LeeroyJenkins

Yuri, you have to prove the WSE are correct. The burden of proof is on you. I have asked you multiple times what the significance of your "Magic" L/D numbers are and you continue to fail to answer.

Dude, are you ok.... like mentally?

Dude, What does this have to do with you coming up with some revolutionary wingsuit equations? It's hard to keep track of the point of this thread with you posting all sorts of nonsense. You fail yet again to answer simple questions? What is you fastest wingsuit flight?

Hey Yuri, What's your highest performance wingsuit flight. Starting to get the feeling you aren't very good and want to blame the suit instead of the pilot. Your ego is so big you invented equations to make yourself feel better because all those MWS are keeping you down.

The Grand Inquisitor These weak men can only kneel to Authority they worship. They can't accept the Truth presented by one of their peers. They can't handle the Truth. Such shame! PS. Haha, found even a better quote from the genius: Whats your wing loading when you include the weight of your ego? But really, if wingsuit manufactures posted the same nonsense you did, people like aonsquared and I would still criticize them. One thing I do know however, the aerospace engineers that work to design these suits understand aerodynamics way more than you do. You can't even answer simple questions because you know the answer will undo your theories.

Platypii, I think you need to step back here and look at your logical reasoning. You made a hypothesis (L/D ratio is roughly constant on this flight), then measured ground Vx and Vy through GPS. Then critically, without measuring lift nor drag nor its ratio with any other method, you say that since the L/D calculated from yuri's equations looks like your hypothesis, then it must be correct. You looked at glide ratio varying wildly and stayed on this train of thought: "it doesn't match my hypothesis, so it must be wrong". (and yes, instantaneous GR is definitely not a sensible aerodynamic measure, but instantaneous GR being wrong doesn't automatically mean yuri's equations are correct) But why not use any number that stays roughly constant? I can multiply air density by 2.44 and tell you it's L/D ratio for your flight, and it would match your hypothesis better than the GR data, but there would be no logic behind it. To properly prove something, it needs to be able to make predictions that are independently verifiable, and not just because it "looks" right. Im pretty sure this is how he came up with his equations. They prove what he wants them to and nothing more.

This chart is a perfect demo of the trick I mentioned above. Look for intersections of GR and L/D curves: at these points, Vx has an extremum (i.e. horizontal acceleration is 0, but vertical doesn't need to be - it doesn't need to be a sustained point!) This trick is useful "in the field" when someone shows the data from their flights (straight, no wind) - look for extrema in Vx, and in these points, L/D will be equal to [air] GR. This immediately follows from the 1st WSE equation: ax = g*V*(Kl*Vy - Kd*Vx) if ax = 0 then Kl*Vy = Kd*Vx, or Kl/Kd = Vx/Vy, or L/D = GR. Several other useful tricks exist as well. WSE are like a Pandora box, one can pull so much useful stuff out of them! You don’t need wse for that, it’s basic glider aerodynamics.

Attached is my first flight in a freak 2. Also attached is the Raw data. It wasn't the longest flight as I pulled high. It also wasn't a fast flight. Flight Data Raw.CSV

Aons, Did you also notice that the graph posted is a very slow and floaty flight? Platypii, I saw that. I have also played around with his equations. My biggest problem with Yuri's idea is the fact that he thinks it will revolutionize wingsuit design. It wont, the limiting factor of wingsuit design is the air frame, AKA the human body.

http://www.pureflyingmagic.com/Content/Knowledge/Resources/Articles/en/WingsuitEquations.pdf You don't need physical data to prove it. If you accept the underlying physical equations: F=ma and lift equation, and if there are no mistakes in the proof (I don't see any, but onus is on you to find one), then the equations are valid. That being said, I've played with them, and applied them to real world gps data, independently of yuri's software, and they appear to match observed reality. For example with wingsuit starts... using WS equations you can observe the L/D being close to 3:1 throughout the whole start arc, whereas the GPS glide ratio varies wildly and takes much longer to reach "steady state". This is what I would expect to see from a true L/D measurement. Of course you need physical data to back up theoretical calculations. Just because mathematical derivations are correct does not mean the equations are a valid representation of wingsuit flight. Accept F=MA, you and yuri sound like freshman in physics that think they have the world figured out. Where is the scientific method? I’ve played with the WS equations and used my GPS data in them and gotten absolute nonsense as an output. I believe there could be value to wingsuit specific equations if they were developed by someone that understands dynamics and are properly validated with 3D modeling and wind tunnel testing. As for now Yuris crack pot equations are unproven pshdoacience.

