0
Fall0ut

Rafale vs. Freak2 ?

Recommended Posts

birdynamnam


From PF website: "A unique new model, exploring new ground with large surface wingsuit acrobatics."



You understand the concept of marketing, right? According to manufacturers, of course every new product they make is "new ground" and totally different from everything else on the market :ph34r:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fall0ut

***
From PF website: "A unique new model, exploring new ground with large surface wingsuit acrobatics."



You understand the concept of marketing, right? According to manufacturers, of course every new product they make is "new ground" and totally different from everything else on the market :ph34r:.

Fine - then lets just classify all suits in the same class, as nothing manufactorers makes make any difference. No need to discuss further in this topic and its all just tracking guys :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yuri_base

***Interesting developments going on...



There hasn't been any "interesting developments" in wingsuits in about a decade. In about 15 years, L/D increased only by 20% (from 2.5 of V-4 back in 2004 to 3.0 of mattresses; and it's been stuck at 3.0 flat for years now). The prevailing planform is pretty much the same T-design of about 10 years ago. L/D improved mostly due to trivially increased surface area. Dramatic improvement in flare is mostly an automatic consequence of this modest improvement in L/D (flare - effective conversion of kinetic energy into potential energy - is very sensitive to L/D increase). Increased internal pressure is nice for ease of flying, but has virtually no effect on aerodynamics, as long as it's enough to shape the wing (and it was enough 15 years ago in "soft" suits).

The multi-million $$$ wingsuit industry is as stagnant as some swamp in Florida. The only thing that is skyrocketing is the marketing. Any new minuscule iteration is presented as a revolutionary breakthrough. "Buy buy buy... we want your $$$... $2K at a time."

Winner winner chicken dinner! +1
Apex BASE
#1816

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
johnmatrix

+1

I wouldn't say it's stagnant though - just reaching it's logical terminus with marketing playing an increasing role as it has to in any business.



No, it's not its logical terminus. We haven't even started yet! It's like inventing a horse carriage and reaching its logical terminus and stopping there and just doing marketing BS. "Our latest carriage is over 9000 times faster than the last year model [reality: NOT, or maybe, by negligible margin, but not scientifically measured]. And it now features a redesigned horse manure bucket - it's now square for larger capacity! The bucket can now be painted in custom patterns - want pink elephants? we have 'em!" All while ignoring existing science, thermodynamics, engineering, manufacturing and thus not progressing to steam engine, combustion engine and so on.

All modern "top of the line" wingsuits are of the same T-planform and inlet design/placement that was empirically ("let's try this!") found almost a decade ago. Nothing principally new since then. None of the wingsuit makers, ever, showed any interest in advancements in wingsuit science and instrumentation. It's like a car maker not showing any interest in speedometer and other instrumentation, or advancements in science, technology, computer modeling. The same old instrument (GPS), which is good for navigation, not for precise aerodynamics measurements, is still the only instrument used.

The only one (besides me) who ever tried scientific analysis of wingsuit flight, is Hartman Rector, who even expanded Wingsuit Equations to 3D by himself and built computer modeler (in the most elaborate Excel spreadsheets I've ever seen) that can extract real polar curve characteristics from his flights and then use it for 3D fit of other flights, and even estimating possible lines for prospective flights. But to this date, I don't know of anyone in our Solar System who is actually using true wingsuit instrumentation for measuring aerodynamic parameters. Sad, but true, I'm the only one in the whole Solar System who's trying. For 12 years now.

And why would they try, indeed, if marketing BS works? That's why they are perpetually stuck in the horse carriage terminus. If they put all this effort into scientific improvements, measurable by objective instrumentation, not by BS superlatives, they'd be offering Ferrari now, not the same old horse carriage.

Even simple ideas get the wall of resistance. Talking to some of the top pilots constantly winning at competitions (even to the champion) about this simple idea how wingsuits can get some fresh developments: separate time, speed, and glide runs at competitions by allowing the pilots use different, goal-specific suits for each discipline; this will foster the development of interesting suits that are not bound to average the 3 totally aerodynamically different design criteria into one, mediocre one. Build a ridiculously large and ridiculously thick suit just for absolutely slowest vertical speed, longest time; build a small, thin airfoil, superfast suit for speed run (or even just the legwing) with the mathematically optimal L/D = sqrt(2) for max speed; build a separate suit for the highest L/D possible without being held by requirements of time and speed. In response, I get a startled look and excuses like, "people can't afford to have 3 wingsuits". Riiiight, as if not the majority of competitors are either sponsored and have free suits and paid travel/expenses, but even "amateurs" always have "latest and greatest" suit or several suits. Just excuses to resist innovation.

Here, I extracted some marketing BS from several wingsuit makers just for one of their suits, as well as from this thread, and mixed it randomly. A fun read...


"cutting edge in glide performance and speed to carve through the mountains and sky"
"Forward speed / flare are massive"
"Technology from our FAI World Championship winning XXX"
"Agility/Precission on XXX is unique for a suit that size"
"The range is stellar"
"design that boosts agility and glide while not hindering basic safety"
"XXX pushes the performance envelope the max, delivering the maximum shortest start possible in basejumping at a sustained glide ratio of 3:1 and up"
"The result is a suit that we think will again play a role in the advancement of our sport"
"gives the user a glide capability unique to the suit"
"XXX is a big step up in comparison"
"wingsuit with the ultimate glide"
"precise maneuverability with power"
"incredible glide performance, fast acceleration and precise handling"
"Not the usual ‘sloppy’ handling"
"a massive "free" performance increase with no compromise in stability or safety."
"There is no other wingsuit available that can match the XXX's blend of pure glide performance, speed, agility and ease of use"
"XXX is a missile"
"It offers the shortest start arc, accessible glide performance, and comfortable agility in steep terrain lines"
"incredible pressurization of the arm wings"
"The XXX is a new design, evolved from our performance line"
"XXX for dayz"
"a new profile that is more pitch-stable"
"a true weapon in big mountains"
"which allow the suit to fly at a much flatter angle achieving, with ease, very impressive glide ratios"
"these suits are worlds apart"
"the suit of choice for elite WS BASE jumpers"

But this is just for the latest models; imagine stacking a pile of superlative quotes for all the suits in the last decade on top of each other... you could just climb it to the Moon. Yet, objectively speaking, very little has changed in 10 years. We still have a glorified horse carriage.......
Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps:
L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP
iOS only: L/D Magic
Windows only: WS Studio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yuri_base

***Interesting developments going on...



There hasn't been any "interesting developments" in wingsuits in about a decade. In about 15 years, L/D increased only by 20% (from 2.5 of V-4 back in 2004 to 3.0 of mattresses; and it's been stuck at 3.0 flat for years now). The prevailing planform is pretty much the same T-design of about 10 years ago. L/D improved mostly due to trivially increased surface area. Dramatic improvement in flare is mostly an automatic consequence of this modest improvement in L/D (flare - effective conversion of kinetic energy into potential energy - is very sensitive to L/D increase). Increased internal pressure is nice for ease of flying, but has virtually no effect on aerodynamics, as long as it's enough to shape the wing (and it was enough 15 years ago in "soft" suits).

The multi-million $$$ wingsuit industry is as stagnant as some swamp in Florida. The only thing that is skyrocketing is the marketing. Any new minuscule iteration is presented as a revolutionary breakthrough. "Buy buy buy... we want your $$$... $2K at a time."


maybe true as far a glide but speed is getting faster and flare comes from energy build up.
I loved my Aura 1, my freak 2 even more fun with its range and flare and now I have a C3 and for base jumps I can come out of the same line with way more speed range and flare it has made jumping for me safer.
Every buy they have said to make for me was worth it.
BASE 1519

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wasatchrider

now I have a C3 and for base jumps I can come out of the same line with way more speed range and flare it has made jumping for me safer.
Every buy they have said to make for me was worth it.



It's just a slightly different trim for the most part. No basic technology change. It's like taking the same canopy and changing its lineset trim for faster speed that will give better flare.
Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps:
L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP
iOS only: L/D Magic
Windows only: WS Studio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yuri_base


The only one (besides me) who ever tried scientific analysis of wingsuit flight, is Hartman Rector, who even expanded Wingsuit Equations to 3D by himself and built computer modeler (in the most elaborate Excel spreadsheets I've ever seen) that can extract real polar curve characteristics from his flights and then use it for 3D fit of other flights, and even estimating possible lines for prospective flights. But to this date, I don't know of anyone in our Solar System who is actually using true wingsuit instrumentation for measuring aerodynamic parameters. Sad, but true, I'm the only one in the whole Solar System who's trying. For 12 years now.



Ahem... https://baseline.ws

Also honorable mention to https://www.facebook.com/IcarusAngelo/

That being said, I completely agree your other points... wingsuit design and technology has SO much more potential. It's sad that we haven't even gotten 4:1 yet.
BASEline - Wingsuit Flight Computer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
platypii

***
The only one (besides me) who ever tried scientific analysis of wingsuit flight, is Hartman Rector, who even expanded Wingsuit Equations to 3D by himself and built computer modeler (in the most elaborate Excel spreadsheets I've ever seen) that can extract real polar curve characteristics from his flights and then use it for 3D fit of other flights, and even estimating possible lines for prospective flights. But to this date, I don't know of anyone in our Solar System who is actually using true wingsuit instrumentation for measuring aerodynamic parameters. Sad, but true, I'm the only one in the whole Solar System who's trying. For 12 years now.



Ahem... https://baseline.ws

Also honorable mention to https://www.facebook.com/IcarusAngelo/

That being said, I completely agree your other points... wingsuit design and technology has SO much more potential. It's sad that we haven't even gotten 4:1 yet.

I meant exactly "using true wingsuit instrumentation for measuring aerodynamic parameters", not a GPS recorder/visualizer (which, in form of generic GPS/Flysight/Paralog/Skyderby has been there for years). By aerodynamic parameters, I mean sustained horizontal and vertical speeds normalized to sea level and unit of wingloading (a series of which for different AoA is forming a polar curve or region), lift and drag coefficients, AoA. GPS is incapable of determining these, even by reverse solving the Wingsuit Equations and fitting the trajectory, because wind profile is never known with accuracy needed (even sometimes on BASE jumps, there's no wind on exit, no wind at LZ, yet there are quite strong ~20mph layers of wind in between!) If only GPS was used in aeronautics to record plane's position and speeds, we'd still be not far from Wright Brothers' airplane.

We need real instrumentation to progress further, to really quantify the improvements due to design changes. The only way of doing this in real jumping is to put sensors in undisturbed airflow and orient them properly, which means a long enough pole and a vane. (Can't cheat basic physics/aerodynamics, sorry.) But while the means to do it are freely available (with some simple DIY and a free app), no WS manufacturer has ever done this. They could have done many A/B tests to determine which changes work and which don't, for example, determine if hiding the cheststrap under the suit actually improves flight characteristic or it has a negligible effect not worth the chance of missing an undone strap. Sweep angle, airfoil profile, trim, etc. etc. - the real effects of these changes can be precisely measured. But no one is interested! Instead, all we get is this marketing vomit.

People don't understand wingsuit dynamics, they don't understand that listening to [ground, not even air, sic!] glide ratio and trying to make it higher 99% of the time means that they are simply slowly flaring - bleeding their horizontal airspeed and converting it to better GGR. GPS is not an instrumentation, it's a distraction and confusion. But unfortunately, Solar System's reaction over the last 12 years has been like this:

[inline cow.gif]
Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps:
L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP
iOS only: L/D Magic
Windows only: WS Studio

cow.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I must say that is the best rant I've read here for quite some time. B|

Felt a bit nostalgic actually, reminded of the days of this forum some years back where it was just about seeing the latest cool-looking new suit design from whatever manufacturer (and nobody cared which manufacturer it was) instead of the same looking thing coming out again with the same old marketing.

But don't you think that given that extending the wing surface past the extremities of the body has proven to become quite unsafe that we've reached a size limit for what a mass-produced wingsuit can be?
I.e. people are managing to have enough incidents already with the current suits in circulation, do we really want to see how many more will occur if we have struts for the arms extending out past the hand?

And that given that general size limit, isn't there a particular planform that will be generally the best and it's the T-type you mention that tended to get popular after the first Tony Suits X Bird?

I must say the 'Flick Tail' design from TS that was used by the winner of the the World Base Race in 2016 was an interesting departure from the norm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It feels like manufacturers have been working harder on reducing drag than increasing lift.

New ram air inlet designs are reducing drag while maintaining internal pressure.

The swallow tail suit from Tony is a super interesting example of reducing drag... Most of the lift on any wing comes from the leading edge, so why not eliminate draggy tail? Other than...

A lot of good work on refining the balance of the suits to make them easier/safer to fly. The relative location of the center of lift vs center of gravity can have a huge affect on the aerodynamic stability of a suit.

Rbaseg has some interesting experimental suits that extend the wing past the hands. Seems like that's the only way to really increase lift substantially.

[inline fliktail.jpg]
[inline batsuit.jpg]
BASEline - Wingsuit Flight Computer

fliktail.jpg

batsuit.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
johnmatrix

I must say the 'Flick Tail' design from TS that was used by the winner of the the World Base Race in 2016 was an interesting departure from the norm.



Here we go, we can only applaud some fresh thinking. However, it's still unquantified. "Winning design" is a superficial measure because it's one pilot vs. other pilots. The winner was by 0.4s faster, out of 29s total - a difference of only about 1%. Take into account human reaction time to start signal and other errors in time measurement, and it's a moot point. A much more reliable measure would be a polar curve of normalized sustained speeds and comparison of it to polar curves of other suits. The polar curve goes to the right (increasing horizontal speed) and bends down (increasing vertical speed), then goes vertically down (max possible sustained horiz. speed is achieved) and bends back to the left (you can't go any faster horizontally, but can vertically). Once the max sustained horiz. speed is found for the same experienced pilot, but on different suits, you can make objective conclusions. "Flick Tail has Vxs_max = 160mph, Jedi 150mph. Clear improvement!" 100% scientific, 0% bullshit. The race results can't be trusted to make conclusions about suits. Race is like a river that can be entered only once - who knows what the result would be if the same pilot jumped Jedi instead? Maybe faster by a full second? Who knows.

The winner did see me jumping my L/D Vario device (based on a smartwatch) at Lodi circa 2015-ish and examined it closely, was interested. It wouldn't be hard for a big wingsuit manufacturer to build such a device, it works on any smartphone or Wear smartwatch, all you need to do is to make a vane that fits your device. And then you can have scientific results and be the first WS maker in the Solar System (and possibly, the Universe) without all this marketing BS.

In terms of further developments in wingsuit, it would be a good start to precisely measure max L/D for each model of wingsuit (with the same factory pilot) and build a graph "L/D vs. planform surface area", to see a trend, then we can see if there's an asymptotic saturation or there's still some room to squeeze some more sweet L/D. Reaching the 3rd magic L/D = 3.57 (for which the trajectory becomes level (infinite G.R.) at some point after BASE exit) would be a major milestone in history of wingsuiting. It will also put us much much closer to achieving zero total speed at the end of a flare, making possible things like "landing" on a trapeze or a net suspended below a hot air balloon. Every 20% increase in L/D will bring us amazing things, like the 2.5->3.0 increase did (no flare -> massive flare).
Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps:
L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP
iOS only: L/D Magic
Windows only: WS Studio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
// The winner was by 0.4s faster, out of 29s total - a difference of only about 1%.

As an illustration, here's a simulation of WBR in Wingsuit Studio showing a difference of 0.4s over 20s (not even 29!) flight at Gridset, with identical pilots/suits/flight modes, but with different exit push: one has a very strong push at 10mph, the other has a weak/medium push at 3mph.

[inline WBR.png]

This proves that WBR is not an indication of suit aerodynamics at all, there's too much variability due to pilot skill - push, dive/planeout technique, ability to nail the right flight mode, etc., as well as wingloading.

WBR is just another BS the WS makers are using for marketing.
Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps:
L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP
iOS only: L/D Magic
Windows only: WS Studio

WBR.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yuri_base



WBR is just another BS the WS makers are using for marketing.



All that is very interesting but I must disagree with that point. I was at the WBR this year (not competing) and the subject came up that none of the major WS manufacturers are sponsoring the event nor using it for marketing that much. Sure the manufacturer of the winning suit will do a social media post about it like they do with any other event (skydiving or BASE) but the WBR is still primarily a community event organised by locals in Romsdalen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Conclusion:

1. I will still let you know how my Rafale compares to my Freak once it arrives.

2. All modern suit designs are basically Tony Suits from the "Bird" series.

3. Marketing has become a thing in this industry for better or worse.

Sounds to me a lot like every other industry as it matures. I mean, what are the fundamental differences between a Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla...really?
Apex BASE
#1816

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BryanCampau

It won’t be very long before the wingsuit tunnel is changing pitch as well as speed. I think that will be eye opening to see the true performance amongst various models and manufacturers in there.



Won't happen. Wingsuit in a research tunnel has been done several times already - Birdman long time ago, PF not so long ago. It was all publicity stunts, to make pretty pictures - "look, we're doing scientific research here, look at our serious faces!" No practical results. No even basic Cl, Cd vs. AoA data - this is what research wind tunnels are built for! Even the above linked Icarus project - no Cl, Cd, only pretty colored CFD swirls. No data, no papers, nothing.

BS upon BS upon BS...
Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps:
L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP
iOS only: L/D Magic
Windows only: WS Studio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really? When you can accurately control wind speed and pitch with the suit in flight, you truly believe they could not accurately measure the performance of a suit and compare to other models? I feel like there is no better way to compare.

Please do tell what way to measure beats a flyable wingsuit tunnel? By your previous comment it sounds like you may be unaware that there is a tunnel that is more than just a research tunnel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess if you only look at the maximum L/D people were getting, perhaps thats true. How many people were actually getting 2.5 in a V1 in 2004? Ive been hearing people claim 3:1 since about 2004, and only in the last 5-6 years was this really true. Wingsuits have improved immensely for the "average pilot". There were people in V1-V2 (yourself of course included) that could fly extremely well with an assortment of tricks and experience, and likely a COG/wingloading that just worked really well for those specific suit designs. (Just had dinner with James Boole not too long ago and laughed as we remembered how to tunnel the arms, and tension with the outside of your calves). Those were the days when a really talented phantom pilot could outfly a shitty V1 pilot. Now, anyone can strap on a modern giant airlocked suit, lay there, and fly 3.3:1. There arent as many tricks, because they arent really needed. Id say that in that 15 year period, the average pilot went from flying 2:1 to 3:1.

I agree that the current overall design of modern big suits doesnt leave much room for big sweeping changes, more continuous fine tuning. Maybe its that we've reached close to maximum performance achievable by a sewn together nylon suit. More rigid material would be better, but are they cost effective, and would people hike them to the top of mountains in backpacks? Is anyone even flying for max distance anymore? I guess I dont skydive much, and I never got into the GPS dive/flare/tailwind competitions. My attention has turned to 1 piece tracking suit development, as its like the old days of wingsuiting where everyone has a different idea. At least Robi didnt follow through with his threats to never make one of those stupid dangerous flying mattress suits ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hjumper33

I guess if you only look at the maximum L/D people were getting, perhaps thats true. How many people were actually getting 2.5 in a V1 in 2004?



I'm not sure where and when I got the 2.5 figure for V-1. A friend of mine in V-1 and me in Phantom-1 were jumping balloons a lot circa 2006, and recording balloon's track with GPS (to record wind profile), then vectorly subtracting wind from our flight data to obtain reasonably wind-free trajectory, and from the sustained part of it get our L/D. Maybe then. But I know for certain my max L/D in Phantom-1 - it's 2.15. (I measured it by various independent methods many times - with L/D Calculator in Wingsuit Studio from base jumps, from sustained parts of balloon and plane jumps with wind elimination, and with Analog L/D Meter.) And I'm fat. And the suit was measured wrong and was ridiculously small on me. And the leg wing was almost like on Prodigy-1 - the top of the arc was barely below the knee. So, extrapolating to 2.3 or even 2.4 for fit flyers in properly sized P-1 is not unreasonable. And then 2.5 for V-1 seems to be a good bottom estimate. I've also owned V-2 (it was a flop) and V-4 (max L/D = 2.75, precisely measured with L/D Magic and L/D Vario).

Quote

Now, anyone can strap on a modern giant airlocked suit, lay there, and fly 3.3:1.



Source of 3.3? Anyone actually scientifically measured it with a proper tool? My impression is 3.0-3.1 is the max. (Mine in Aura-2 is 2.9, measured with L/D Vario.) Maybe, with an integrated container and those thin rubber climbing shoes (like for climbing gym) I've seen James jump, it's close to 3.3?

Quote

Maybe its that we've reached close to maximum performance achievable by a sewn together nylon suit.



Maybe. But it would be a very strange coincidence that in about 2 decades of wingsuit, no scientific approach whatsoever has been used in R&D and yet we have magically arrived at maximum performance by doing a Brownian motion random walk! It's like a cat walking on a piano and you hear the Beethoven's Moon Sonata! Are there any examples in history of aeronautics when massive progress has been achieved without scientific approach, just by trying this and that? (Rhetoric question.)

When the random trying this and that saturated about 6-8 years ago, at least one of the manufacturers even started asking people around, via their affiliated pilots, "what else can we do? how can we improve the performance?" [as in, we don't know what else to try] Trying to fish some fresh ideas. Then, the Great Savior - gorilla marketing - was brought to wingsuiting. The model was taken, perhaps, from the gadget world - a new model every year, unnecessarily many different models in lineup, and aggressive marketing of each new model as oh-so-much-better than the last years, "outdated" model. The network of sponsored or affiliate pilots has exploded. They're everywhere now, and you turn left, and someone is showing a v.3 of some model and saying that it's massively, massively better that v.2. You turn right and someone is showing all the hidden pockets in the crotch area the revolutionary new suit has. From the back, you hear that the flare is so massive that you have to take the PC out of the pouch, flake it like a mushroom as if you're doing a handheld go-n-throw jump, and pitch it up for it to grab air, as the flare brought you to a complete stop. From the front, you see someone showing a zipper with a new color in R,G,B=57,34,154 - never been done before in human history! And you feel surrounded with the BS. BS has won!

Quote

Is anyone even flying for max distance anymore?



Well, at least one does. I actually get more satisfaction from a perfectly executed max L/D performance flight than from proximity. It's an amazingly satisfying feeling when you land and try to see where you jumped from and can't because some small hill or cliff completely obscures it.
Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps:
L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP
iOS only: L/D Magic
Windows only: WS Studio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yuri_base

Then, the Great Savior - gorilla marketing - was brought to wingsuiting. The model was taken, perhaps, from the gadget world - a new model every year, unnecessarily many different models in lineup, and aggressive marketing of each new model as oh-so-much-better than the last years, "outdated" model.



"Gorilla marketing" :D
I just realised you meant "guerrilla marketing" but I'm afraid your term has stuck for me now forever. Love it - and agree 100%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hjumper33

I think I got confused by the line in your post that’s says the V-4 but also 2004. I assumed you meant V1, but perhaps you meant a later date? V4 came out around 2011-12 iirc.

In similar vein, I actually meant to type 3:1, not 3.3.



Ah, yeah, it was just a typo, I meant V-1 in 2004. V4 was in 2011. Same with "gorilla marketing".
Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps:
L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP
iOS only: L/D Magic
Windows only: WS Studio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's free!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0