outlawphx 1 #1 June 6, 2006 How about a real strap-on wing Stealth Wings Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #2 June 6, 2006 Videos of it from 2001: http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php. Nothing is new... Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phoenixlpr 0 #3 June 6, 2006 Thats useless. A trooper does not jump/fly naked. Weapon? Backpack? A high glide(1:9-1:11) canopy is much better option, e.i. freefall deployable glider. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
outlawphx 1 #4 June 6, 2006 QuoteThats useless. A trooper does not jump/fly naked. Weapon? Backpack? A high glide(1:9-1:11) canopy is much better option, e.i. freefall deployable glider. Actually, the wing is a storage compartment as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
outlawphx 1 #5 June 6, 2006 QuoteVideos of it from 2001: http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php. Nothing is new... Dave I actually did a seach on it here before posting, but not on your site. Where is it on your site? I tried searching under "wing", but didn't find it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yossarian 0 #6 June 6, 2006 article says it can take an extra 200lbs of kit/weapons etc, seems like an ok idea to me, cant imagine 27,000ft of canopy control is much fun on the arms and its gotta be pretty nippy up there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LouDiamond 1 #7 June 6, 2006 All I can say is "don't believe the hype". I have commented on this subject in the wingsuit forum and other forums and I'll say it again here. That contraption is completely unfeasable, even if it does have a gear compartment. I did see mention of a 200lbs capacity in the article. Even if you can stuff 200lbs in the compartment, I call bullshit as there is no way you can tell me that it will fly correctly and that the weight will be distributed so guys can even stand up ,let alone walk down the ramp. Great idea and cool toy but a classic example of someone with no operational experience trying to make and market stuff that they have no idea about."It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required" Some people dream about flying, I live my dream SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #8 June 6, 2006 The defense department is so full of money designated for special-forces technology that they will buy 50 of these before they realize that they are useless. Especially if they have a buddy who is a contracting officer.... Zipp0 -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LouDiamond 1 #9 June 6, 2006 Quotethey will buy 50 of these before they realize that they are useless. Very unlikely. Those news releases are from the manufacturers not from any government as far as I can tell. Believe it or not, anyone thats ever been a paratrooper would tell you that device has no practical application and we do have people at the decission making level that have enough common sense to pass on that one. In fact, they did at last years PIA where it was showcased. But it would look cool in a James Bond type of movie where you don't have to contend with reality."It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required" Some people dream about flying, I live my dream SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #10 June 6, 2006 Quote But it would look cool in a James Bond type of movie where you don't have to contend with reality. That's the first thing I thought when I saw it Add jet power for extra credit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nathaniel 0 #11 June 6, 2006 Quote But it would look cool in a James Bond type of movie where you don't have to contend with reality. How awesome would it be if paratroopers could be dispensed like bomblets from a clusterbomb just scaled up a bit. That would make for an awesome hollywood shot, kinda like the intro movie to quake2 except with wings My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #12 June 6, 2006 Quoteand we do have people at the decission making level that have enough common sense to pass on that one. Really? Where? I can point you to dozens of pieces of shit our government has bought over the years. Or they spend 25 million and then cancel the project.... Zipp0 Here's a good one(common sense? ): http://historynet.com/ahi/blbatnbirdbomber/index.html -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr17Hz 1 #13 June 6, 2006 QuoteThe defense department is so full of money designated for special-forces technology that they will buy 50 of these before they realize that they are useless. Especially if they have a buddy who is a contracting officer.... Zipp0 I don't know why everyone on this forum is jumping so quickly to assume that there is no way this could work... If it can be done with one person one time over the english channel with no baggage, why can't it be improved? problems with exit? What is stopping the government from designing a plane or modifying an existing plan to make exiting these easier by ejecting them horizontally? Problems with taking up too much weight? What is stopping them from creating airodynamic baggage, or making the wing a few feet wider? Problems controlling the wing? What is stopping them from using solid-state gyroscopes to computer control the flaps on the wings, to force an unstable pilot stable and to force the wing at an angle that generates the best lift? I recall seeing a popular science or popular mechanics magazine around a year ago that had a special on unmanned spyplanes... most of them are not very wide at all, and carry a lot of weight in equipment, equipment with camera and other sensor equpiment that needs to be on a circular mount on the bottom of the craft to support 180 degree movement. If we can launch missles that can fly and navigate by themselves why couldn't we become part of that missle? Sure, all of this initially means very little for the skydiving community, because the costs involved are just too high; but there should be no reason why a $150,000 - $2,000,000 wearable ring would not work to deploy soilders behind enemy lines. Pass or fail, it is "crazy" and "impractical" ideas like this that have put all of us in the sky... Where do you think skydiving would be today if it wasn't for government money? Would there have been enough demand for a plane like the twin otter if government money wasn't funding scientific experiments in the arctic circle, and require a rugged smaller plane to get equipment in and out of tight spots, but still make it further on a tank of gas than a helicopter? Would there be enough suplus equipment and expeirenced jumpers coming out of the service to make the sport a sport, instead of a daredevil stunt? What do you think test pilots said the first time they heard the goverment was goign to use parachutes to deploy vehicles and people into war?Matt Christenson [email protected] http://www.RealDropzone.com - A new breed of dropzone manifest software. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,047 #14 June 6, 2006 Hi Matt, Well put. Yup, I'm an engineer. Jerry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #15 June 6, 2006 Oh, no doubt it could be done. Spend enough money and you can do just about anything. Although, it seems that when done they will basically have a single seat jet, which already exist. Seems like a solution to a non-existent problem. -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 3 #16 June 6, 2006 QuoteHi Matt, Well put. Yup, I'm an engineer. Jerry Jerry, They claim a glide ratio of 6:1. "moving six feet forward through the air for every one foot he fell vertically –" There is a HAHO canopy available that has a 6:1 glide ratio and I think would be easier to work with. PARIS/Hi Glide They also claim they can glide 120 miles. "The lightweight carbon fibre mono-wings will allow them to jump from high altitudes and then glide 120 miles or more before landing" With a 6:1 ratio you would have to exit around 105,000 feet to travel 120 miles. As Scott said I think this article would fall under the heading of “Press Release” by the manufacture and not hard news.My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lilchief 0 #17 June 6, 2006 I think manufactors shoul massproduce them to skydivers and attach paintball markers on them and we all could have a dogfight over a case of beer skyhigh Or we could arrange picnics with airsafari. You just stash tent, food and beer, raw eggs and flour in the cargocompartments.. I should really just go to bed... too mutch bullshit on me...haha. "Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been and there you long to return." - Da Vinci www.lilchief.no Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LouDiamond 1 #18 June 6, 2006 QuoteI don't know why everyone on this forum is jumping so quickly to assume that there is no way this could work Well take it for what it is worth, I AM one of the guys they claim would use this device and I have been doing this type of stuff for more than a day now. I know what I need to do my job and I know what type of environment I find myself in when I am doing my job and I know the type of people I work with. Based on my REAL WORLD experience and knowledge I can tell you unequivocally that the device pictured does not and will not find a place in the US military and I'd also go so far as to say, any other governments toy box. Its a very cool device and a bit of a technical showcase but ultimately, its a toy built to be used by people like Felix."It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required" Some people dream about flying, I live my dream SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SWATcop 0 #19 June 7, 2006 That's the first thing I thought when I saw it Add jet power for extra credit. *** It is supposed to have jet power according to the article. http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/gryphon-singleman-flying-wing-177606.php Here is a better pic of it from the rear attached. You can see the gear inside it.Kevin Muff Brother #4041 Team Dirty Sanchez #467 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LouDiamond 1 #20 June 7, 2006 QuoteYou can see the gear inside it. I hope I see the day when all 100 + lbs of gear plus the weapon I have to carry fits in a compartment that small and square."It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required" Some people dream about flying, I live my dream SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SWATcop 0 #21 June 7, 2006 Yeah, LOL. You would definitely have to travel light to use this thing. I sure don't see a ruck going in there anywhere. I would think getting the CG right would be critical. I don't see this thing getting past the experimental stage.Kevin Muff Brother #4041 Team Dirty Sanchez #467 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
squirrel 0 #22 June 7, 2006 yeah, but remember "star wars"? how much did we spend on that? ________________________________ Where is Darwin when you need him? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 3 #23 June 7, 2006 QuoteI don't know why everyone on this forum is jumping so quickly to assume that there is no way this could work... If it can be done with one person one time over the english channel with no baggage, why can't it be improved? Quote Because some of the people on this forum have a realistic idea of what is needed for Spec. Ops. Teams to go in harms way. And this neat little toy is not it. Would you like to try jumping this thing carrying this kind of load? See Attachment:My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites damion75 0 #24 June 7, 2006 Quote I don't know why everyone on this forum is jumping so quickly to assume that there is no way this could work... If it can be done with one person one time over the english channel with no baggage, why can't it be improved? I'm not an engineer, so whether or not it could be done is not something I am qualified to look at, but I do question the value of it... because I am an Anti Aircraft missile instructor. The point of the HAHO insertion is that it is very difficult (not impossible) to pick up canopies on radar, hence the stealth insertion. Picking up these solid wings, no matter how much RAM they build onto them, is not nearly so difficult, so you lose the benefits of a stealthy insertion. So why do it?*************** Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lok 0 #25 June 7, 2006 In my opinion there are many reasons, that these wings haven’t anything to offer for Special Forces Operations. At this point I totally agree to what Loudiamond, SWATCOP and Zipp0 said before. First of all the only reason these wings could be used is as alternative to today HAHO operations (not HALO). HALO/HAHO parachuting has seen little combat action from 1960..... Practically the only real action behind enemy lines was that of MACV-SOG on VIETNAM and Rhodesian SAS on the bush war 1970-80 in Mozambique, and were only HALO operations ....the majority of which were unsuccessful. That hasn’t anything to do with brave operators of US and Rhodesian Special Forces but for other factors that went wrong. I have done my national service in Special Forces, and what I remember? Is that HAHO exercises every time went wrong? It was particular difficult for a 4 men team to keep contact in Night and with weather condition changed continuously, nearly impossible both 4 team members land in the same Landing area with little separation between them. And all Special Forces operators, in now days have GPS and multiple compass systems to always check their route......but as I said weather and wind conditions on various altitudes play significant role for the success of the operation. So I believe that with these wings with Jet engines, would be impossible for a recon team To infiltrate with precision behind enemy lines, 200km away from the exit point. Sometimes supersophisticate modern Fighter aircrafts make wrong navigation on a 200km range target (on combat situation). I can’t understand how a parachutist could navigate this thing with precision on night and close with other team members? Also this would be superexpensive method for 4 men recon team to go behind enemy lines, through these wings (with jet engines) immediately after landing must be destroyed so the enemy could not find them. For mass dropping again is financially impossible to drop one battalion of paratroopers with these wings and the same happens with Civilian Jumpers (Skydivers). I must say also that HAHO/HALO technique-training is used today mainly as an experience and ‘built of character’ for Special Forces team around the world, rather than an infiltration technique. Helicopter Low altitude operation is the most secure infiltration and recovery technique for special forces today…..and the revolution in this sector will came with the introduction in service of tilt-rotor aircraft V-22 (which only the U.S.S.O.COM and MARINE corps are financially capable to acquit at the moment). Military parachuting will continue to exist as low altitude 300-900ft (LALO) mass dropping operations from DC-3, C-27, C-160, C-130, C-17 and other military Jump ships. HAHO/HALO technique may see some improvement in the future with the new TANDEM military systems, which help one 4 men team to infiltrate with only two parachutes, and is not necessary both 4-men team to be qualified in Free-Fall. http://www.skydivewithjohn.com/word_docs/History%20of%20HALO%20Operations.doc http://www.recipeland.com:8080/facts/images/1/1e/HALO_Jump_Congo_Packman_Yuma_Proving_Ground_%28thumbnail%29.jpg http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showpost.php?p=702883&postcount=1 http://www.batnet.com/mfwright/miljump.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 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. 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. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
damion75 0 #24 June 7, 2006 Quote I don't know why everyone on this forum is jumping so quickly to assume that there is no way this could work... If it can be done with one person one time over the english channel with no baggage, why can't it be improved? I'm not an engineer, so whether or not it could be done is not something I am qualified to look at, but I do question the value of it... because I am an Anti Aircraft missile instructor. The point of the HAHO insertion is that it is very difficult (not impossible) to pick up canopies on radar, hence the stealth insertion. Picking up these solid wings, no matter how much RAM they build onto them, is not nearly so difficult, so you lose the benefits of a stealthy insertion. So why do it?*************** Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lok 0 #25 June 7, 2006 In my opinion there are many reasons, that these wings haven’t anything to offer for Special Forces Operations. At this point I totally agree to what Loudiamond, SWATCOP and Zipp0 said before. First of all the only reason these wings could be used is as alternative to today HAHO operations (not HALO). HALO/HAHO parachuting has seen little combat action from 1960..... Practically the only real action behind enemy lines was that of MACV-SOG on VIETNAM and Rhodesian SAS on the bush war 1970-80 in Mozambique, and were only HALO operations ....the majority of which were unsuccessful. That hasn’t anything to do with brave operators of US and Rhodesian Special Forces but for other factors that went wrong. I have done my national service in Special Forces, and what I remember? Is that HAHO exercises every time went wrong? It was particular difficult for a 4 men team to keep contact in Night and with weather condition changed continuously, nearly impossible both 4 team members land in the same Landing area with little separation between them. And all Special Forces operators, in now days have GPS and multiple compass systems to always check their route......but as I said weather and wind conditions on various altitudes play significant role for the success of the operation. So I believe that with these wings with Jet engines, would be impossible for a recon team To infiltrate with precision behind enemy lines, 200km away from the exit point. Sometimes supersophisticate modern Fighter aircrafts make wrong navigation on a 200km range target (on combat situation). I can’t understand how a parachutist could navigate this thing with precision on night and close with other team members? Also this would be superexpensive method for 4 men recon team to go behind enemy lines, through these wings (with jet engines) immediately after landing must be destroyed so the enemy could not find them. For mass dropping again is financially impossible to drop one battalion of paratroopers with these wings and the same happens with Civilian Jumpers (Skydivers). I must say also that HAHO/HALO technique-training is used today mainly as an experience and ‘built of character’ for Special Forces team around the world, rather than an infiltration technique. Helicopter Low altitude operation is the most secure infiltration and recovery technique for special forces today…..and the revolution in this sector will came with the introduction in service of tilt-rotor aircraft V-22 (which only the U.S.S.O.COM and MARINE corps are financially capable to acquit at the moment). Military parachuting will continue to exist as low altitude 300-900ft (LALO) mass dropping operations from DC-3, C-27, C-160, C-130, C-17 and other military Jump ships. HAHO/HALO technique may see some improvement in the future with the new TANDEM military systems, which help one 4 men team to infiltrate with only two parachutes, and is not necessary both 4-men team to be qualified in Free-Fall. http://www.skydivewithjohn.com/word_docs/History%20of%20HALO%20Operations.doc http://www.recipeland.com:8080/facts/images/1/1e/HALO_Jump_Congo_Packman_Yuma_Proving_Ground_%28thumbnail%29.jpg http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showpost.php?p=702883&postcount=1 http://www.batnet.com/mfwright/miljump.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
