Wingload for a flying squirrel?

[Milo 0]

This is too bizarre to post anywhere else.
The flying squirrel doesn't really fly, it climbs to a high place and glides to a lower place.
That seems to be much the same physics of skydiving, and wingsuit flying.
Is there a biologist or zoologist here who knows what the # to ft^2 ratio is for Rocky?
milo

[SkydiveMonkey 0]

Does it have airlocks, or is it cross-braced?
When I grow up, I want to be a post whore

[Zennie 0]

We kicked this around in the Wingsuit forum recently.
I found some weight/size numbers and did a rough calculation. Rocky is loading around .39.
"Zero Tolerance: the politically correct term for zero thought, zero common sense."

[quade 3]

Believe it or not, we've already sort of discussed this HERE.
You'll need to scroll down a bit to get to the WAG estimates.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[MrHixxx 0]

Definately have to try a weight belt on one. Getum up to about 2.4, but only over water of course... Fern branch wind blades... Humm...
Maybe bring some Sugar Gliders into the mix too...
-Hixxx
"Sous ma tub, Dr Suess ma tub"

[quade 3]

Quote

That seems to be much the same physics of skydiving, and wingsuit flying.

Just to recap what has been previously discussed.
Yes, the physics are the same, but not the scale.
As you increase the size of the model from squirrel size to human size, you increase the wing loading dramatically. From well below .5:1 for a squirrel to perhaps 17:1 for a human.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[Milo 0]

Quote

Yes, the physics are the same, but not the scale.
As you increase the size of the model from squirrel size to human size, you increase the wing loading dramatically. From well below .5:1 for a squirrel to perhaps 17:1 for a human.

I apologize to everyone who understands this, but I do not.
Can somebody feed this to me in little bites, I rode the short bus to school.
milo

[quade 3]

In a nutshell, as you increase the size of the jumper (from squirrel size to human size) the weight increases faster than the wing area.
In the thread I previously referenced, there are several examples.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[RedBull 0]

Quote

I apologize to everyone who understands this, but I do not.
Can somebody feed this to me in little bites, I rode the short bus to school.

Think of an example using two cubes falling w/ one side straight to earth.
A 1 inch cube would have a volume of 1³ (1 x 1 x 1), and a presented surface of 1² (1 x 1).
A 2 inch cube would have a volume of 8³ (2 x 2 x 2), and a presented surface area of 4² (2 x 2).
So, as we've made the second cube twice as large, the volume has increased by 8 times, but the single side surface area has increased by only 4 times.
Scale matters. This is why elephants need radiators on the sides of their heads. Their surface area (for heat dissipation) is out of whack with their bulk.
"Audentis Fortuna juvat." - Virgil