is nobody outside of wingsuiting gives a fuck what system we use to measure records. The paper's don't care, they just hear "official record" and show up for a sound bite. And most non-wingsuiting skydivers don't understand crap about wingsuits and just like to see the pretty formations.

I agree with you Mark on all points.Some people, such as myself, have been able to keep the focus only about the judging system, while others have not and resort to slander.

I agree the general public doesn't care and they just hear the title. There are some wingsuiters care about this since it helps media exposure and they can turn it into something (whatever that may be). This sport isn't about that. Record standards are ours. May as well make it something hard strive for, something that we already hold ourselves up to. The current method does not do that.


discussion about judging is a discussion about judging. I'll jump with anyone and everyone [as long as they are safe]. I'll teach anyone... no matter that person's view point. No hard feelings. I've indicated that from the start.

This thread makes me laugh and smile. It's some of the better critiques and ideas that we've had going in a long time.

Jarno has said much more than he has needed to at this point. Jarno has also said much more than anyone from *RTS* or the the IPC delegate who is presenting on behalf of us, the USPA member, as a common voice. A "common" voice that seemly exists in only a few people's heads. There is no common voice exists today. Little comment or true and honest intentions to hear us out have been posted here on line or even off line. No additional information has been made public. Any contact I have had with some members of the USPA commitees/board have needed to be direct since barriers obviously exist as only one voice and some also show little interest in pursuing anything else other than a incomplete, subjective system. There have been numerous recommendations on ways to improve the grid sent to them over the last number of months by a few. It has led to no outside discussion. Heck, they haven't even had one board meeting since it's adoption to discuss this in an official place, in an open forum. It makes me sad and proves the current system is broke.. but we will see for how long this will remain true.

Do i support the software? I can't say, I haven't played with it. I've already have thought of improvements which would help better judge different formations. Time, testing, application, and [potential] revisions to the software or the rules will tell.. as it would any judging system.

Many have really lost focus of what drives us...

we don't need a judging system, let alone a poor one to be able to have fun and put together good looking formations that people would still stand in awe at.

we don't need a judging system, let alone one that can't apply to our creativity and pursuit of taking wingsuiting to another level.

we don't need a judging system to increase or [falsely] validate our skill levels..

we don't need a judging system to make a buck or gain publicity.

If a judging system is meant to be, one will be supported by the community through proof and through testing. At that point one should be adopted. Right now it shouldn't happen anytime soon. There are no reasons to make official steps in something no one has anything to gain from, except those promoting it.

Quote

If they would tell us the numbers instead of just hinting at future revelations we wouldn't have to guess what they are up to.

If taya and others told us what they were up to before they snuck through a flawed system we may not be where we are now either or have to guess what they are up to. Same thing goes with this IPC proposal. At least this time we have time and a true community voice to put behind it.

I will say that the 'numbers' have not been defined. why? because if this method proves to offer something more we as a community can define those tolerances. we can have agreement between us all. That's something the grid, especially under the current rules (or near future proposed rules) can offer.

.. and for those still reading this you can see record spot was talking about at http://news.flylikebrick.com/2010/01/florida-state-record.html

if anyone wants to address something to me. call. if you need my number send me a pm.

Quote

I will bring bail money

you'll probably need some waders too for when you land in the marsh

I tried to sign up to give you a first flight, but didnt find a link.

Quote

Quote

Quote

If you read raisethesky.org you will see that it is 501(c)3 registered entity, a non-profit. From my perspective that means that any money I donate to the entity is eligible for a receipt and tax exemption.

Ah cool, sorry. Didn't realise that bit

NPO or not, I don't think the financials are anyone's business. No one needs to know how much this event profited anyone, it's a business just like any other. It's none of my business how much you made last year any more than it's your business how much I made last year. NPO's allow for administrative fees to be part of the program, as fundraisers have to make a living too. There is nothing that says administrators of an NPO must be volunteers.

yes, they can legally take wages, reimbursements, advertisements, overhead, buy assets, etc out of the $ you donated to them. When they file a 990, they will also have to report the top ten paid/compensated individuals, which would be public... JFTC is no different.

but either way, that's not what or why I asked. As long as a fair portion of every dollar raised goes to charity, who cares what they do if you choose to participate in their events.

I asked what the actual total was since 5k was unexpected for 70+ people and makes it seem like some people didn't pay a donation in order to jump...

so I'm wondering if future events donations will be optional and if not, I pose the question should the US records be always associated with raise the sky or should they have their own fund raising events?. JFTC has their own nitch and can, but not always produce records.

that's good to hear. too bad others didn't take the offer up. I understand wanting to keep it small, I would have done the same.

props to ill vision too. looks like they did a great job around the dz (at the event and w/ the children)

Quote

It seems works out perfectly either way. The 71 way is accepted as a formation, but then the rules changed midstream and "buffers" were added to the grid. So...had the 100 way not materialized (it didn't) then the 71 way stands. Except....the 68 way did materialize from the 100 way, so it stands. But had it not materialized, the 71 way would be the record.
And...the 71 way is still the largest assembled formation in the world whether recognized by FAI, FAA, USPA, MickeyD's, or anyone else.

Marketing at it's best. let's rename/rebrand it and do it again!

Quote

$354 x 70 = $24,780

it's not that simple which is why I asked , not assumed, out of the curiosity of myself and others. plus there were 11 covered slots or so.

Quote

The 71 was also judged on a gird and we were told that it was successful.

yes it fit what they had as the grid. unofficial or not, it's technicalities. Actually that grid probably harder since it didn't have the 'buffer zone'. It seems to me uspa comp manual on national records says nothing about dates or time frames. it asks that the USPA is notified before and after the attempt and signatures. Since the USPA was notified before last year bother before and after, couldn't you technically apply the new grid, get signatures, send video and have that be the record?

68 way - official national record
71 way - unofficial national and unofficial world record


71way had at least 5-6 alternates.
75way, later a 68 way, had no alts and was the formational more thought through in terms of making it easier to put together (no long wings).

Either way it's about as official as the POPS record RTS also touts on the website.POPS won't recognize anything that small.

Quote

"the parachutists over forty years old in this formation went off right afterwards to go and set a POPS (Parachutists Over Phorty Society) record of their own!"

nice video phil. great camera flying too.!

where others offered an option to go to the school?

now everyone can sit on mike and bland! is this like a rodeo? double rodeo?
I know at least two people who will get one[

Quote

or design your own card

lucky for us of those who aren't mike

Apparently scotty(?) and matt(?) are Aliens


on another note...

I don't think anyone informed is expecting all (or many) of the organizers to have been paid. They just whored themselves to for sluts.. i mean slots . Many would have done the same.

organizers-
What was the actual rounded amount contributed to charity? Did any of the organizers contribute too to this amount? I don't understand how what the media reports as $5100 when the website says:

Quote

The cost to attend Wingsuit Bigway 2009 is $750, of which $100 is tax-deductible in the United States. This includes 22 jumps.

I know you can deduct other overhead, but the 5.1k amount seems a little unexpected to many.

Quote

There was a FAQ that clarified the process. The FAQ made it pretty clear that advance approval and payment was required.

well officially they had the 26th of oct as a cut off date which was originally in the FAQ.. They then decided to postpone that since they didn't have over 70 people, and people like my self weren't yet sure we'd be able to make it. People were still being qualified people up until friday before the event.

Quote

But FAI on bigways

this record or the judging method isn't recognized by the FAI yet... & great tact...

Quote

The smartest thing for the organizers to do was put PM in the lead.

agreed. surprised that happened.

3deg is not accurate and does vary by grid size and position. short order or long order. If it sounds cool to all your friends than more power to you. if you want to show i'm wrong than do so. Also if you want to argue about something the gird not right now, then you will be a lone man in the room going fwd.

in the sample below the X's are the same size, the grid is not.

Quote

what is the average number of jumps and average number of wingsuit jumps of each participant?

Edit: Also, what is the least number of jumps of any participants? What is the least number of wingsuits jumps of any participants?

the avg per avg jumper is probably less than last year, but I can't put a number on it. probably not too much lower, but that doesn't mean anythng.

least number of wingsuit jumps: 10-15

Quote

To all those who carp and bellyache about the USPA system, tough! You could have taken the initiative and proposed your pet scheme instead of leaving it to someone else.

if you only knew the whole story and history... I also prefer not to push a poor judging system down the communities throat and go with something that shows better testing, thought, and a has a backing of a fair portion of the community.

Quote

And if you think flying a 45 degree line +- 3 degrees does not indicate talent - try it for yourself and report back.

you speak big for only dusting off your suit for the summerfest's and now the bigway09. I've done it, along with things you can't do..Jarno too... now can we get back to talking about the grid, because 45 degree line +- 3 degrees (from whatever point you think) this isn't it.

we should really discuss this in [url=http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3616314;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;guest=63512319]this thread[/url]

Quote

Besides, I doubt your vision is good enough to see the next guy in his box 400km away, let alone your depth perception. Would be OK for a 4, but nothing bigger.

who needs a visual reference when you have gps. there's no rule about needing to see the person. our points remain valid.

I do see what you are saying about angular accuracy short or long. There's still a larger variance from the person you may be flying off of given a larger and wider grid and spacing. Angular range widens from the true base the further one is from it. again tolerance allowed is just too large.

last I checked the 'approved' method is a 2d square/diamond with a 13.5% buffer zone on each side which effectively increases your allowed 'in' space by 62%. why are you discussing something it is not, but could potentially be with tweaking?. It's also not a 3d lattice as height isn't taken into account.

Quote

Quote

I'm just glad to be here instead of being in the ICU.

How are you holding up with the daily jumping on these formation loads? When I was there a few days ago you were jumping & packing... just wondering if you're able to do all that repeatedly while keeping up with the bigway event

Also what happened to your sig line for the blog link? I didn't bookmark it.

Quote

your suggestion

It's not really a suggestion, it's perfectly within the rules.
Yes the best fit is a major flaw along with many others.
Scaling and/or how to scale is also one. If you used the 4 way diamond base as a measurement for centering, spacing and scaling you'd see an improvement.
Removing the 13.5% overlap on all sides, which effectively increases the allowed area by 62%. given it fitted to a 6' person, that isn't horrible. fitted to a 10'+ grid it's a big difference.
just a few of the various problems.

eitherway, it is what it is right now, it's not going to show much true talent, but should make something pretty

aww come on matt, if you move the that grid to the left and down a little you can get at least 3-4 more people 'in'. Nothing says you need to center it on the base or even have them fully 'in'.

it's better to use last year's tag line - "f$#@ the grid"

nice matt. the top slot sure made for some good video.