Nice Dodge, answer these. What does your magical L/D number translate to for wingsuit performance? Where is the mathematical derivation of your equations? Where is the physical data to back up your mathematical derivation? Can someone repost these questions? I don't know if he is just ignoring me or he blocked me so he doesn't even see my comments.

Still waiting Yuri.....

Are you incapable of answering simple questions? What does your magical L/D number translate to for wingsuit performance? Where is the mathematical derivation of your equations? Where is the physical data to back up your mathematical derivation?

Think he will provide either?

So anyone who thinks that WSE and related math I derived is wrong, has a burden to rigorously, mathematically - not by just blah-blah-blah - prove that they are wrong. Seriously? Seems like you're making the extraordinary claims here. I don’t think he realizes he is the one who declares.

As a result, they essentially fucked up other capable guys who fly (relative to air) as good or almost as good as these guys, but are now far below in the table of records, for a long time (2 years already). Only because these 2 guys did "wind-shopping" and did a downwind jump in hurricane-strength uppers. These "records" are as moronic as someone recording a GPS track of their run to bathroom on a jet liner, extracting a 100m length of it, and claiming on Wikipedia that they ran 100m in only 0.4s, much faster than Usain Bolt's 9.58s. Here's my proposal to Paralog: 1. Stop this fucking nonsense, games with wind, fake "records", cheating. 2. Mandate the following rules, for any distance/speed track: Rule A. The ground track must be a straight line with no more than 100m deviation from the line start-finish of 1000m altitude window. Rule B. The ground track heading is established before each load as a line that is at an angle to cross-wind line (in downwind direction) equal to arctan of half wind speed divided by average horizontal speed of top 3 pilots in previous competition or maybe a test run before competing. This is to make the ground speed as close to air speed as possible, as the crosswind line will bisect the airspeed-groundspeed-windspeed triangle. Pilot's actual start-finish line should not deviate from this heading more than 5 degrees. Rule C. No tracks are accepted if winds at 500m window level are more than 20kn. This is to minimize the difference between groundspeed and airspeed, since the bisecting cannot be done perfectly. 3. Standardize all speed results to sea level by dividing the speeds by a factor of [square root of (density at sea level) /divided by/ (density at middle level of 1000m window)] 4. Standardize all time results to sea level by multiplying the times by a factor of [square root of (density at sea level) /divided by/ (density at middle level of 1000m window)] 5. With wind-corrected ground tracks and standardized speeds and times, add calculated L/D to graphs according to the formula L/D = (GR + z)/(1 - GR*z) where z is dimensionless ratio z = ax/(g - ay), ax is horizontal acceleration, ay vertical, g acceleration due to gravity. (ax and ay are calculated from Vx, Vy data as derivatives.) GR here is glide ratio relative to air (which should be close to ground GR if the flights follow the above rules). Then we can stop talking all this BS and cheating and not only give all pilots a fair game to play, but start really analyzing data - sweet real data, not BS data. Pilots who participate in PPC and read this and agree, please let PPC know. (I won't.) Who hurt you!? Can you just post your derivations? No more nonsense. Can you also explain why you think 3.567 is the magic L/D number and what that number translates to in wingsuit performance?

Link 6 leads to tonysuits.com, article on Dean Potter. Why? What it has to do with GR? (other that to point search bots to index the site) Self-promotion! ***The main surface is typically made from ripstop nylon, with various materials used to reinforce the leading edge, and reduce drag.[8] Link 8 leads to Aura3 on squirrel.ws. Why? Is it the only suit made of various materials? Self-promotion! Link 9 leads to flylikebrick.com. Why? Is that some official historical record? Self-promotion! Link 10 leads to The Great Book of BASE ISBN. Self-promotion! Link 30 leads to tonysuits.com again. If the record is "verified" by official entity, the link should go there. Self-promotion! This BS is exposed above, link 32 goes to Paralog. Self-promotion! Link 38 goes to WWL. WTF WWL has to do with Gypsy Moths?! Self-promotion! External links go to "How to Start Wingsuit Flying & Prices, Where to Learn, Videos, Risks & News" wingsuitfly.com and flylikebrick.com (2nd time!). This is the state of the union in wingsuiting today. BS, self-promotion, fake records, lies, hiding truth, stagnation, no scientific approach. Very sad... Lol, now that’s an impressive off topic word salad. What was your point in all of that? You’re still pushing your app, you’re still promoting your equations. Why do you think the world records are fake? Were those pilots not moving the fastest and furthest across the ground? Back on topic yuri, where are those derivations I asked for? Why won’t you say what you believe the magic L/D number translates to for wingsuit flight?

