0
ianmdrennan

Nick Batsh 220m Swoop Video

Recommended Posts

Quote

Still...you can't argue that you won't go much further with a 6.7 meter per second tailwind than you would with no wind.



I'm not arguing that. What i'm saying is that it doesn't scale and you cant just take the difference of a downwind and no wind and say that's what it would be in a headwind. It'll be more stretched out on the back end with a tail wind, and compressed on the front end with a head wind. In a 6.7 mps headwind you're effectively not going to cover any distance at all over the ground for your last 3+ seconds of flight (since your ground speed will be zero - even though the canopy can keep flying). In the downwind scenarios you're still moving at 20 mph+ for those last 3 seconds.

Hell, I could be wrong - it's happened before :)

So, lets assume a benchmark that we're able to generate 80 mph of airspeed and a min of 5mph (touchdown) over 10 seconds

No Wind Scenario: Pilot flies for 10 seconds over the ground, from 80-5 before touching down. Ground and airspeed match.

Downwind (15 mph): Pilot flies for 10 seconds over the ground, from 95-20 mph GROUNDSPEED before touching down. (airspeed is same as no wind).

Headwind (15mph): Pilot flies for 7-8 seconds over the ground, from 65-0 mph GROUNDSPEED before touching down. (airspeed is same as no wind BUT but pilot reaches 0 ground speed while still having airspeed to keep flying).

Ian
Performance Designs Factory Team

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As the time you spend in the air is only equal to the time from entering the gates until you start flying backwards(!), the time in the air will be shorter for a headwind run compared to a tailwind run.

The extra airtime will both let the tailwind push you further and your canopy fly further. That's why you will see a bigger difference than the just calculated one.

/Stefan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The extra airtime will both let the tailwind push you further and your canopy fly further. That's why you will see a bigger difference than the just calculated one.



Tailwind doesnt push you. At all.

Doesnt really matter, wind or no wind. He's Nick James, Batch!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Downwind (15 mph): Pilot flies for 10 seconds over the ground, from 95-20 mph GROUNDSPEED before touching down. (airspeed is same as no wind).

Headwind (15mph): Pilot flies for 7-8 seconds over the ground, from 65-0 mph GROUNDSPEED before touching down. (airspeed is same as no wind BUT but pilot reaches 0 ground speed while still having airspeed to keep flying).
Ian


You're right Ian, air time will be shorter in the headwind scenario so the distance will be less. I happily stand corrected.
PS: Unless I'm also mistaking here, the headwind starting speed should be 80 rather than 65 or am I missing something else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It may be true that you have no groundspeed for the last few seconds when swooping into a strong headwind, but we are really talking about distance here. It doesn't matter if the last three seconds are at zero groundspeed; what matters is how far you went over the ground.

The difference between airspeed and groundspeed is the windspeed, you add windspeed to airspeed to get groundspeed. The distance coverd in the swoop that can be attributed to wind is the windspeed multiplied by the duration of the swoop. It doesn't matter if three seconds of the swoop are at zero groundspeed, they still count in terms of swoop duration. In your example above you still spend 10 seconds swooping, it's just the last three have zero groundspeed.

Again, this all assumes the pilot does everything the same no matter what the wind, which I don't think is true. Take a strong crosswind...in order to fly straight through the course, you have to turn into the wind, which means the canopy will have a roll angle. At the same time, you probably have to add more tail input to keep from sinking, since the canopy isn't straight over head. This additional control input means the canopy is banked and pitched and flying in a dirtier configuration than it would be in no wind conditions.

Point is, wind does change things, strong winds change things a lot. It isnt quite as simple as adding windspeed, but it's a good 1st-order approximation.


"Holy s*** that was f***in' cold!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

It doesn't matter if three seconds of the swoop are at zero groundspeed, they still count in terms of swoop duration. In your example above you still spend 10 seconds swooping, it's just the last three have zero groundspeed.



This isn't true. Once your forward speed matches the tail wind speed, you will either have to touch down, or you will start flying backwards. You are assuming that your canopy will maintain the same speed as the headwind during the last seconds of the swoop which isn't correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

It doesn't matter if three seconds of the swoop are at zero groundspeed, they still count in terms of swoop duration. In your example above you still spend 10 seconds swooping, it's just the last three have zero groundspeed.



This isn't true. Once your forward speed matches the tail wind speed, you will either have to touch down, or you will start flying backwards. You are assuming that your canopy will maintain the same speed as the headwind during the last seconds of the swoop which isn't correct.



