Forums: Dropzone.com: Suggestions and Feedback:
Atmonauti

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

mciocca  (C License)

Jan 31, 2008, 1:11 PM
Post #1 of 102 (5381 views)
Shortcut
Atmonauti Quote | Reply

May i suggest, as more and more skydivers are affiliating to the discipline of ATMONAUTI angled social flight (sky flying at its best!), that a sub-heading is created under Skydiving Disciplines, where interested skydivers can discuss Atmo, exchange ideas, receive information specific to the discipline, competitions etc. Skydiving is made of many interesting and sometimes opposing sub-disciplines, and in order for the sport to continue to grow, I propose including ATMONAUTI as a recognized discipline asap.

The Sky's Our Playground. Marco Ciocca. AIR005.

www.atmonauti.com


Bolas  (D License)

Jan 31, 2008, 4:53 PM
Post #2 of 102 (5341 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mciocca] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Can you give us a quick explanation of what it is?

What flight types does it share common characteristics with?

Ex. Blade running - Canopy Flight.

Your website didn't seem to say. Looked like freeflying and tracking to me.


(This post was edited by Bolas on Jan 31, 2008, 4:54 PM)


mciocca  (C License)

Feb 4, 2008, 2:51 AM
Post #3 of 102 (5303 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Bolas] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Yeah Sure I can.

Here's a brief explanation:

Atmonauti, unlike traditional free-fall (that utilises the relative gravitational wind from “below” to achieve a multitude of stable body positions at terminal velocity) is the name given to the technique that intentionally utilises lift to overcome gravity, in order to achieve relative wind (or a custom “tube”) at an angle of between 10deg – 45deg, where after the atmonaut (atmosphere navigator) may introduce Free-fly body positions, while “falling” at greatly reduced speeds (90mph – 110mph), resulting in extended free-fall time and increased safety.

Atmonauti, due to the reduced air speeds, is a SOCIAL discipline, which is accessible to the masses.

Atmonauti incorporates Frontmonauti (belly down), Backmonauti (belly up), Footmonauti (feet first facing up), and Inverted Footmonauti (feet firstg facing down and Atmo Relative Work.

It is completely unlike any form of skydiving as it utilizes lift to compensate for gravitational pull (in ALL body positions), whereafter all freefly-similar moves can be incorporated into the discipline.


stratostar  (Student)

Feb 4, 2008, 7:36 PM
Post #4 of 102 (5273 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Bolas] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Yea it's a fancy word for tracking dive. And not worthy of a sub forum or "special" place to talk about it, it IMHO belongs in freeflying.


mciocca  (C License)

Feb 5, 2008, 12:48 AM
Post #5 of 102 (5266 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Dude with all due respect first EDUCATE yourself, then make FOOLISH comments like the ones you just posted on the WWW.

Atmonauti has absolutely no similarity to tracking whatsoever, in that tracking is freefall, with no lift generated, and whereby the diver spills air in order to achieve forward movement.

Docks are virtually impossible, 10 way formations are IMPOSSIBLE, RW with multiple points ARE IMPOSSIBLE, rig surfing, feet first spocking etc are ALL IMPOSSIBLE in tracking. Unless of course you have the footage, in which case post it so we can all see. Until then, try it our first then comment.

Respectfully yours, Marco.


stratostar  (Student)

Feb 5, 2008, 3:23 PM
Post #6 of 102 (5249 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mciocca] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Well Pal you have your view of things and I have mine, I say your full of crap!


(This post was edited by stratostar on Feb 5, 2008, 3:33 PM)


frost  (D 25011)

Feb 11, 2008, 1:29 PM
Post #7 of 102 (5193 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

you have no clue about the subject. none. It's best to stay quiet when you dont know what you're talking about, you'll look smarter.


SimonBones  (D 28573)

Feb 12, 2008, 1:17 PM
Post #8 of 102 (5167 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mciocca] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

In reply to:
Atmonauti has absolutely no similarity to tracking whatsoever, in that tracking is freefall, with no lift generated, and whereby the diver spills air in order to achieve forward movement.

Docks are virtually impossible, 10 way formations are IMPOSSIBLE, RW with multiple points ARE IMPOSSIBLE, rig surfing, feet first spocking etc are ALL IMPOSSIBLE in tracking. Unless of course you have the footage, in which case post it so we can all see. Until then, try it our first then comment.

