Apache X

[jeb 0]

I am flying two GPS systems and they both say the apache is a fast suit :) on the same jump one says I enter the crack at 135mph the other says I enter at 120mph (horizontal speed) :) I think I trust the flysight a bit more then my GPS goggles :) Flysight says 120mph :) But either way, it's very fast :) I did 4 flights through the crack over the last 3 days and all the flights have basically the same data. High speed entering the crack with slower speeds leaving the crack to landing area. There was zero wind to a slight head wind. Glides are in the 3.5 to 1 range from crack exit to opening :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9fPhUmt4rQ

[NoValidTitle 0]

Holy crap.

Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood.

[Deniq 0]

Quote

Glides are in the 3.5 to 1 range from crack exit to opening :)

As peak or continuous?
Could you please post here picture from Paralog with vert./horiz. speeds and glide ratio?

[jeb 0]

Here you go...

[mccordia 73]

a 3.5 glide is not uncommon after a 30 second dive to to get to the crack...?

Seems like results pretty much comparable with other big suits. Picking up speed when diving, but in general the 'fast' comes from the dive preceding the flare/transition to full flight. At least thats what the graph is showing...

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[jeb 0]

Actually the flare slows me down. I was doing 120 in the dive to the crack and through it. When I do the flare and get the above 3 to 1 glide for the rest of the flight my forward speed slows down to the mid to hi 80s. Plus it's not just a flare and then stall out. It's a flare that then stays above 3 to 1 till I open :) The distance from the crack to the landing area is quite far :) The distance from where you leave the crack to where you open is .91 miles :)

[mccordia 73]

Quote

I was doing 120 in the dive to the crack and through it

Which is what I said....diving to get the speed. Not actual sustained forward speed in full flight.

Quote

Plus it's not just a flare and then stall out

I think anything preceeded by a dive can be concidered a flare.
The fact that you dont push it to a stall-out doesnt mean its not a dive/flare.

Ive gotten up to 7:1 glide ratios after diving, and the flare after a dive can easily last up to 40 or even 50 seconds before the suit finaly eases back into normal/sustained full flight performance.

Its all incredible vallues, but with extreme peaks due to dives its hard to impossible to quote the numbers as overal vallues for 'fast' or 'slow'.
The Venom is a slow carpet as well, but when diving you can get 200 mph forward speeds out of it. Does that make the suit 'fast'? Peak vallues are incredible fun to quote, but far from fair/representable numbers on performance.

Be it with the dive 'poluting' the results, the paralog performance competition is (I think) the closest we can get to getting 'some' numbers on sustained suit performance (your score is also in there).

If we would make a seperate competition, that didnt allow diving and perhaps used a larged competition altitude (3,5 km to 1,5 km) we could actually get the numbers people could quote as sustainable performance.
But interest for that one seems low, and the marketing related high performance numbers are always much more fun to throw around

That aside..the balloon stuff is cool. Any specific reason for that one?
As I recall seeing a tethered balloon setup as part of your landing project as well to guide you to the landing area/angle?

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[Deniq 0]

Quote

Actually the flare slows me down. I was doing 120 in the dive to the crack and through it. When I do the flare and get the above 3 to 1 glide for the rest of the flight my forward speed slows down to the mid to hi 80s. Plus it's not just a flare and then stall out. It's a flare that then stays above 3 to 1 till I open :) The distance from the crack to the landing area is quite far :) The distance from where you leave the crack to where you open is .91 miles :)

I am agreed with mccordia.
You fly in the crack with ~120 mph (190 km/h) forward speed and after this bracke till ~75 mph (120 km/h).
Jeb, yours data looks like swoop with a small canopy:
1st step - ~40 seconds acceleration in the crack with high fallrate, glide ratio about 1,8-2,0.
2nd step - ~20 seconds swoop with huge glide ratio.

The same effect use the people in skydive competitions like "Wings over Gransee".
Just see here one example: http://www.paralog.net/ppc/getdata.php?trackid=742&filename=Chart.png.
Helmut's peak for glide ratio is here about 9:1

Jeb, glide ratio maximizing for 10-20 seconds is more easier then continuous flying with good performance more then 1 minute

[piisfish 135]

Quote

Jeb, glide ratio maximizing for 10-20 seconds is more easier then continuous flying with good performance more then 1 minute

yeah, but then he wouldn't be flying the Crack

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[LukeH 0]

Dude, once could be a mistake or over enthusiasm. But three times recently you are posting fairytale numbers, supposedly backed up by GPS and graphs.

Glad you are having fun flying your suit, but maybe take a math 101 class on reading graphs and calculating averages before making anymore misleading claims.

This style of suit has been slow in all previous iterations, the only obvious change is the usual - add surface area (and remove drag from chest drag). If this style of suit is now suddenly faster how was this achieved? Prove me wrong, I'd be glad to be wrong and find a suit that had the performance being claimed.

Between these claims and the sped up video clips posted by others it's obvious that a lot of effort is going into changing the perception of these suits.

Try another tack, a slow large floaty suit has advantages. It will benefit more from thermals and tail winds. That's a style of flying some people may prefer - nothing wrong with it. Think para-glider V speed-wing.

I've seen Apache, X-Bird and others flown first hand, and they look noticeably slower to me.

[maretus 0]

Quote

The distance from the crack to the landing area is quite far :) The distance from where you leave the crack to where you open is .91 miles :)

If my math serves me right .91 miles is 1.46 kilometers (the thingies we use here in euroland to calculate distances you know). I do not know where you openen on this particular flight but the distance from the grassy "shoulder" on left on the exit of the crack to the intersection of the roads in the closest corner of the upper landing area is about 750m (that is 0.46 miles) and the distance from the point where the crack starts to "open" and turns maybe 30 deg to right to the same point in landing area is 940m (0.58miles).

1.46km from either of these points would put you pretty much between the upper landing area and the PG landing area in the city, the distance from the grassy shoulder on the exit of the crack to the landing area in the city is 1650m (1.02mi) and from the upper point of the crack where it starts to open up it is about 1850m (1.15 miles).

As far as I have seen your videos you have been landing on the upper landing area where most of the people land after flying the line through the crack. I have also seen this spring couple of really good flyers fly it all the way to the lower landing area after flying the line through the crack. For me this is pretty impressive feat since the vertical difference between the bottom of the crack and the landing area in the city is about 600m with the distance of 1850m. This would yield over 3:1 GR for this part of the flight (since you neeed some room for opening as well although you most likely are flying also a bit above the bottom of the crack). This of course for a good pilot is achievable by using the speed gathered on the dive through the crack to make a gigantic flare.

http://www.ufufreefly.com

[LukeH 0]

Not sure where the distance for this claim came from, but for a previous claim, it looks like it was the ruler tool in google earth used against the 3d track of the flight which will I think will give an exaggerated figure.

[Deniq 0]

Jeb, I copy here sentence from the topic for BIRDDOCTOR:

My special proposal for you: go in August to Europa for "Hungarian Competition" (10-14 August) or "Wings over Gransee" (26-28 August) and show your really performance at the same weather conditions with others in fair contest.
1st place at "Wings over Gransee" and yours flight to Europa is for free (1000 Euro prize money).

[maretus 0]

Quote

Not sure where the distance for this claim came from, but for a previous claim, it looks like it was the ruler tool in google earth used against the 3d track of the flight which will I think will give an exaggerated figure.

I took the values with a distance tool in another map service. See the attachement.

http://www.ufufreefly.com

[LukeH 0]

I believe your figures. I was talking about Jebs claims.

Rules on map software can be used accurately, but I think they can also give inaccurate results if not used properly.

[jeb 0]

Last year I landed at the top landing area only twice out of 9 flights 7 of which were through the crack. This year so far I did 4 flights through the crack landing at the bottom landing area all 4 times and pulling super high over the middle of it. I was proximity flying the last little grass knoll as you exit the crack on the left side. I have no other way to judge the distance then using google earth and calculating my line through there. My flight is not a strait shot from the crack to landing zone. I do it in an arched turn :)

I will be more then happy to fly with any of you who come over to europe. I will be here till Oct :) I am not in any competition with anyone. I am just flying and having fun. Playing with the GPS and looking at data trying to understand what it is saying :)

When I say this suit is fast I am not comparing it to anyone else's flights but my own. Compared to the flights I was getting in my classic, skyflyers 1,2,3,4, Stealth, X wing, ghost, phantom 2, sugar glider, GSII and V1/V3 its faster for me. Not really to sure how it compares to what you guys are getting. But then again I am not competing with you guys :) I already know I am not the best nor am I the fastest. But I sure am having fun all the same...

Jeb

[maretus 0]

Quote

Last year I landed at the top landing area only twice out of 9 flights 7 of which were through the crack. This year so far I did 4 flights through the crack landing at the bottom landing area all 4 times and pulling super high over the middle of it. I was proximity flying the last little grass knoll as you exit the crack on the left side. I have no other way to judge the distance then using google earth and calculating my line through there. My flight is not a strait shot from the crack to landing zone. I do it in an arched turn :)

I will be more then happy to fly with any of you who come over to europe. I will be here till Oct :) I am not in any competition with anyone. I am just flying and having fun. Playing with the GPS and looking at data trying to understand what it is saying :)

When I say this suit is fast I am not comparing it to anyone else's flights but my own. Compared to the flights I was getting in my classic, skyflyers 1,2,3,4, Stealth, X wing, ghost, phantom 2, sugar glider, GSII and V1/V3 its faster for me. Not really to sure how it compares to what you guys are getting. But then again I am not competing with you guys :) I already know I am not the best nor am I the fastest. But I sure am having fun all the same...

Jeb

Hi Jeb,

the flight you have posted in the attachement shows landing in a field which is NOT official landing area. Please read the sign posted up to the exit by the locals showing the designated landing fields. Use either the higher LZ or the one further up on the town. One mamber of our local crew landed on that field on your attachement and had a very unfriendly discussion with a local citizen after it.

