Summerfest

[Skwrl 56]

I'll be sending it to Matt for his editorial discretion.

For anyone who doesn't follow this: there was a "Skwrl in Tow" malfunction at the big way- a relatively rare event where a wingsuiter is outsmarted by the camera step.

In this case, we climbed out on a formation (i.e., high) speed jump run, then the pilot decided we had to climb back in. Turns out, when the front float (and the rest of the gang) climb back in, it's really hard for the camera guy to climb back in. Who knew? (I'm told big way RW guys have the front float remain outside when this happens for just this reason... But I never got that memo.) Anyway, I was trying to claw my way back into the plane against 1.73 windtunnels of relative wind. Once I realized I was supposed to get in, I was really wigging out trying to climb back. Didn't want to let everyone down... But I couldn't climb in. Which made me wig out more... Until, you know, I realized "Oh, wait, I got a rig on..." and remembered that I have perverse love of landing out... I had one of those "moments of clarity" where everything became cool.

In any event, the best part was Bill Wegner's really, really impressive determination to pull me back in. He had my chest strap and was damn certain he wasn't going to leave me behind. His plan would have worked, but my hand slipped off the plane as I was trying to switch it from the camera handle to the doorway... I pounded against the empennage (that's French for tail) of the plane a couple of times, then decided that I didn't want to risk breaking the fancy cameras on my head against the tail, and dropped off. I kind of feel bad I let Bill down. He would have saved my ass, but for gravity.

On the other hand, the marina I landed in was pretty and the people were very nice. They gave me a sandwich, a Sprite, and a lift back. So, you know, Skwrl complete victory and such... Well, the sandwich was a little dry, but almost complete.

Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography

Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

[VectorBoy 0]

So this transgression does not end up on a possible near strike report you will have to do community service for the rest of summer.... cleaning grass stains off suits used for FFC.

Glad you guys had fun.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

and kallend gets to say "told you so" for the millionth time...

Want to be my agent?

...

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

[The111 1]

Don't worry Jeff, I'm starting a new instructional program for how to climb back into an airplane from the camera step. It's called the CBIAFCS-I program. You can be my first student.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Don't worry Jeff, I'm starting a new instructional program for how to climb back into an airplane from the camera step. It's called the CBIAFCS-I program. You can be my first student.

Will it have a USPA CBIAFCS instructor rating with mandatory sign-off?

...

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

[PhoenixRising 0]

Quote

Quote

Don't worry Jeff, I'm starting a new instructional program for how to climb back into an airplane from the camera step. It's called the CBIAFCS-I program. You can be my first student.

Will it have a USPA CBIAFCS instructor rating with mandatory sign-off?

Kallend,

Of course it will or we will all die!!!!

Wingsuit organizing, first flight courses and coaching
Flock University
Tonysuits

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Don't worry Jeff, I'm starting a new instructional program for how to climb back into an airplane from the camera step. It's called the CBIAFCS-I program. You can be my first student.

Will it have a USPA CBIAFCS instructor rating with mandatory sign-off?

Kallend,

Of course it will or we will all die!!!!

Horrors. How have we survived this long?

...

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

[SuperGirl 0]

Quote

Will it have a USPA CBIAFCS instructor rating with mandatory sign-off?

either that, or someone will refine (erm, copy and dilute) it into a multi level CBIAFCS-I hierarchical rating system that smells a little too much like a pyramid scheme.

[Buried 0]

Quote

the revised grid requirement (the "27% grid") is fiendishly hard for a large formation to meet.

I disagree. With the right fliers and distances (huge spacing, doesn't completely help) it can be met. The first IL record met that. Numerous 9 and 16 ways are over 40%. The Russian 36 way last year was ~38%. One difference with the Russians is they adjusted each jump after reviewing the details from within the software that's out there. They set out to do the best they can do and very much achieved that. Very different than flying for the grid..

Quote

These are concerns that I raised at a gathering a couple of years ago. Camera angle, lens distortion, etc... that were all essentially disregarded at the time ...

Butters, you know the story behind this and it is very valid. It was just agreed to disregard this as a factor since the process becomes too complex to solve or judge. Unless you have contact or VERY close flying or another way to judge, you can't negate this as an issue. The right tool shouldn't care, but it is what it is.

Where is my fizzy-lifting drink?

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

the revised grid requirement (the "27% grid") is fiendishly hard for a large formation to meet.

I disagree. With the right fliers and distances (huge spacing, doesn't completely help) it can be met. The first IL record met that. Numerous 9 and 16 ways are over 40%. The Russian 36 way last year was ~38%. One difference with the Russians is they adjusted each jump after reviewing the details from within the software that's out there. They set out to do the best they can do and very much achieved that. Very different than flying for the grid..

Quote

These are concerns that I raised at a gathering a couple of years ago. Camera angle, lens distortion, etc... that were all essentially disregarded at the time ...

Butters, you know the story behind this and it is very valid. It was just agreed to disregard this as a factor since the process becomes too complex to solve or judge. Unless you have contact or VERY close flying or another way to judge, you can't negate this as an issue. The right tool shouldn't care, but it is what it is.

Not sure exactly what you mean by your percentages. Can you elaborate? ANd I don't see how you can disregard camera angle when that makes a difference to the perceived "squareness" of the formation.

To give an example, if you fly a perfect 36 way diamond with an apex angle of 96 degrees or 84 degrees, someone's foot or hand or head will go over the line of the square grid that USPA is using.

While it is what it is, I don't think the spirit of formation flying is that we all carry protractors with us on our jumps.

...

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

[Buried 0]

John, you are discussing old issues with the current system that have always existed. Blame the person who got us here in the first place. SCM states camera should be below or above the formation. Of course, ideally, they they should centered.

The percent is the ratio of the size of the flier to the size of the diagonal of the grid space. That's what the 27% (tick marks) relates to. Base flyer must equate to 27% or greater of the diagonal of the grid space.

Where is my fizzy-lifting drink?