You misunderstood him, he was talking about a headwindscenario. You are saying that once your forwardspeed (=groundspeed) matches the tailwindspeed, you will have ... to touch down ... this is correct as once your forwardgroundspeed matches the speed of the tailwind, your airspeed would be zero and your wing would have already stopped flying... but he was talking about a headwindscenario. With the groundspeed being zero, the airspeed would still be the speed of the wind (the air, therefore called airspeed :-) ) and as long as the windspeed is faster then your wings stallspeed, you´ll keep flying. The groundspeed being zero it will look like hovering, but from an "air-point-of-view" it´s not what is is....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

It doesn't matter if three seconds of the swoop are at zero groundspeed, they still count in terms of swoop duration. In your example above you still spend 10 seconds swooping, it's just the last three have zero groundspeed.



This isn't true. Once your forward speed matches the tail wind speed, you will either have to touch down, or you will start flying backwards. You are assuming that your canopy will maintain the same speed as the headwind during the last seconds of the swoop which isn't correct.



You misunderstood him, he was talking about a headwindscenario. You are saying that once your forwardspeed (=groundspeed) matches the tailwindspeed, you will have ... to touch down ... this is correct as once your forwardgroundspeed matches the speed of the tailwind, your airspeed would be zero and your wing would have already stopped flying... but he was talking about a headwindscenario. With the groundspeed being zero, the airspeed would still be the speed of the wind (the air, therefore called airspeed :-) ) and as long as the windspeed is faster then your wings stallspeed, you´ll keep flying. The groundspeed being zero it will look like hovering, but from an "air-point-of-view" it´s not what is is....



Please read again.
What I said was that once your canopy's forward speed (ground speed is irrelevant as the canopy is just a wing flying through a block of air (which happens to be moving either in the direction of the course (tailwind) or towards the gates (headwind).
It is true that you can keep your canopy (wing) flying for the same duration of time regardless of the direction of the wind, however, with a headwind, the last portion of the flight will actually be going backwards. (As the block of air is moving faster towards the gates than your wing is penetrating through it)

What you are saying regarding hovering will only be true for the short duration where the airspeed of your wing will be equal to the ground speed of the air. Unless your stall speed of your canopy is higher than 6.7 m/s, you must agree that you lost some of the wings airtime from the portion where the wing was still flying, but not able to penetrate the wind?

/Stefan
ps. No, I dont expect to get laid from this, but I do hope for Ian to get some rectification(?) B|

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you perform your swoop in the same manner regardless of wind then your distance in different wind is simple math

D0 (your distance at zero wind) - Ws (wind speed) * t (time from plainout point till touchdown)

Just draw your swoop relative to the air (or to the ground when wind is 0) and shift all the picture for Ws*t forward or backward

P/S in this matter D0 is distance beetween plainout point or from the gates if you pass them at plainout)
Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This Petra canopy reminds me of the Ozone Bullet planform, but crossbraced. Will the next gen hp canopies become more like speedfly wings I wonder?
Life is ez
On the dz
Every jumper's dream
3 rigs and an airstream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For the math to work you need to keep the duration of flight the same even if that means flying backwards for part of the swoop. However, this is a moot point. I think you will find it very hard to fly backwards under a competition wing within competition wind limits. Even if you pull off that trick I doubt you will go back more than a few feet so the difference will be negligible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

This Petra canopy reminds me of the Ozone Bullet planform, but crossbraced. Will the next gen hp canopies become more like speedfly wings I wonder?



.????

The Petra may have an obvious ellipse, but it's design is nothing like the bullet, or most any paraglider based speed wing.

Bullets have a symmetric ellipse, taking advantage of both leading edge and trailing edge curves. The Petra has a very leading edge dominant ellipse.

From what I understand the Petra is a completely new planform.

-SPACE-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is impressive. I regret to say that not being current has prevented myself from following the competitive swooping scene these last few years. I have been busy doing this and this which offers a similar adrenaline rush to swooping. But they are far less likely to bite me in the rear end regarding lack of currency. As great as swooping is, you really need to be ultra current to be flying the bed sheets.

I know Nick has been going horizontal on his distance runs for a few years now, but I see he has influenced others and they are trying to emulate him as well. But Nick does appear to have the technique down better than most. It must suck to be a real Big Boy these days in the distance swooping event as their bellies are too big and their ballast must get all messed up if they could even rotate horizontally the way Nick rotates.

Keep up the good work guys. As I said, very impressive. ;)


Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

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.

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