raymod2

Here are the dates for the USPA Canopy Piloting Nationals over the last 9 years: September 17, 2007 August 28, 2008 October 21, 2009 September 2, 2010 September 15, 2011 June 14, 2012 May 8, 2013 May 21, 2014 June 20, 2015 As you can see, the idea that you can train all year and be fully prepared for Nationals at the end of the season has become a distant memory. It makes no sense to me.

I think these attacks on Charlie are mean-spirited and unwarranted. I also question the premise that he should be emulating today's top pilots. First, it didn't look like Charlie was competing in that video. Second, if you want to beat the best you need to do something differently. Do you think Nick Batsch was emulating the top pilots in every way when he rose to prominence? Nick developed techniques that people were laughing at then. Now the top pilots are emulating Nick. What I see when watching Charlie's video is a talented pilot who is having a lot of fun and I thought the video was fun to watch (especially the unorthodox turn reversal!)

gSwoop 2.05 has been released. The biggest change is the addition of zoom controls for the plots. Use CTRL-plus and CTRL-minus or open the View menu and select the zoom level there.

gSwoop 2.04 is up on the website. This includes a major rewrite of the plotting code. I'm no longer using gnuplot and coded everything using the Cairo library. This results in a significant performance improvement. I measured a 2X speedup in the CLI and the GUI is noticeably faster. As a bonus the package size is down about 25% since I was able to remove some dependencies. More things to come!

Thanks for the write-up, Troy. I know what you mean about how the Petra wants to keep turning. Controlling the turn rate on bigger turns is one of the hardest thing to learn.

One of the coolest features of gSwoop is automatic detection of speed carve runs and measurement of your speed carve times. These times can be very accurate (within 2% to 3% error) but gSwoop needs a good gate location to achieve that accuracy. Gate location is performed by walking counterclockwise around the swoop pond and stopping at five points: A = in front of the entry gate (standing in distance course) B = left of the entry gate C = behind the entry gate (looking through gate at distance course) D = right of the entry gate A = in front of the entry gate (standing in distance course) gSwoop determines the position of the entry gate very precisely by finding the intersection of line AC with line BD. The orientation of the entry gate (which direction it faces) is a little harder to determine. The problem is that lines AC and BD are not necessarily perpendicular. In Z-Hills, for example, they are off by about 4.5 degrees. For distance runs you want to use line AC to determine gate orientation and that is the default behavior of gSwoop. For speed runs the default option will not get you the best results. The reason is that gSwoop uses the position and orientation of the entry gate to mathematically determine the positions and orientations of all other gates (most importantly, the exit gate). But a small error in the orientation of the entry gate will result in a large error in the calculated position of the exit gate! To address this problem gSwoop uses one of two approaches. They both require the user to specify a carving course (by checking the box for "carving course" in the GUI or passing the -c option when processing the gate file in the CLI). The first approach is to use line BD to determine the orientation of the entry gate. This works pretty well because it is the line that was probably used when setting up the speed course. However, it is vulnerable to small errors when locating points B and D. For instance, a common source of error here is when the gate markers (which are floating in the water) get pushed around by the wind. The second approach (new in gSwoop v2.03) is to check for an additional point in the gate location file that will be present if the user walks to point E (the center of the exit gate) before turning off the GPS (the user locates points A,B,C,D,A,E in that order). This works best because it gets the location of the exit gate directly. Using Z-Hills as an example, the error in the exit gate location was decreased from 5.2 meters to 0.2 meters using this method. Below are some comparisons of speed carve times measured by GPS versus electronic gate sensors. All data was collected from competition rounds during the 2015 FLCPA meet #2 in Z-Hills. The gate location attached to the previous post was used with the "carving course" option in gSwoop v2.03. example 1: gps = 4.19, sensor = 4.25, error = -0.06 (1.4%) example 2: gps = 3.44, sensor = 3.44, error = 0.00 (0.0%) example 3: gps = 5.13, sensor = 5.01, error = 0.12 (2.4%) example 4: gps = 3.04, sensor = 3.13, error = -0.09 (2.9%)

Here is the gate location for meet #2 of the FLCPA in Z-Hills (March 13, 2015).

I've been doing a lot of work on gSwoop during the off season and starting with version 2.0 (now available at gswoop.com) there is a GUI interface for both Windows and Mac OS. Now you can simply drag-and-drop your swoop GPS file into the application window and your metrics and plots will be instantly displayed. You can also select your gate and launch Google Earth (to get a 3D view of your swoop) directly from the GUI. The console version is still present and it works the same as before for those of you who are more comfortable at the command line.

The only dimension that matters is the height. They should be 1.5 meters tall (roughly 5 feet). There is a pool toy called the "Splash O' Meter" that is cheap and works great but they are discontinued and hard to find now.

Attached is the gate location for FLCPA meet #1 last weekend (Feb 21 - Feb 22) in Z-Hills. The same gate was used for speed, distance, and accuracy.

I realize that a lot of swoopers use Macs so I have been busy porting gSwoop to run natively under Mac OS X. With the release of version 1.03 (now available on the website) there is a package available for download that can be installed on machines running Mac OS X. This has been tested on Yosemite 10.10.1 but it should work on older versions (probably as far back as Snow Leopard 10.6).

FYI, I have added support for output in metric units (meters, km/h) in v1.01 which is now available on the website.

Yes, it runs on all Windows versions as far back as Windows XP.

As some of you know I have been working on a project for quite some time to see if GPS can be an effective tool for analyzing swoops. You may have seen me at various competitions walking around the swoop pond with my FlySight (this is done to locate the entry gate) and I'm always wearing it on my helmet during jumps. I have been developing software that parses a GPS log, analyzes the swoop, and generates all kinds of plots and metrics. For the most part I have been using it to analyze my own swoops. It's fun to look at metrics like peak vertical speed and entry gate speed but it has also allowed me to experiment with different flying styles, different size turns, or even different wings and directly compare the results. For a long time the swooping community relied on outside video to debrief their jumps. Inside video (helmet mounted GoPros) has recently become ubiquitous. I think GPS is the next thing that will help progress the sport. If you swoop and you don't own a FlySight I encourage you to consider getting one. I launched a new website (http://gswoop.com) where my tool is now available for download. Check it out and take a look at the example plots and metrics. They'll give you a good idea of the things GPS can show you about your swoop.

Chuting Star just started selling a belly band for $85 that attaches easily to a harness without hip rings: http://www.chutingstar.com/skydive/volitant-padded-adjustable-belly-band It has loops on each end and it comprises two parts so that you can girth hitch each side to your harness. Then it operates just like a chest strap. See the attached photos.

I see that Mirage ($100) and Sunpath ($80) are both selling removable belly bands. However, they seem to be designed for attachment to hip rings. Is anybody using these with a rig that does not have hip rings?

I stopped using an AAD ever since my Vigil fired during a swoop and my reserve dragged me into the swoop pond at Mile Hi. At one time I considered buying a speed CYPRES. The firing parameters are as follows: activation speed: 96mph (old firmware), 102mph (new firmware) activation altitude: 750 feet to 330 feet However, I've noticed it is possible to trigger these firing parameters with the new generation of canopies. I've seen a Peregrine hit 97mph at sea level and I've seen a Petra hit 101mph at 5000' MSL. Peak speed usually occurs around 400 feet. I'm curious if anyone has been swooping with a speed CYPRES and if there have been any incidents.

Where have you seen pilots getting over 700' using the traditional distance rules? Nick went 730' during the PD Big Boy Pants in 2011 but conditions were ideal (5055' MSL with a 14mph downwind). I wasn't aware anyone else had broken 700' during a competition. My interpretation of "attacking the gate" is when you try to finish your turn as close to the gate as possible. If you get too close it forces a steeper approach. Not ideal but we've all been there at one time or another. With the traditional rules you would aim for the very top of the gate in this scenario. The risk was a vertical extension but it gave you the biggest margin to avoid impact. With the new rules this scenario becomes much more dangerous. There is no margin available to the pilot and a small misjudgement results in a violent impact. I observed both crashes this year (one from the packing area and the other one from the air). In both cases the pilots ended up on the shore which tells me they had very little vertical speed when they impacted. Based on that I don't think they would have impacted the water under the traditional rules.