I have to disagree with some of these statements. While I do agree that atmonauti and tracking are different flying styles, docks are not impossible. In fact, our DZ frequently takes docks on tracking dives. Since taking docks can and is done on tracking dives, RW (working relative) and turning points is possible and is done. 2 weekends ago we built a 5 way docked formation all tracking.

If lift is not generated on a tracking dive, why do our neptunes and pro-tracks read them to be in the 90, 80, and sometimes even Shocked in the high 70s (for the really fast ones) mph? I have frequently (on faster track dives) flown at an atmonauti angle in front of the rabbit.

Basically it's all freeflying. Freeflying does not mean either sitfly or head down, freeflying is exactly that: free flying. We fly on all axis, one position/orientation fluidly transitioning to the next as if there were no middle. If you want to start drawing lines between styles within a discipline, then we need a new section for bellyflying, backflying, sitflying, standflying, head down flying, side flying, tracking, and atmonauti. Then why not seperate ones for back tracking, side tracking, belly tracking, frontmonauti, backmonauti, sidemonauti, and all the feet first monauti?


mciocca  (C License)

Feb 24, 2008, 7:54 AM
Post #9 of 102 (5111 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SimonBones] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Heya,

The point is merely to diffirentiate between different techniques, those that rely on gravity and those that utilise lift to partially compensate for gravity.

The stuff you guys are up to is great! Id love to see pics/footage of this though as tracking as a term is often used to describe the technique used in Atmonauti, where docks, RW, slow ff rates etc are commonplace.

Im not saying for a minute that you're not doing this all in traditional tracking (deflecting wind vs generating lift) but Ive often heard the same thing said, but on closer inspection we've determined and amicably agreed that it was indeed Atmonauti, and not tracking, that was being utilised during these docks/RW/low ff rates etc.

The best way to determine this is to post some pics/footage. Sounds like you guys are up to some cool stuff man! Cant wait to see some cool shots. If it turns out to be atmo that you're doing, well COOL! Thats cool too ;o)


mnealtx  (B 30496)

Feb 27, 2008, 1:09 AM
Post #10 of 102 (5085 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mciocca] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

If a track position isn't generating lift, then neither is atmonauti - unless they've changed the laws of aerodynamics while none of us were looking.


mciocca  (C License)

Feb 27, 2008, 3:31 AM
Post #11 of 102 (5078 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mnealtx] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

;o)

Hi Mike,

Sorry to say it, but its a typical uneducated statement.

How did you arrive at the conclusion that if tracking doesn't generate lift then neither does atmo?

Thats like saying that if a round parachute goes straight down then so does a modern day canopy.

Id recommend first reading up/educating yourself, try it out, and Im sure you'll appreciate the difference.

Blue skies.


pilotdave  (D License)

Feb 27, 2008, 12:20 PM
Post #12 of 102 (5059 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mciocca] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Quote:
but on closer inspection we've determined and amicably agreed that it was indeed Atmonauti, and not tracking

Everything I read like that about atmonauti makes me giggle and think "awww, that's so adorable." I don't know why. Arguments about atmonauti are just so damn cute! Must be atmonauti's magical powers to generate massive lift and thrust at zero angle of attack. I LOVE those atmonauti diagrams that were in parachutist a while back.

Dave


(This post was edited by pilotdave on Feb 27, 2008, 12:22 PM)


mnealtx  (B 30496)

Feb 29, 2008, 2:52 AM
Post #13 of 102 (5027 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mciocca] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

In reply to:
;o)

Hi Mike,

Sorry to say it, but its a typical uneducated statement.

How did you arrive at the conclusion that if tracking doesn't generate lift then neither does atmo?

Thats like saying that if a round parachute goes straight down then so does a modern day canopy.

Id recommend first reading up/educating yourself, try it out, and Im sure you'll appreciate the difference.

Blue skies.
\

Uneducated? No, not at all, merely countering your claim that a (roughly) 45 degree dive somehow is "generating lift" while a (roughly) 20-25 degree track isn't.

You can make all the claims you want, but aerodynamics is still aerodynamics. (Hint: think of it in regard to trim angles of different canopies - a Navigator isn't going to out-sink a VX)


mciocca  (C License)

Feb 29, 2008, 3:09 AM
Post #14 of 102 (5025 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mnealtx] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Hi Mike,

For lift to be present and working on a body the relative wind needs to travel across the airfoil from fornt to rear, as with atmo/gliders/canopies etc.

In freefall (including tracking) the relative wind is from below, thus true lift in not being generated. Please see attached image.
Attachments: Atmo vs Track.jpg (63.7 KB)


mnealtx  (B 30496)

Feb 29, 2008, 3:59 AM
Post #15 of 102 (5021 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mciocca] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Very pretty picture. It still doesn't explain away the laws of aerodynamics and still doesn't refute the fact that in a good flat track I can fall at, say, 100mph vs 130mph in a 30 degree "atmonauti" AOA.

So, where is all this "lift" you keep claiming?


mciocca  (C License)

Feb 29, 2008, 7:23 AM
Post #16 of 102 (5014 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mnealtx] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

In Atmo, if you're doing it correctly, you should have a vertical speed ranging from the 75mph - 90mph range.

Furthermore, the point of taking angle and using the relative wind from the head to the feet and not on the chest is that you fly with the body and use your arms and feet for docking as with freeflying headdown docks etc, which you cannot do in tracking.

Atmo 4way, 8way etc is commonplace (with docks), transitions by and between body positions on different axis also commonplace (not so in tracking), so its not only about the reduce ff rate.

PS If your doing atmo at 130mph, your NOT doing atmo ;0)


(This post was edited by mciocca on Feb 29, 2008, 7:36 AM)


mciocca  (C License)

Feb 29, 2008, 7:33 AM
Post #17 of 102 (5011 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mnealtx] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

mnealtx,

I notice that you have 50 jumps or so total over 13 years of jumping.

Would it not be prudent for you to consider what more experienced skydivers and skyflyers are saying rather than commenting on something you clearly do not have a lot of experience with.

In a 2 week period we often exceed 100 skydives, training the atmo discipline.

I would recommend that you consider doing some training in atmo with an atmo instructor who will support your growth specific to flight training and im pretty sure that you will reach the 75 - 90 mph speeds the rest of us attain, and not the 130 mph speeds you reach in ff.


mnealtx  (B 30496)

Feb 29, 2008, 8:12 AM
Post #18 of 102 (5004 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mciocca] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

I understand that y'all are justifiably proud of what you do, no problems there.

Aerodynamics still apply, though - I'd have to see the jump track info before I buy it, sorry.


DJL  (C License)

Feb 29, 2008, 9:47 AM
Post #19 of 102 (4996 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mciocca] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Quote:
relative gravitational wind


Your search - "relative gravitational wind" - did not match any documents.

Suggestions:
Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
Try different keywords.
Try more general keywords.

Search for "gravitational wind"

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=38956


pilotdave  (D License)

Feb 29, 2008, 12:21 PM
Post #20 of 102 (4990 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mciocca] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

My favorite diagram!!!!! Thanks for posting that!!!

You may be right that atmonauti is something special and is totally different from tracking, yada yada... but I really don't think you understand the physics of what's going on. It's like trying to mix aerodynamics and religion. You have faith, we have aerodynamics. There's a happy medium between them called reality. I don't understand how you can acheive a fallrate of 75 or while travelling along a 45 degree trajectory at 0 angle of attack. But I really don't think you do either, since your diagram makes no sense. BUT IT'S FREAKING ADORABLE.

Dave


(This post was edited by pilotdave on Feb 29, 2008, 12:22 PM)


mciocca  (C License)

Mar 1, 2008, 12:25 AM
Post #21 of 102 (4968 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pilotdave] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Dave, you still don't seem to have understood the concept of Atmo.

The suggestion is that you try it out first before commenting.

Try it out, and you'll find that what many of us are saying is indeed truly amazing.

If the diagram makes no sense to you, then its even more clear as to why you haven't yet understood the concept, since it makes total sense to those who are familiar with the technique.

Pleas don't assert that since you don't understand something that it means i do not understand it either. Speak for yourself bro, not for the rest of us.


mnealtx  (B 30496)

Mar 1, 2008, 12:42 AM
Post #22 of 102 (4964 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mciocca] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

In reply to:
Hi Mike,

For lift to be present and working on a body the relative wind needs to travel across the airfoil from fornt to rear, as with atmo/gliders/canopies etc.

Just to touch back on this....since you say the "lift" that you get is due to being at 0 degrees AOA to the relative wind, why aren't the headdown freefly guys falling at 50mph?


mciocca  (C License)

Mar 1, 2008, 12:59 AM
Post #23 of 102 (4963 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mnealtx] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

In order to generate lift you need to create a movement of air/relative wind OVER AN AIRFOIL.

In Atmonauti we produce the relative wind from the head towards the feet OVER AN AIRFOIL shape of the body.

Since we do not have a propulsion system, we sacrifice altitude by taking up an angle of flight relative to the ground in order to produce relative wind over the airfoil shaped body to create lift.

In head down, we are falling straight down, with our bodies perfectly in alignment with the angle of descent, with no airfoil shape whatsoever. If in head down you take up the airfoil shape, you would in theory create a low pressure above the airfoil, pulling you in that direction, which is not commonly done.

Further to this, as i said before, in Atmonauti we sacrifice altitude (taking up an angle of flight, thus not flying parallel to the ground) in order to produce relative wind over the human airfoil which produces lift. In head down, traveling perpendicular to the ground we sacrifice way too much altitude and the lift generated is not sufficient to increase our ff time significantly, thus the most popular angles in Atmonauti are from around 45 - 10 degrees, but often can reach 60 or 70 degrees, sometimes referred to as Trace in France, which is a steep form of Atmonauti.


(This post was edited by mciocca on Mar 1, 2008, 1:05 AM)


mnealtx  (B 30496)

Mar 1, 2008, 3:31 AM
Post #24 of 102 (4956 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mciocca] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

In reply to:
In order to generate lift you need to create a movement of air/relative wind OVER AN AIRFOIL.

I'm moderately familiar with the general concept behind how a wing operates, thanks - that's why I'm arguing this point with you.

In reply to:
In Atmonauti we produce the relative wind from the head towards the feet OVER AN AIRFOIL shape of the body.

Since we do not have a propulsion system, we sacrifice altitude by taking up an angle of flight relative to the ground in order to produce relative wind over the airfoil shaped body to create lift.

Hmm...sounds like "spilling air" to me.

In reply to:
In head down, we are falling straight down, with our bodies perfectly in alignment with the angle of descent, with no airfoil shape whatsoever. If in head down you take up the airfoil shape, you would in theory create a low pressure above the airfoil, pulling you in that direction, which is not commonly done.

What happened to the whole "airfoil shaped body" thing? No airfoil shape whatsoever? C'mon, man, you're contradicting yourself - if the body makes an airfoil in atmo, it makes a similar airfoil in ANY similar (non-arched) position, so by your 'proof' ANY position other than HD or straight belly flying is creating an airfoil shaped body and 'generating lift'.

Lift is lift, regardless of the attitude of the wing.

*If* that "airfoil shaped body" is creating lift, then why aren't the HD folks getting pulled off the fall line by it?


Premier LouDiamond  (D 25931)
Moderator
Mar 1, 2008, 6:45 AM
Post #25 of 102 (4949 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mciocca] Atmonauti [In reply to] Quote | Reply

I'm sorry, but I don't see how this is any different from freeflying when you apply the definition of freeflying. Atmonauti is/was a freestyle move that used to be used in competition before it was removed. Besided the 45 degree attitude it also required a roll to be correctly done. Doing it in different orientations( foot,back,etc monauti) by definition is still freeflying in it's purest sense. I don't see this as being a different discipline. If anything it is a subset of freeflying IMO.

As for your claim of being able to generate lift and the speeds you normally fall at, to include the aerodynamic explanations, I think you are grossly overstating what little lift you may generate. Your claims of fall rate would put you in the range of most easy wingsuit flock dives. I have followed Atmo dives out in my wingsuit and quite frankly you guys come out of the sky just like a tracking dive does but at a steeper angle. A wingsuit can create a very small amount of lift for a very short duration before it begins to fall along it's aerodynamic glide path again. The explanations and descriptions you have given (and that I have heard others give) "sounds good" but the aerodynamics and physics are not there to support it.

I by no means wish to rain on anyones fun and I am positive Atmo is fun to do as it involves flocking in 3 dimensions and we do similar things in wingsuiting. However, cooking up witch doctor aerodynamics, ignoring basic physics and trying to give it a different name doesn't negate the fact that it is still a form of freeflying.


First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Dropzone.com : Suggestions and Feedback

 


Search for (options)