mjasantos

Hi Steve, Following your initial question, if you'd like have a look at my 4-way FS Team "Matrix FS" performing the Murphy Flake in 2 different manners... there are many others, but these show you that it's possible to build this formation as you've questioned. When we talk about randoms and blocks, the combinations are zilions... Talking about both attached pics, I can tell you that while keeping our relative positions (slots) to each other within the Team, these are different built Murphy Flakes. On "Matrix_FS_Murphy_Flake_1" pic, we are in our A Slots, and this is our regular Murphy Flake... this was built on the "E - G - C - A - M" page. On "Matrix_FS_Murphy_Flake_2" pic, we have kept our relative sectors, but the Tail has been in the Point of the Murphy Flake, the Point has been in the Tail, myself (Outside Center) have been "catting" the "new" Point of the Murphy Flake, and the Inside Center took the job in the formation that usually is mine... this was built on the "F - 17 - C - 16" page. Hope it helps to visualize! Blue Skies! ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Hey Billy! I've noticed that your Home DZ is Eloy! You're a lucky one! There you have the Airspeed Team, one of the best all around the World! Be there and learn from them as much as you can! They are great! Here you have some awesome pics of a student (?) and current or former Airspeed Team Members performing "mantis position" during Tunnel Camps held recently (September and October 2002) at SkyVenture (Orlando, FL). Jack Jefferies http://www.tunnelcamp.com/camp_pics/31_32/31_32_146.jpg http://www.tunnelcamp.com/camp_pics/31_32/31_32_151.jpg http://www.tunnelcamp.com/camp_pics/31_32/31_32_159.jpg Mark Kirkby http://www.tunnelcamp.com/camp_pics/31_32/31_32_207.jpg A Student (unknown identity) http://www.tunnelcamp.com/camp_pics/31_32/31_32_221.jpg Christopher Irwin http://www.tunnelcamp.com/camp_pics/33_34/33_34_048.jpg http://www.tunnelcamp.com/camp_pics/33_34/33_34_059.jpg Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Hi had already noticed that... It's an "unhappy" title for a competition, but I don't think FAI has too much room to change it... At least, with these Air Games, the so called 3rd World will be remembered, not by the reasons it should... they that are mostly of the times forgotten... Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Today, October 25, 2002, at the FAI Web Site, was released the New Concept for the 3rd World Air Games. Check it out at: http://www.fai.org/news_archives/fai/000137.asp#000137 (in English) or http://www.fai.org/news_archives/fai_fr/000138.asp (in French) Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Cool! Let me share with all of you, as well, 3 pics of my "she dog Beagle"... she answers by Cookie and if she stands for a while at the DZ, I'm sure there won't be any hares or rabbits within a mile!!! She loves to go out for a walk, practising her scent while tracking down all the time... but she doesn't despise a good nap on the couch... Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Well Max... Hummm, I've just started my research in that year of 1998... but no problem, I'm almost approaching the year of 2002... OK, you're just kidding... Now seriously: those articles are 4 years old, but still current! Besides the fact that these resources are widely known around the world and even for those who are not subscribers, won't be difficult to get those issues! In the Internet, we can find many things about this subject, but most of the times "one image is better than a thousand words"! Let me add just a short complement: at http://www.humanflight.com/downloads/manuals/Coachrating.pdf, which is the web site for the USPA Instructional Rating Manual of the "Coach Rating Course", dated March 2002 (this resource is not an oudated one... , on Chapter 6. Group Freefall Skills Training, page 13, mentions: Thanks and... Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Thanks! ... and Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

These are other good articles about the subject: ---------- Advancing to the "Transition Position", by Craig Buxton It is published in the "Skydiving - Parachuting Newsmagazine", Issue #206 (September 1998), Pages 16 & 19. ---------- Flying to the Top (Tips from the Pros - Formation Skydiving), by Joe Trinko It is published in the "Parachutist", October 1998 Issue, Pages 26, 27 & 29. ---------- Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Hi, That's exactly correct! This mantis is called also transition position, because that is not your flying posiition all the time... it's exactly a transition position! Otherwise, would be as inflexible as the box one... Just to "colorize" this, I attach 6 very recent photos of my 4-way team training jumps (taken last October 5 and 19, 2002)... where you can see that we are not using it all the time, but only when it makes your flight more efficient... Hope you like them! Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Hi, Sorry for the self-advertising but I've got 2 pictures of myself (from above and at level), taken from our 4-Way team's cameraflyer video coverage... They're exactly at the top (the 2 in the middle) of the opening page in my web site: http://www.mariosantos.com/. This is also called "transition position", used a lot in Formation Skydiving. These fotos of myself are not models for this position, as each skydiver has his/her own peculiarity while doing it, but it should become natural during transitions between formations. Any way, this skill about body position is something usually covered during tunnel camps... of course, you can also train it while skydiving but take a camera flyer with you... Hope the images help you in some way! You're welcome to have a visit at our 4-Way Team (Matrix FS) web pages: http://www.mariosantos.com/uk_us/matrix.htm. Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Hi, On this subject, last October 12 I've got the following e-mail from Ms. Fiona McEachern (Chairman of the IPC Formation Skydiving Committee - http://www.fai.org/parachuting/committees/fs/): Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Hi, Because opinions posted here have drifted slightly from what I'd like to see posted, here I am again... I'm not defending if FS should be or not an Olympic event... actually, I don't believe it will be (at least in my skydiver life), and I also don't care much about it... When I started skydiving, this Olympic possibility wasn't even in the horizon, but that wasn't the reason why I chose this sport... and as myself, I know that the 100% current and past skydivers, didn't choose to skydive because it could be Olympic or not... I don't see a problem on the IPC tries to have some Parachuting events in the Olympics... Where I see the problem is to change what exists now, making it a completely different thing, just to have the possibility to be considered for the Olympics... My first intention when posting this thread here, was to know if current Formation Skydiving competitors, regarding the FAI IPC attempts to make Parachuting an Olympic Sport, would prefer that IPC changes Formation Skydiving competition rules as they are now (towards an "Olympic Format" similar to the one I previously described) or, instead, creates a "new Olympic Format"? Looking at the different events, when we talk about Parachuting, we have Accuracy, Style, Formation Skydiving, CRW (several), Swoop, Skysurfing, Freefly, Freestyle, etc.. Anyway, most of us, elect only one of these as our favorite... My opinion and what I defend, is that why should FS, to be admitted in the Olympics, be changed on its main aspects... if this happens, the worst it can happens is that, in 2012, Formation Skydiving, as it will be then, won't happen as an Olympic event but, due to the changes, would be a completely different sport event from the one we know and train today! If FS to be Olympic has to be changed that much, when the change is complete it won't be the very same FS we have now! Being such, why not to create from rooth a FS Olympic format, with the required attributes? If the IPC intention on the run for the Olympics persists, why not to create this "so called" FS Olympic Format, that would be a new and separate event (keeping Standard FS main configuration as it is). Then those who would like to be Olympic Athletes, would be able to train that format... those who don't, would continue to train the standard FS... Of course that if standard format keeps the 10 round format, teams who elect this to train, would prepare themselves for 10 rounds competitions... those who elect olympic format (with for example 4 or 5 rounds), would prepare themselves for 5 rounds competitions... but we have to admit that these are completely competition formats... The same when I talked about the working time... now we have 35" in 4-way, but there were already competitions where the olympic (faster) format was applied with 15-20" working time... And instead of repeating the same page over and over within the 35" working time, the "new" format considered just to take the time for one page, where time started to count when teams have the 1st formation done (a star)... You have to agree that this "short" format that has been tested in some competitions by some of the world-top teams, has nothing to do with current FS (with a dive pool that you almost exhaust in competition, although there are trilions of combinations in the way that pool can show up in the competition draw)... Those trilions of combinations is what makes FS attractive for those who practice it... making competition more demanding because very rarely you get a page exactly identical to the ones you have been training... very few sports have this feature, but we like the challenge! Why change it? What do you think about this? Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Watcher has defined it pretty well on the previous post! Myself wouldn't explain it better! The initial IPC goal was to make FS competitions atractive to the media, with higher chances to see an approval of Parachuting as Olympic Sport. 2 or 3 years ago in Finland it was tested by world-class top teams a competition format similar to this one (I don't remember all the details): - 4 rounds, where round after round you would get grounded the bottom half of the teams according to their ranking in the last round completed; - jumping altitude: 5,000 ft; - working time: 15 seconds; - 1st formation would be always something like a star, and the time would only start when the team got that star done; - then there were 2 possibilities: find the best time to complete a 5 points sequence or see how many points you score in 15"... This was the general idea... a fast competition, where FS could be seen from the ground, etc.. Is this the Formation Skydiving I would like to train? NO!!! I prefer to have the complete pool exhausted in a competition, jumping for a working time of 35", and at least have some rounds (now they are 8) where regardless the team's performance you are allowed to compete... on the format I mentioned, teams take the serious risk to be training a full season and then get to a competition and be eliminated after one round... if such was the situation, at the World Cup in Ampuriabrava, teams like Germany (EADS), who classified in the first half wouldn't have passed from the 1st round... If IPC still intends to place a bid for having Parachuting as an Olympic Sport in 2012, by creating an "Olympic Format" you may get people who are interested about it and go for it... although the format I mentioned wouldn't have too much connection with the Formation Skydiving as it is now... Blue Skies! ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

I'm not sure about what do you mean by "cuts after rounds 9 & 10", but if I understood well that is what I think it should be: - All the teams compete until round 8; - Then you have the semi-finals, with the first-half of the teams based on their classification after Round 8; - Finally you have the finals, with the first-half of the teams based on their classification after Round 9. This is OK and is standard procedure at FS IPC Competitions. I didn't mean to say that every teams should do the 10 rounds... I agree with the format they used for the World Cup at Ampuriabrava... those cuts will work as semi-finals and finals! ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Hi Enrique, It's not a stupid question at all! ... and you are right: everything you mentioned about randoms, blocks and that sequence (or page) A - G - 3 - P, is very correct! Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

This is a copy of an e-mail sent to the IPC Info List (ipc-info-l@fai.org) -------------------------------------------------------------------- Standard FS versus Olympic FS... Hello all, At the last IPC Meeting (January 2002) some statistics were introduced to justify why the number of rounds in Formation Skydiving events should be less than what is currently… The idea presented then was that, after the 2nd round, very rarely occur changes at the top places… As always, the exception confirms the rule… we have here a very recent example, the World Cup 2002 in 4-Way Formation Skydiving held at Ampuriabrava, finished today… Have a look at the attached file and take your own conclusions… … the 3 top teams finished with above 22.0 averages; … a team with 21.6 didn’t get a medal; … Majik, the winners, if the Meet finished after 3 rounds would place 4th; … Vertical, who finished 2nd, would be the winners if the Meet had only 2 rounds; after Round 3 they have been 2nd, 3rd, 2nd, 3rd and finally 2nd… … Maubeuge who finished 3rd, would be the winners if the Meet finished with 3 rounds; from that round they have been changing from 2nd, 4th, 3rd, 2nd and finally 3rd; without the last round they would have been 2nd; … Norgies, who finished 4th, would have been changing from 1st (exaequo) to 2nd, 4th, 3rd, 2nd until round 6; if the Meet have finished there they would have been 2nd… only beyond there they went for the 4th place until final… My conclusion: the most rounds you have in one competition the biggest probability you’ll have that the final result represents the real situation… 10 is a good number of rounds… don’t make it more, but please don’t make it less… on this event we still had important changes from round 9 to 10… If IPC wants to make Parachuting and Olympic Event, please don’t change Formation Skydiving as it is now… keep 4-way and 8-way as it is and instead create a "new format" for the Olympic Event… then we would have the "4-way and 8-way standard" and may be the “4-way and 8-way Olympic”, but as separate events. Hopefully this can be considered! Anyway we won’t have Parachuting in Olympics before 2012… Thanks and Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal FS_4_World_Cup_2002.xls

Sangiro, Skydive Portugal location in terms of meteo at this time of the year is great. By August, when temperature goes higher and when it's windy, you get there some turbulence, but not this time of the year. I live at about 50 miles from the DZ and many times at home I have overcast, rain, but quite often when arriving to the DZ the skies are blue. If the weather there is bad, then is bad all over the country... Last Saturday our team was there jumping and the weather was just perfect... Regarding thunderstorms, is not the case... To have a better picture of the weather, you should have an "average" weather between Coimbra (http://weather.cnn.com/weather/forecast.jsp?locCode=LPCO) and Castelo Branco (http://weather.cnn.com/weather/forecast.jsp?locCode=LPCB), because the DZ is about in the middle. Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Not exactly... By using the shared solution in my 4-way team I mean that the front piece will know the non-repeaters for the Blocks 3, 10 and 12 in both A and B slots (these blocks will be repeaters for the rear piece) and the rear piece will know the non-repeaters for the Blocks 13 and 16 in both A and B slots (these blocks will be repeaters for the front piece). Let me give you an example. Imagine the following draw: A - G - 3 - P. If this draw shows up, our team knows that the front piece (point and outside center) will have to swich slots page after page... on the 1st page the front piece will be doing the block on their A slots and on the next page the front piece will be doing it on their B slots... on the 3rd page, the front piece will be on their A slots again and so on... for the rear piece, this draw would be always a repeater sequence (always on their A slots). Now imagine the following draw: D - K - B - 16. If this draw shows up, our team knows that the rear piece (tail and inside center) will have to swich slots page after page... on the 1st page the rear piece will be doing the block on their A slots and on the next page the rear piece will be doing it on their B slots... on the 3rd page, the rear piece will be on their A slots again and so on... for the front piece, this draw would be always a repeater sequence (always on their A slots). Of course, this is not like this all the times... sometimes is possible to make a transition which makes possible to avoid the slots switch... but if that is not possible, we'll apply this method. Of course, when you have a draw you might have multiple combinations... if in a page you get randoms and one mirror block, page after page you'll have mirrored formations from the previous... but if within a page you get 2 mirror blocks, sequence after sequence you will have always the same relative positioning of team members. The same for non-repeaters... using front or rear solution, if you get 2 non-repeater blocks, they will make that sequence after sequence you'll have the same relative positioning of team members... but if you use the shared solution, that may not happen... Imagine this example and our team's continuity plan: H - 3 - 16. If this draw comes, we know that page after page will happen a slot switch for both the front piece (caused by block 3) and the rear piece (caused by the block 16)... If we get a draw like J - 10 - 3, we know the front piece and rear piece will be repeating similar pages throughout the dive, although the block 10 would be executed in front piece A slots and block 3 executed in front piece B slots... you can get similar example for the rear piece (for example, L - 16 - 13)... This may sound complicated, but when we get used to our team's plan is not that difficult. So, when choosing which solution best suits your team, you'll have always some sort of trade-off on something... Hope have helped! Blue Skies! -------------------------------- ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Hi, It's true the wheel has already been invented... if you own or can afford to have one Pro-Track altimeter device (http://www.l-and-b.dk/protrack.htm) with Jump-Track software (http://www.l-and-b.dk/jumptrack.htm, you'll get all those features inherent to a jump logbook and many other additional, including rig track information, etc.. I've got these and I can tell you that it's awesome!!! Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

2002 World Cup of Artistic Events - Vienna, Austria Omniskore again did a great work!!! The results for this competition are available at http://www.omniskore.com/comp/2002/World_Cup_AE/world_cup_ae.htm Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Sangiro, On my last post I forgot to mention that Skydive Portugal (http://www.skydive-portugal.com/ is also the Home DZ of the Freestyle Team Funkflyz, current World Champions and which have also won the last World Cup of Artistic Events (in Freestyle), held at Vienna - Austria, from September 21-28, 2002. This team is composed by Nils Predstrup and Martin Kristensen... "meet" them at http://www.skydive-portugal.com/staff.html. Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Hi Sangiro, The DZ is Skydive Portugal (http://www.skydive-portugal.com/. This is Matrix FS (my 4-way team) Home DZ. It would be nice to have you here... let me know if you come, so we could meet there! Please notice that they'll be closed for some periods... have a look at http://www.skydive-portugal.com/events.html Hope this helps and to have you jumping at Portugal (in Europe, not in South Carolina)... Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Hi, A continuity plan is no more than the team's strategy that will get the team ready to deal with any draw from the dive pool of formations. This is achieved by setting up exit positions and individual tasks for building the random formations and performing the block moves. The adequate continuity plan for a team will definitely depend on the team's preferences and each jumper's level of experience... that's why, in theory, we would have a different continuity plan, for each different team (because it's customized for each team). Among the factors that will influence the continuity plan to choose, are the previous training in the different slots and experiences of the team members, the number of training jumps the team plans to have for their period of commitment, the period of commitment of the team members, body sizes and mental abilities of each team member, just to mention some. The difficulties are mostly caused by the block moves. From the current 4-way IPC Dive Pool, we can find 4 different types of block moves, where some of them can fit into more than one category. To help the visualization you can have a look in my web site, at http://www.mariosantos.com/uk_us/continuity.htm The 4 different categories previously mentioned are: 1) Repeater blocks (blocks that bring everyone back to their original slots): 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22; this type doesn't cause dive engineering problems; 2) Mirror Image blocks (blocks that switch everyone to a mirror image of the original formation): 1, 5 and 17; these are not a serious problem if the team has learned to memorize them in the proper way; 3) Center switcher blocks (blocks that switch the 2 center positions with the 2 outside positions): 9 and 14; sometimes the teams deal with these by switching them back to the original inside positions during one of the transitions of formations that follows the block, or by starting these type of blocks with the centers facing outside (so they'll finish facing inside); 4) Non-repeater blocks (blocks that switch piece partners within each piece): 3, 10, 12, 13 and 16; these are the ones that demand the most serious brain work and where teams without a continuity plan will start to face problems to engineer the dives of a draw. Most of the teams use the following piece partner system: the front piece (composed by the point and outside center) and the rear piece (composed by the inside center and tail). The piece assigned to the non-repeater moves will have to memorize and perform a page of 10 or 12 points on a skydive. The continuity plan to choose, should depend on the way each piece can handle non-repeater block moves. Because the continuity plan is customized for each team, there should exist infinite solutions... anyway, there are three which are the most common, known as follows: 1) the front solution (when the team feels that the front piece performs best when it comes to non-repeaters, the front piece will be the only one to perform them); 2) the rear solution (when the team feels that the rear piece performs best when it comes to non-repeaters, the rear piece will be the only one to perform them); 3) the shared solution (used when both pieces perform strongly and at the same level when dealing with non-repeater blocks; then these blocks may be shared between the front and rear pieces, making the team more flexible and also guarantees the best and shortest random transitions). Any of these solutions have advantages and disadvantages. The main disadvantage of both the front and rear solutions is that all the brain work will fall within one of the pieces. The main advantage is, since the other piece won't deal with non-repeater blocks, both pieces will be very familiar with the way they'll perform those. The main disadvantage of the shared solution is that, in theory, both pieces won't be as good performers as the one piece in charge of the complete cross-training. The main advantage is that the teams opting for this solution will have more flexibility on dive engineering. Following the division mentioned previously, it should be: 1) For the front piece: The B Slot of the Point (usually in his A Slot) is the Outside Center Slot; The B Slot of the Outside Center (usually in his A Slot) is the Point Slot. 2) For the rear piece: The B Slot of the Inside Center (usually in his A Slot) is the Tail Slot; The B Slot of the Tail (usually in his A Slot) is the Inside Center Slot. Conclusion: There are many factors to be considered on choosing the continuity plan that will best suits to a certain team... with the training, that continuity plan will definitiely going to be adjusted (is not a static thing, but a dynamic plan). The most the team has possibility to train, the more solutions the team will be able to test and to find which is the best for that group of individuals. It's not right to say that "this continuity plan is better than that one", because one certain continuity plan may not work as good on another different team. The world-class top teams are very flexible on the ways they have to perform each draw... it's common to see withinh certain of those teams, the point slot guy performing as a point on a certain page and as tail or inside center on the next one... they can do this, because they have a lot of training jumps, where those solutions are tested. For the reamining teams, with limited resources, one of the 3 most common mentioned solutions on the way to deal with non-repeaters (front solution, back solution and shared solution), has more probabilities to help the teams achieving their goals... choosing one or another methods, depends from those factors and, most of all, should be a team's decision. Hope have helped. Blue Skies! ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Hi, If you'd like, you can get additional information at: Briefing Structure http://www.dropzone.com/features/BriefingStructure.shtml Basic Exit Techniques http://www.dropzone.com/features/BasicExitTechniques.shtml Exits http://www.dropzone.com/features/Exits.shtml Hope it helps! Blue Skies! ------------------------------ ----------------------------- Mario Santos Portugal

Hi, Does anybody know where are published the results for the Worldcup in Skysurfing, Freestyle, Freefly, held at Vienna - Austria, from September 21-28 September? They should be under http://www.skyday.net/ but the site hasn't been updated... Thanks and Blue Skies!