Never submitted anything to Wikipedia and never will. Self-promotion is what 99% of the wingsuit article on Wiki is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wingsuit_flying I don't give a fuck about self-promotion. Since I gave up on seeing any hope from existing WSMs, I post here for new wingsuiters, who are not familiar with old stuff they may find interesting, as well as relatively new stuff, and hopefully it won't take that long (another 12 years) for new WSM to be born and embrace the new technology and delight all of us with refreshing line of wingsuits, backed up by hard numbers, not marketing BS. They'll last as long as the people who think they're correct, and the server hosting on his website. It's on web.archive.org, as well as countless other servers, search engines, people's computers, my apps on app stores (which are also duplicated by various app discovery sites)... The information on the web these days is indistructible. (no wonder - it's evolution of military network design built to withstand nuclear war) Whatever anyone posts on the web stays there forever, in one form or another. That's why it's fun to come back many years later and read silly posts by all the stooges, including many "airspice engineers" (yeah, many of those who trolled in my threads back 12 years ago, were/are airspices.) You sure promote yourself a lot for not caring about it. Yuri, why don’t you post your equation derivations? Or provide them somehow. I may only be an engineer with a math minor but I know some people with masters/PhD that would love to look at them.

“I am very smart👌🏻, so much smarter that’s you🖐🏻, probably the smartest 👌🏻 person ever☝🏻.” - yuri Why don’t you publish? You have a PhD. You know how the process works. I’m sure there is some masters or PhD student that you could work with to get published.

Would you like my boss' email? I have a simple question: what's the difference between a wingsuiter and the unpowered gliders that have been around for more than 100 years? Also, please learn to spell He still haven’t even explained what his magic L/D number means for wingsuiting.

So anyone who thinks that WSE and related math I derived is wrong, has a burden to rigorously, mathematically - not by just blah-blah-blah - prove that they are wrong. However, as noted in Wikipedia, ***Middle Ages in Europe: After the fall of the Roman Empire, Europe fell back on feudal law. This included some Germanic customs, including presumed guilt. I guess, there are people still thinking in feudal law terms. The first here who will rigorously, mathematically - not by just blah-blah-blah - prove that Wingsuit Equations are wrong, will receive the unofficial Nobel Prize in Wingsuit Science (and probably, the official one in Physics, presented by the King of Sweden in Stockholm, for proving Newton's F=ma wrong, since WSE is nothing but F=ma as applied to wingsuits). In simpler words. Yes he used his own equations to prove that his equations are right.

Ahhh yes. Let your bigotry flow. Rush, it’s ok that your world view is shrinking, I know you are soon going to need to confront your personal identity, I know it will be hard, but I believe in you.

Yeah, seems like the DOJ was concerned with the leaks in the media and needed a strategy to stop them.

For everyone reading this thread I will explain a small amount. There is one constant our friend here fails to take into account. The biggest issue for wingsuit design is the fact that the airframe is human sized. This is and will always be the biggest limiting factor to wingsuits.

He's not going to answer that, it's too straightforward Also he's pretty much talking to himself now. However, I can answer about the 1.41 L/D (which he thinks he discovered and is "magic") , it's trivially derived from 1/2 *rho*V^2*S*C_d if you treat C_d as a constant (which seems to be the limit of his abilities). In this case, he's lucky because the induced drag component at higher speeds is small compared to profile drag. However, this value only assumes a straight-line glide and constant velocity. The path with the highest average horizontal velocity will be a cycloid similar to those derived by Jakob Bernoulli and Isaac Newton in the 17th century. (much harder to fly, though) He has a lot of, in my educated mechanical engineer opinion, bad assumptions.