Pond is filled up at Lodi / Acampo Parachute Center!

[JohnDeere 0]

Quote

A VERY ROUGH cut of the first annual Lodi 90 meet is up on Youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEwmDFEXbDs
Final edited version will be posted within a couple of weeks.

Nothing opens like a Deere!

You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers!

[Sangi 0]

haha, lot's of swimming going on... seems like fun..

What's up with not being allowed to do more than 90 degree turns anyway?

"Dream as you'll live forever, live as you'll die today." James Dean

[4dbill 0]

Quote

Do you have results like winning speed and distance?

That would be especially interesting when compared to competitor's measurements with traditional technique at the same DZ elevation.

The purpose of the meet was to see how fast swoopers can do their things doing just a 90. 71 MPH at the gate was the winner and over 200' rooster tail for distance. Well.. that should settle the argument that with proper technique, you can build a lot of speed using just a 90. We'll be posting the full results with full photos and polished video soon. Stay tuned.

4DBill

[davelepka 4]

Looked like a fun comp. Too much stabbing out of low turns and rear riser stalls for me though.

[wildcard451 0]

Quote

Looked like a fun comp. Too much stabbing out of low turns and rear riser stalls for me though.

Yeah, I kept waiting for someone to eat it with the way they were flying.

[4dbill 0]

Quote

Do you have results like winning speed and distance?

That would be especially interesting when compared to competitor's measurements with traditional technique at the same DZ elevation.

The results are posted!
http://4dwireless.net/lodi90/results.html

This pretty much settles the argument for those who argued that 90's just don't cut it when it comes to speed and distance. The numbers speak for themselves. If you would like to register for next year's event, please contact me or the dropzone. It'll be bigger and better! :)

4D bill

[davelepka 4]

Quote

Yeah, I kept waiting for someone to eat it with the way they were flying

I think one of the problems with a comp where you can only do 90s is that jumpers who have only progressed to 90s typically wouldn't have much experience in 'hitting the gates'.

Trying to swoop to a specific target, such as a set of gates or the edge of a pond is a skill all by itself, and one that needs to be developed over time. Without putting in the that time, you get a lot of low turns because the tendency is to set up too far away, and once you make it to a reasonable initiation point, you're too low for the turn. 'Target fixation' can take over, and fly you right to the target without watching your altitude.

I don't think that non-swoopers understand the differences between 'beer line' swooping and competition swooping. The higher degree of accuracy needed for competition swooping makes it a seperate discipline.

[Blink 1]

Quote

Looked like a fun comp. Too much stabbing out of low turns and rear riser stalls for me though.

Well now that it's out there, people will have plenty of time to go back and perfect their 90's and take home more money next year. ;)

[davelepka 4]

It's not their 90s they need to perfect, it's putting a 90 through the gates. Every one of those guys may be able to 10 for 10 on a clean 90 out in the middle of LZ. When you start aiming for a specific spot to plane out, that's when it gets complicated.

I'll even go as far as saying that putting a clean 90 through the gates might be tougher than doing it with a 450 (provided you can do both a 90 and a 450 without a gate).

When I do a 450, I spend some time going into the wind, some time running with the wind, and in general spend a good amount of time in the turn. The point being that I can do some 'fine tuning' during my turn to make up for any mistakes in the set up. I can run one leg a little longer or shorter, or I can adjust the dive to fly further into or away from the corner. I have options.

With a 90, you don't really have those options. The overall turn is so much shorter that you're very limited in the adjustments you can make so the set up becomes more critical. Blow the set up, and you're going to lose alot from the turn trying to fly to the gates.

I'd be willing to bet that if they hold another comp, the locals will run away with it. If all they can do are 90s anyway, they can practice on every jump they make. I guess I could practice 90s too, but I'm allowed to do whatever I want where I jump, and it's not 90s.

[4dbill 0]

The final edited version of “2009 Lodi Ninety Swoop Meet” video is online!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSZBhSk61jA
Each swoop shows jumper’s name, speed and rooster tail length, both for educational and entertainment purposes.
For anyone disputing that 90 degree swoops don’t have much potential speed/distance, the video shows otherwise.

[JohanW 0]

Frankly, we disagree.

Believe me, I have sympathy for what you're doing and would join the fun in a heartbeat, but I think the video shows there *is* more potential in 270 or 450 degree turns. (Safely, even. That could never be in the video of course, and I would not complain if I were there.)

Two thumbs up for having fun while staying within the rules, be they local or BSRs.

Johan.
I am. I think.

[jcain 0]

What is the highest speed and average speed of a 270 or a 450? How many people are doing them to the potential and how much higher is the risk? If you execute a decent 270 and go 65mph, is it worth the risk? I have no doubt that a 270 or a 450 is faster but by how much and how much higher is the risk factor?

[JohanW 0]

Quote

What is the highest speed and average speed of a 270 or a 450?

I don't know exactly. But higher than that of a 90.

Quote

How many people are doing them to the potential

I don't know exactly. But how many people can get more out of a 270 than out of a 90, even if doing neither of them to their full potential?

Quote

and how much higher is the risk?

Not all that much, really, and it can be managed fairly well in my opinion.

Quote

If you execute a decent 270 and go 65mph, is it worth the risk?

To me? Yes. I'm not speaking for anyone else here, just as I expect you not to speak for me. I would not be getting 57 mph out of a 90, probably.

270s are within my comfort zone. The speed of those is within my comfort zone. As long as I'm not breaking any local rules doing them, not endangering anyone else, not scaring anyone, why would you want to limit me to 90s? Are you going to prevent me from crossing streets as well? Getting out of bed in the morning? (Actually ..

Johan.
I am. I think.

[JohanW 0]

Oh, and please fill out your profile some. I have no idea if I'm talking to an experienced swooper or some new kid on the block who doesn't really know what he's talking about. No offence.

Johan.
I am. I think.

[timmyfitz 0]

Quote

but I think the video shows there *is* more potential in 270 or 450 degree turns.

No shit Sherlock! What a revelation!

[jcain 0]

The point is not to limit people to 90s the point is if you look at the incidents that have been happening, have been from more aggressive turns I.e. more then 90. If you are only going to go 5 or 10 mph faster or even the same speed, is the risk worth the reward? Why do a 270 just ok and go just as fast as a 90?
As for my exprience I am new to skydiving but that does not mean anything when you are talking about risk just because you can ride a motorcycle doesn't mean you should be out on a track trying to ride with the pro's.

P.S. The fastest mph from a pro in competion was 91 mph and most people can not duplicate that. The fastest recorded speed at the Lodi 90 was 71mph.

[jcain 0]

Speeds at the 2007 Mile High Canopy Cup Ultimate Speed was consistintly in the high sixtys.

[adamT 0]

It's easy to see that turns over 90 can be a bigger risk when done in a pattern with non high performance pilots. I don't belive by themselves they are safer. As has already been said in this thread you have alot less time for correction in a 90 degree turn. Those winning 90s were done by people I've competed with several times, to me their 90s looked alot less contolled and safe then their normal comp turn(although still impressive for what you had to work with). To argue that you can get as just as much speed from a small turn and be safer doesn't add up. It's that speed that allows you to slam yourself into the ground and die. To maximize the speed of a small turn is alot of comittment at the top and the bottom. There is a small amount time between those points. With a large turn there is more time between the initiation and the release, more time to adjust so the relese can be at the proper point in space. Of course you have to work up to that level, there are no short cuts but there are reasons we fly the way we fly. I belive swooping gets a bit safer at the level of big turns and loadings over 2.0. As long as you are honest with yourself that you are flying consistantly at that level and you have your limits and don't cross them.

As far as radar guns go i'm not too worried about what they say. They are inacurate at best. This is from my experiance at varrious events, I don't know what method and gun was used in Lodi. I've been told I was going 81 on a run that I know wasn't that powerful and then clocked in the 60s on a run with alot more mustard, at the same event.

Regardless I think it's great they setup a comp out there in Lodi. Looked like fun and I would of gone if I was out there at the time. Way to rip it up and not brake bills rules.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

The fastest mph from a pro in competion was 91 mph and most people can not duplicate that. The fastest recorded speed at the Lodi 90 was 71mph.

Are you basing the speeds from previous events from the distance over time for the speed course? If so, remember that it will be an average speed for the distance traveled. Not the fastest speed.

It really depends on the radar and the operator. I'm going to assume that it was a consumer grade radar and not someone who is a professionally trained operator. That is simply because something like even an old K-band hand held Stalker is around $900 to purchase.

So its really impossible to compare speeds with the data you have. If they had organized an FAI speed course and used an appropriate timing system (be it even a camera), then you could compare data to what is currently known.

The overall point is I'm happy for Lodi to have held a fun and successful meet. It would have fun to have been there for it; however, it is important to remember that even on a lightly loaded canopy a 90-deg high performance turn can kill you.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[4dbill 0]

Quote

If the pro swoopers were only allowed 90's, just have fast/far can they go? 50%? 80%? 90%?

There is no question that the fastest speed is achieves with turns more than 90 degree. The burning question was by how much.
The whole point of the meet was to find out what can be achieved and how much performance can be squeeze out of restricted 90's.
Is it safe to say that it's faster than what most people thought?
Mind you, speed estimates, according to the past posts in this thread, before the meet, was anywhere between 20% to "pretty fast" of 270+ swoops.
I am happy to say that instead of speculations, actual data was recorded, showing the world that 90's can be pretty fast while being significantly safer than 270+ s.
Oh.. we used a properly calibrated professional quality Falcon radar gun, legal in traffic courts.

Anybody up for next year's meet? More participants would make it more fun. Besides, I have a good feeling that prize money will increase.

4D Bill

[adamT 0]

I'm still confused about the "90s are safer but almost as fast", angle? It's the speed that kills, specifically the vertical speed. You can't have the horizontal speed without first building the vertical. So where is the extra safty? Learning a bigger turn is an increased period of risk, but I think once you have the turn down it is less risky then a larger turn due to more control and more options. Which may be negated by the extra speed. So maybe they are equal in terms of the imposibble to measure metric of safty :p

[jcain 0]

I think it would be an interesting stat. How many people broke them self up doing a 90 and how many people were doing a more then 90.
Anybody with some numbers?

[danielcroft 2]

I don't think those stats would be useful because you'd probably find that (for the most part) more experienced people were doing 270+ and therefore the comparison wouldn't be valid.

[JohnDeere 0]

Quote

Quote

What is the highest speed and average speed of a 270 or a 450?

I don't know exactly. But higher than that of a 90.

Quote

How many people are doing them to the potential

I don't know exactly. But how many people can get more out of a 270 than out of a 90, even if doing neither of them to their full potential?

Quote

and how much higher is the risk?

Not all that much, really, and it can be managed fairly well in my opinion.

Quote

If you execute a decent 270 and go 65mph, is it worth the risk?

To me? Yes. I'm not speaking for anyone else here, just as I expect you not to speak for me. I would not be getting 57 mph out of a 90, probably.

270s are within my comfort zone. The speed of those is within my comfort zone. As long as I'm not breaking any local rules doing them, not endangering anyone else, not scaring anyone, why would you want to limit me to 90s? Are you going to prevent me from crossing streets as well? Getting out of bed in the morning? (Actually ..

So he shouldnt speak for you. but you feel you can speak for others

Quote

Frankly, we disagree.

Nothing opens like a Deere!

You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers!