0
kallend

Wisconsin state record

By kallend, in Wing Suit Flying

Recommended Posts

Fast    0

Fast
Quote

Major props to Derrick and the crew that flew!
Congrats!



Thanks Spot - mostly it came down to a having a great group of people that flew a solid almost fitting 14 way on two jumps (including an almost 90 degree carve in formation on jump 1).

We ended up getting it as a 13way as time had run out for one person.

Thanks again everyone!
~D
Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me.
Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

kallend    2,026

kallend
Quote

I have officially judged and signed off this record.
Derrick & Brian have the (electronic version of the) paperwork.

Congratulations to everyone involved. Nice work.

.



Cool! Thanks, Jan.

Not that I wish to start a discussion on the merits of the grid again :):):) ...

...but I would point out that this formation,which looks very pretty and DOES fit the grid, has an apex angle of about 76 degrees rather than the 90 degrees of the rigid grid. Which means that the flyers who set up the angles off the leader were about 7 degrees off in judging 45 degrees, with the result that the feet of flyers towards the back outside were consequently close to the grid lines. Had this been a 5x5 diamond flown with these angles it probably would have been too narrow to fit the grid even if every line was exactly straight and all the intersections perfect. On a 10x10 diamond the angles will have to be set up accurate to about 2 degrees to keep the hands and feet of the folks at the back inside their box.

Now I'm all in favor of precision flying, but having a scheme that places such an emphasis on being able to judge (by eyeball) an angle to such accuracy while flying a wingsuit seems strange to me. I'd be hard pressed to judge a 45 degree angle to +- 2 degrees while sitting at my desk if I didn't have some reference to assist. Also, let's not forget that the angle seen on the photo depends sensitively on the position of the camera flyer.

We had someone on the formation who's around 6'6", and another around 5'4". Using the taller person as the "base" results in a total allowable formation size that's 17 feet (5.2m) bigger than if the shorter person had been "base". On a 36 way diamond the difference would be 25 feet (or around 2 whole grid boxes). I can't for the life of me see why this makes any sense.

Just sayin'.
...

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

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Butters    0

Butters
Quote

Not that I wish to start a discussion on the merits of the grid again :):):) ...

...but I would point out that this formation,which looks very pretty and DOES fit the grid, has an apex angle of about 76 degrees rather than the 90 degrees of the rigid grid. Which means that the flyers who set up the angles off the leader were about 7 degrees off in judging 45 degrees, with the result that the feet of flyers towards the back outside were consequently close to the grid lines. Had this been a 5x5 diamond flown with these angles it probably would have been too narrow to fit the grid even if every line was exactly straight and all the intersections perfect. On a 10x10 diamond the angles will have to be set up accurate to about 2 degrees to keep the hands and feet of the folks at the back inside their box.

Now I'm all in favor of precision flying, but having a scheme that places such an emphasis on being able to judge (by eyeball) an angle to such accuracy while flying a wingsuit seems strange to me. I'd be hard pressed to judge a 45 degree angle to +- 2 degrees while sitting at my desk if I didn't have some reference to assist. Also, let's not forget that the angle seen on the photo depends sensitively on the position of the camera flyer.

We had someone on the formation who's around 6'6", and another around 5'4". Using the taller person as the "base" results in a total allowable formation size that's 17 feet (5.2m) bigger than if the shorter person had been "base". On a 36 way diamond the difference would be 25 feet (or around 2 whole grid boxes). I can't for the life of me see why this makes any sense.

Just sayin'.



Adding to the reasons I think the grid is a joke. A bad joke.
"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

kallend    2,026

kallend
Quote

Quote

Not that I wish to start a discussion on the merits of the grid again :):):) ...

...but I would point out that this formation,which looks very pretty and DOES fit the grid, has an apex angle of about 76 degrees rather than the 90 degrees of the rigid grid. Which means that the flyers who set up the angles off the leader were about 7 degrees off in judging 45 degrees, with the result that the feet of flyers towards the back outside were consequently close to the grid lines. Had this been a 5x5 diamond flown with these angles it probably would have been too narrow to fit the grid even if every line was exactly straight and all the intersections perfect. On a 10x10 diamond the angles will have to be set up accurate to about 2 degrees to keep the hands and feet of the folks at the back inside their box.

Now I'm all in favor of precision flying, but having a scheme that places such an emphasis on being able to judge (by eyeball) an angle to such accuracy while flying a wingsuit seems strange to me. I'd be hard pressed to judge a 45 degree angle to +- 2 degrees while sitting at my desk if I didn't have some reference to assist. Also, let's not forget that the angle seen on the photo depends sensitively on the position of the camera flyer.

We had someone on the formation who's around 6'6", and another around 5'4". Using the taller person as the "base" results in a total allowable formation size that's 17 feet (5.2m) bigger than if the shorter person had been "base". On a 36 way diamond the difference would be 25 feet (or around 2 whole grid boxes). I can't for the life of me see why this makes any sense.

Just sayin'.



Adding to the reasons I think the grid is a joke. A bad joke.


Well, it is what it is, and I'm not going to get all pissy about it and refuse to attend events where it is used.

However, I know we can improve on it.
...

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

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

MakeItHappen    15

MakeItHappen
Quote

Quote

I have officially judged and signed off this record.
Derrick & Brian have the (electronic version of the) paperwork.

Congratulations to everyone involved. Nice work.

.



Cool! Thanks, Jan.

Not that I wish to start a discussion on the merits of the grid again :):):) ...

blah blah blah...

Just sayin'.


Yeah I know the grid system is really funky.

Let's find something that is better and work towards implementing that.

.
.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
0
Go To Topic Listing