We now have two more years of data. Here are the top distance runs for the last eight years of Nationals: year venue elevation rules best run pilot ---- ------ --------- ------- -------- ----- 2007 Skydive Chicago 615' MSL 5' gate 347' Tagle 2008 Mile Hi 5055' MSL 5' gate 501' Batsch 2009 Spaceland 50' MSL 5' gate 514' Windmiller 2010 Spaceland 50' MSL 5' gate 471' Batsch 2011 Spaceland 50' MSL 5' gate 447' Batsch 2012 The Farm 850' MSL drag 499' Batsch 2013 Z-Hills 80' MSL drag 407' Batsch 2014 Z-Hills 80' MSL drag 512' Dellibac You can draw your own conclusions but the data continues to show no evidence that the new rules are limiting distances. Also this year we had two crashes during dragging distance that sent both pilots to the hospital. I propose that we eliminate the dragging requirement and add another gate (or two) farther down the course to prevent popping up in downwind conditions.

@jjudd - What is it that you fully understand now? That money is the most important thing? That any decision which places profit as the highest priority is the correct one?

Don't think of it as "pulling down your risers". Think of it as shifting your weight from your leg straps to the front risers. Once your entire body weight has been lifted off the leg straps you have already changed the flight configuration as much as possible. After that you are just changing your body position (ie. tucking into a ball). Regarding the OP, I have gotten a hand caught in my front riser dive loop but I didn't have video to determine the cause. It has only happened once that I can remember.

Ian, did you watch Nick's runs? With the new rules he is popping up just as high as he ever did. And he wasn't the only one. All the top distance runs had significant pop-up. For what it's worth, I don't think you need to pop up to train distance. Working on entry gate speed is far more important. The pop-up probably adds 50 to 75 feet at most (depending on wind conditions) and you can save that for the meet.

The elevation at Spaceland is 50 ft MSL and the elevation at Skydive the Farm is 850 ft MSL. Not a big difference and most consider them both to be roughly at sea level. Wind conditions are certainly a factor and pilot skill increases every year. Here is some more data to give more context. This time I have included all three years at Spaceland: 2009: 140.31m (Cleary), 156.73m (Windmiller), 124.88m (Watkins) 2010: 143.60m (Batsch), 105.90m (Windmiller), 113.65m (Tagle) 2011: 134.15m (Batsch), 136.13m (Batsch), 110.34m (Batsch) 2012: 143.27m (Batsch), 136.45m (Dellibac), 151.95m (Batsch) I don't remember the wind conditions every year but there was definitely one year that we had some very strong downwind conditions during distance (pushing 15mph). The fastest downwind we had this year was about 8mph.

The new distance rules used at the 2012 USPA Nationals of Canopy Piloting required the pilot to drag water through the entry gate and stay below an additional four gates which extended 50 meters (164 feet) down the course. The purpose of this rule change was to limit the distances attained by the competitors so that course requirements could be relaxed resulting in more options for venues. Therefore, it is instructive to compare the maximum distances attained in each round between 2011 (old rules) and 2012 (new rules): 2011: 134.15m (Batsch), 136.13m (Batsch), 110.34m (Batsch) 2012: 143.27m (Batsch), 136.45m (Dellibac), 151.95m (Batsch) It has been my observation that the new rules certainly make the distance event more difficult but they do not achieve its stated purpose. Dragging water erodes the margin of safety but does not significantly limit entry gate speeds. The pilot simply aims for the water level rather than the top of the gates. The additional gates also did not limit popping up at all. Those pilots who had powerful runs were still able to pop up significantly after the 5th gate.

You can look at the scores from previous years to get an idea how you would stack up against the current field of competitors. You should be able to fly through a 10 foot gate and reliably go at least 44 meters (144 feet) after that. Otherwise you will likely end up getting wet frequently. It would also be great if you could get some practice on a speed carve course since it requires an awareness of your canopy disposition to avoid striking a marker.