I always land up since I suck and cannot make the lower one. Maybe I should consider tony suit... :D

Edited to add : I have nothing against your performance numbers and I do not say you are giving out fake claims. I personally know I'm very much an average WS pilot and I'm having fun on my own skill level. It's also amazing to see some of the better flyers do their thing. Regarding performance numbers, I really have no clue and personally don't even give a f*ck. I've never flown with GPS and most likely never will since I really do not care about the numbers. Like Douggs once said, at the end of the day the best base jumper is the one who has most fun. :)

http://www.ufufreefly.com

[mccordia 73]

I think the wording on the facebook/dropzone/bjumper forums/website read very different from the last message you write here.
Nobody is beating you down for the fact that you're not the fastest man on the planet.

They are simply saying the conclusions you draw based on the numbers you posted are not fully correct ones when it comes to the stuff you write...

Id heavily recommend you do attend some of the performance competitions, as most people dont attend those to learn how they rank compared to other. Most people go there to further learn, understand the GPS tools, data and (based on how other fly) learn to improve their own flying. Both Hungary and Germany (Gransee) are competitions where you'd learn a ton about those aspects of your flying.

It would change it from 'trying to understand what its saying' to 'understanding what its saying'

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[unclecharlie95 3]

Great video and sweet flying Jeb, thanks for sharing.

BASEstore.it

[LukeH 0]

If you want to know the true distance you have covered, the GPS data from your flysight is probably the most accurate way. The problem with using the ruler in google earth is you are measuring between points at different altitudes in a 3d model so are probably measuring more than just the horizontal distance between those points.

Paralog will give you the information you are looking for.

If you say you are not in competition with anyone I believe you. Neither am I (I'd regard myself as an average flyer at best).

But you are the one that is choosing to post these claimed GR and claim no dive etc . Why? Even after you got the first one quite wrong, you posted another claim of even higher performance on facebook shortly after, and this on two forums. You actions don't seem to reflect the post above.

I have no problem with someone being a great flyer, or any suit that has great performance (or not so great). I do have a problem with the constant flow of false\distorted data about certain suits being portrayed as fact.

Why claim the GR is not the result of a dive and then post a graph that clearly shows it is? None of this is personally aimed at you Jeb, others are doing the same.

Enjoy your flights, I hope you benefit from continued publicity and it helps with your future projects, but please try to be a bit more accurate when quoting figures, you have the right tools to be accurate there is no excuse really.

[jeb 0]

Dude,

this will be the last time I respond to you, ever. But you are placing words on the page that I didn't write. In the posts I have placed on this thread i never claimed to not be diving before the good glide. I actually say I was diving into the crack at high speed then flaring out. I then just point out I hold a better then 3 to 1 till I open. What part of any of that is inaccurate? It's exactly what the GPS data says. Plus the data of my flight in google is from my flysight. I exported it to a klm file and opened it in google earth placing the little red line showing my exact flight path. Have a good one and you don't have to talk to me any more because I will not be talking back :)

Jeb

[LukeH 0]

That's fine. I didn't said it was in this post, I mentioned and was referring to various claims. Attached is where you said no dive, there is\was a graph that showed what looks like a dive. No worries, take care.

[jeb 0]

Here is the flight: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UueIPoxf_Y&feature=relmfu

So where exactly did this dive happen that took my glide over 3 to 1? If your going to try and tare down a persons credibility, be right...

Now this really is the last time I respond to you :)

Jeb

P.S. I am only not going to respond to you on line :) But if I see you in person feel free to come up to me and lets do a jump together :) I will gladly fly the water fall with you or any other exit point around the world.

[Mac 1]

Quote

That's fine. I didn't said it was in this post, I mentioned and was referring to various claims. Attached is where you said no dive, there is\was a graph that showed what looks like a dive. No worries, take care.

This thread turned into a read between the lines, and have a pop at Jeb from the start. You are now posting a FB post, about another jump, unrelated to this thread, and that was the foundation of how this thread went.

I went to post earlier to this thread but deleted it, as I thought it would sort itself out, but this picture just made me laugh.

FFS, the guy put some "facts" about what happened, without any claims as far as I read them in this post. You all read between the lines, and went for him. For what its worth, I am not a Jeb groupie (in fact I disagree with somethings he has done), I just feel the ripping that this thread went into, was unjustified.

In the end, who gives a flying fuckidy fuck, just jump, have fun, and be nice to each other... Lifes too short for this picky unimportant shit...

-Me

PS) Not completly directed at you, as most people on this thread went between the lines.

[piisfish 135]

Quote

In the end, who gives a flying fuckidy fuck, just jump, have fun, and be nice to each other... Lifes too short for this picky unimportant shit...

yup, seems Jeb is having fun, providing data, sharing his love for the Crack....
thanks Jeb for the post.

Everybody have fun

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM