0
Edra

how much extra flight time from tracking.. ?

Recommended Posts

Howdy folks I hope you all are well, I have a question for all of you tracking gods out there.
How much extra median flight time can one expect from a good track from 14.000 ft. ?

I have had some mention to me during training that they can get (27) extra seconds of flight time from 14.000 feet ?!, not wearing any suit other than a regular freefly suit.. Ie no tracking suit or wingsuit worn..!

To get a 87 second flight from just tracking and body position from 14.000 ft seems incredible..Can any of you achieve this ?

If the ideal tracking angle is at 45 degrees to the earth to gain a 1:1 glide ratio it achieves 10 extra seconds of flight from 14.000 ft.
I cannot comprehend how someone 6ft tall weighing 180 lbs in a tight fit vertical freefly suit can gain a 1.8:1 glide ratio.

Does 27 seconds of extra tracking time seem correct under ideal conditions to any of you. ?

I really need to be a proficient tracker, and having experimented with palms up vs palms down, leg and arm width\elevation angles, extent of de-arch, head and chin tuck position, duration of initial drop down etc nothing has really yielded magical flight times for me thus far..

what have you guys found is key to increased glide ratio and flight time.?
Best regards
Edra
"You'll shoot your eye out kid"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really a silly question as it something I have been working on myself. I've heard of people in Track Suits getting that kind of freefall time. The problem is..... time isn't a real good indicator of how well you're tracking... could be that you're just falling really slow. I recently bought a Flysight for just this purpose. Only got to make two jumps with it so far..... the first being the best. Was pleasantly surprised by the results.

Just jeans and a tee shirt...... max GR was 0.8:1 sustained for 12 seconds and topped out at 72 mph. More important in my mind was I covered 9/10ths of a mile in 66 secs from 13,500 to 3,800 ft. All the data spiked when I relaxed towards the end of the jump... probably due to the increased angle of attack. With some fine tuning, I should have no problem bolstering those numbers.

Others who are more experienced may have a better answer, but I believe that you need to go steep to get that performance. Which will in the end.... result in a shorter freefall time than you might expect.
Sun, Fun, and Blue Ones


Respect Existence, Or Expect Resistance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Highrad, Yeah ive heard some great things about the flysight and will order one.
I like your point about time not being an indicator of effective tracking especially in the domain of horizontal distance covered.

GR of 0.8:1 at 72 MPH is pretty good, nice work.
You mentioning being relaxed vs tense\stiff body hyper extended is interesting too, I was wondering which was more effective.
"You'll shoot your eye out kid"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I might have been trying to dearch too much for the majority of the track. When I relaxed into a more natural position (ever so slightly pushing against the air) the GPS showed significant glide improvement. I also tucked my chin to look at the ground I was covering, lol.

I use palms up because it naturally rolls my shoulders and the profile it gives me, works best to maximize the surface area of my body type. I also raise or lower my shoulders to change pitch without breaking from a solid configuration. All the other factors are up for experimentation. I've combed over tons of B.A.S.E. tracking videos to see what some of the best are doing. Just gotta get more jumps to test out the variables to see what works best for me.

Like I said.... I believe taking it steep to build speed and slowly flatten out is the key to good GR. Just have to find the sweet spot where you don't go too flat and have the performance drop off. If you're like me and want to get the most out of your track.... snag a fly sight.... worth every penny!


Edit to add clarification: When I mentioned my top speed... I was referring to pure horizontal. My verticle speed was high 90's with a combined flight path speed of 116. I've had my altitrack read low 70's for vertical speed before, but I believe that was just me falling slow!:S

Sun, Fun, and Blue Ones


Respect Existence, Or Expect Resistance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Highradwarrior

Not really a silly question as it something I have been working on myself. I've heard of people in Track Suits getting that kind of freefall time. The problem is..... time isn't a real good indicator of how well you're tracking... could be that you're just falling really slow. I recently bought a Flysight for just this purpose. Only got to make two jumps with it so far..... the first being the best. Was pleasantly surprised by the results.

Just jeans and a tee shirt...... max GR was 0.8:1 sustained for 12 seconds and topped out at 72 mph. More important in my mind was I covered 9/10ths of a mile in 66 secs from 13,500 to 3,800 ft. All the data spiked when I relaxed towards the end of the jump... probably due to the increased angle of attack. With some fine tuning, I should have no problem bolstering those numbers.

Others who are more experienced may have a better answer, but I believe that you need to go steep to get that performance. Which will in the end.... result in a shorter freefall time than you might expect.



I always enjoyed tracking to get high forward speed. That requires being a bit aggressive use of your altitude. As you relax and stop pushing as much, you tend to "coast" more in the horizontal direction than you do in the vertical direction and your glide ratio can go up. Your mass to drag ratio moving forward is great than the mass to drag in the vertical direction, so you slow quicker vertically than horizontally, making the numbers look better. I say that based on practice with a Flysight and again, it was not a track for greatest time in the air but for forward speed, very aggressive. But as soon as I relaxed, the tone went up.
Instructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never looked at it like that and good to know when sifting through the gps data.

There was about a 15 second window near the end of the jump when I was adjusting my body to get a "higher tone"..... and got it by relaxing. The charts showed a small curve where vertical speed accelerated for 3 sec, followed by a sustained max GR and horizontal speed.

The second jump (which I though was the better of the two) was not as good, as I was working to maintain what I thought was a good body position.

Curious to know what kind of forward speed, GR, and total distance covered, other trackers have gotten using a Flysight.... slick or with a track suit. I thought I was killing it with my beer gut hangin in the wind, lol! Probably just wishful thinking on my part. :ph34r:

Sun, Fun, and Blue Ones


Respect Existence, Or Expect Resistance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a couple of specific solo jumps, one with a bit of a tail wind, and the other about 90 degrees to the upper level winds. Between those two, I have a fair idea of what my hard tracking looks like in an RW suit with booties.

I will PM you later, today or tomorrow.
Instructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dthames hows it going. I found the initial burn of altitude helped greatly as you mentioned.. I initially could not work out why my body\airframe was buffeting so much towards the end of the track duration without throwing in a bucket load of arch in the track, it was because of the loss of FORWARD airspeed in delta\track position due to drag and a crosswind I suspect.
My thoughts are that around every 3500ft, a drop down or altitude burn is necessary to maintain a good GR and forward airspeed, especially with a tracking suit on.

Edit: I may also have been buffeting from over speeding, Without the flysight I wont know.
"You'll shoot your eye out kid"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One can certainly get extra time tracking.

I have averaged a repeatable 76-78 mph* on my ProTrack graph, for long periods of straight line tracking. That's for 6'1", 150 lbs at the time (admittedly a good body for tracking), in a tight RW suit with no booties. On a jump with no turns,it was 73 sec from 10,300', and deployed by 1900'.

What those speeds translate into for time over the whole dive depends of course on exit & opening altitudes and to what degree one has to make turns to get home.

I use a pretty standard body position with palms down, legs slightly spread, toes pointed, arms next to the body, but haven't tried to optimize it.

I'm not sure about 'going steep before going flatter' in all of its interpretations, but it is certainly ok to angle a little steeper at the start -- after all, the airflow starts from directly below, so if you have some ideal angle of attack at .5 glide ratio, then to have the same angle of attack when starting, you would need to start off steeper.

Quote

The problem is..... time isn't a real good indicator of how well you're tracking... could be that you're just falling really slow.



True at times, but one isn't going to be falling really slow just by cupping and not moving forward. So getting slow freefall speeds is still some indication of getting some sort of good track going, whether or not one is differentiating between best glide angle and lowest sink rate in still air.


* ("SAS" value - adjusted to a standardized altitude, 3000' I think the device uses. Otherwise a couple mph more for true airspeed.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Edra

answer found, freakin sweet
http://realhumanfly.webnode.it/atmonauti/

sorry to post such a silly question geniuses. I should have known..:|



Well, that "atmo" site has been questioned, and the actual amount of "lift" generated has been debated at length.
Search "atmonauti" on here for some rather heated discussion.

And as was mentioned, the slowest fall rate may or may not produce the most efficient track. It depends on a lot of different things.

You may well try to simply fall at the slowest possible speed to extend your freefall time, but that would get boring because all you are doing is "getting big" and going as slow as you can, nothing else.

A ProTrack would be necessary to get even the most basic data, something like a Flysight would be better.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just responding in general.

Has anyone ever tried out-tracking a high break-off just for fun?

Here's what I mean. For example, you're on a 4 way with low time AFF Grad jumpers that want to break a 4 way at 4500-5000'. You humor them and agree to break off high. No, ... seriously, you're really going to break and leave at the agreed altitude, sort of...

The caveat is that I'm going vertical instead of horizontal! I did this for the first time in the late 90's. As we break, I do a rotating stand up and look up for the person with the flattest track. I then slam my hands to the bottom of my container and go head down in an instant.

I dive straight down for about 2-3 seconds and then pull out into a 'climbing' track flying slightly left or right of my victim. Their 'track' is usually so poor that you can actually fly underneath them and climb past them as they reach to deploy! A true Master Card moment as they make eye contact with you! :)
Cheers!

____________________________________
I'm back in the USA!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When I first got interested in tracking, I remember reading that RW jumpers recommended to de-arch and cup as much air as possible at break off (ride the beach ball) rather than dive and pull up out of a track.

One thing I have noticed from tracking in base (ceteris paribus)...the flatter the exit and the more de-arched the body the better the distance. It is fun to dive and swoop, but it does not produce the same distance. How that translates to a terminal environment, I don't know. I used to think that a steep angle at first was beneficial (airflow vertical, and high angle of attack = stall). Experience has not panned out in favor of that argument.

The pressurized kids did some wind tunnel tests. The highest angle of attack that they tested (30ish% to the relative airlfow) was the most efficient. Part of the drag apparently also ended up acting as lift (don't ask me how or why, that's just what I was told in conversation with one of the dudes).

On the other hand, in their tube3 demo video of brento they recommend diving a little before flattening out...this may be a trick to tame the suit instead of the most efficient technique for distance. If you have flown the tube3 you know why youd want to tame that beast.

The human body is a pretty shitty airfoil (very low aspect ratio) and probably has quite a long recovery arc. The best trackers I have seen, leave flat and are extremely de-arched (like a canopy in deep breaks?)

just some thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vertical speed = Horizontal speed.
The faster you fall the faster horizontal potential you have.

When I first started tracking I was going after max time, but you sacrifice forward speeds when doing this.

In my normal jumpsuit(tonysuit spacesuit) I've gotten 84 seconds from 13,700, deploying at 2,780 holding an average fall rate of 83mph.
Slowest avg fall rate I've obtained on this suit was 80mph, and slowest speed seen was 65mph on a dive with flare out.

Best time with a tracking suit:
118 seconds from 13,100, deploying at 2,000.
Avg speed of 63mph, min of 59mph, and max of 71mph.
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExlIwbHxTiY
I was going for max time, But because of this, I wasn't going very fast horizontally. The distance I covered was roughly 2 miles which means my horizontal speed was only around 50-60mph.

I only had the tracking suit for 10 or so jumps so didn't get a chance to try a dive and flare.

Learn to track steep. I went and did several solo angle tracking dives just to get comfortable with flying at such a high AoA/speed.

Also for reference I'm 5'9"(175cm) 130lbs(58kg)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Freeflaw

Part of the drag apparently also ended up acting as lift (don't ask me how or why, that's just what I was told in conversation with one of the dudes).

Drag is on the same axis as airflow. Lift is any force generated perpendicular to the air flow. I think they might have been talking about high alpha (angle of attack) vortex lift.

Check out the high alpha vortices on this bird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shredex


When I first started tracking I was going after max time, but you sacrifice forward speeds when doing this.


One thing to remember is that every flying body has, for a given weight, an airspeed that will yield the highest lift-to-drag ratio, or glide ratio. This speed, if held correctly, will get you the most distance traveled/ unit altitude. Faster than that and you will go less far. Same for slower. Pilots call it Vy. I'm always trying to find that sweet spot in the middle. Maybe I'll borrow some electronics to look for it. B|

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quagmirian

***Drag is on the same axis as airflow. Lift is any force generated perpendicular to the air flow.

Thank you. I see these terms misused a lot.

So do I.

I remember talking to a pilot one day about CG shift affecting the climb rate of the aircraft. As I stood next to the plane and talked about reducing induced drag of the tail plane, he said "Okay, now you're trying to confuse me with science." :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0