The111

OMG. I googled flat earth society. Get this. From here. While the Society is not a "crackpot" group, it is opposed to the fashionable, politically correct Spherical Earth theory, which is expounded every day by so-called "scientists", the media and political leaders. The Society asserts that the Earth is flat and has five sides, that all places in the Universe named Springfield are merely links in higher-dimensional space to one place, and that all assertions are true in some sense, false in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and false in some sense, true and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense, and true false and meaningless in some sense. Springfield??? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Wtf is that site? Is this a joke? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Blasphemy. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Cursive and Bright Eyes at the Social in Orlando. Or probably anywhere they played for that matter. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

At Zhills a few weeks ago, I woke up at 7am to ice on my car and the grass, I was more hungover than I've been in years, and I made my second high altitude jump at 8am. :) I'm pretty sure it was well below zero at 22k. I didn't jump all day after that. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

"How to use the DZ.com search function" - PKev the origins of the term Lutz Read the whole post and definitely watch the video for a laugh. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

T3: Rise of the Machines. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Ahahaha, two Lutz posts in 5 minutes. Your legend will never die, Scotty! More: "How to accept responsibility for your own fuckups" - Lutz www.WingsuitPhotos.com

"The importance of rapid canopy downsizing" - USPA www.WingsuitPhotos.com

To everybody who says we Floridians are wusses for complaining about this weather: I seriously think there is something different about the cold in FL. I spent the first 21 years of my life in FL and never saw a winter in any other state, and NEVER SAW SNOW. Every winter here seemed freezing to me. Last March I went to Tahoe and saw snow for the first time, and went snowboarding. I could sit out in that weather ALL DAY, wearing only jeans and a longsleeved shirt and jacket, even when I was riding the lift to the top of the run, with wind and snowflakes hitting me in the face. It actually felt good and I liked it. I thought ahead of time that something that cold would kill me. I'm not sure what it is, but there's something more to the equation than just temperature. Humidity is a big part, I'm sure. And Mama: it could still be very sunny tomorrow. Perhaps you meant so much for "warm" Florida. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

How do you plan on actually gathering the data? Just by eyeballing and using the accuracy trick? Or using GPS or something? (I am really not familiar with GPS at all...) www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Exactly what I was thinking VSG. :) www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Ask what? I have no questions about the footage. Read my post again - I only asked if any other jumpers had shown this video to whuffos and had the whuffos think it was a hoax. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Yes, this is how Scott said all the popular PD "S" canopies are (Spec/Sab/Stil). On the next no wind day I find where I actually have enough time under canopy to apply each brake condition and observe what it does to my trajectory, I will try to find out for sure how my Spectre performs... Obviously, even two of the "same" canopies could perform differently due to a variety of conditions... www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Agreed. But as I pointed out originally I am always a little off so I like to bias that little bit in a direction which is able to fine-tuned on final. That's kind of what I was thinking. And I wouldn't try using rear risers at this point anyway.

That's exactly how he explained it, and I definitely agree that with a strong tailwind that is true. But when jumping in no winds it did seem to me like half to deep brakes didn't help my glide as I expected. Pertaining to no wind, he did admit there was a point of diminishing return, where you decreased your vertical speed so much that your glide angle would start steepening again, but he said it should be past 3/4 brakes on most canopies. He seemed very certain that 1/2 and even 3/4 brakes would make you glide flatter in no wind conditions. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Actually, I understood what you meant entirely, which is why every time I used the phrase "full glide", I added the parenthetical (toggles up). I realize that's not "best glide", but "full glide" is a commonly used phrase to describe no toggle input. I think maybe the worst descriptor I used is "max glide" at one point in my previous post, so I went back and edited that to say flattest glide. Any time I am describing the angle of glide I used descriptors flat or steep. The only time I use the phrase "full glide" is to describe no toggle input as it's commonly used. I understand that flattest glide is at a certain small input and that "full glide" is a bit steeper, and that there is a slow speed past the flattest glide which creates the same glide angle as "full glide". I am curious how close you have to get to a stall to go even steeper. Would you say, on a no wind day, using toggle input only, you have to get dangerously close to your stall point to make a steeper glide angle than "full glide" (toggles up)? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Thanks for the replies, Quade. I am positive I didn't misunderstand Scott, but I am inclined to think your answer applies to my situation more... the one time I had a long spot in no wind, I simply applied 1/2 to 3/4 brakes and flew toward the target. I neglected to try different control inputs and see which worked better, but I am almost sure that my canopy would have made it much, much further with no brake input at all; with the amount of brakes I had on I barely seemed to make any forward progress. Another quick hypothetical... I do plan on testing all this stuff out but sometimes I'm not so good at the accuracy trick and never seem to have as long to do it as I want to, so I like to think about this stuff ahead of time. I notice you're on a Spectre loaded slightly higher than me, so your experience is probably at least somewhat close to mine. If we designate "full glide" (toggles up) as 0, and stall point 1, then you are saying max flattest glide angle in no wind, toggles only, is at about 0.125 to 0.25. Here is my question: how far do you have to go to get a glide which is steeper than full glide (0)? I'm guessing it's around 0.5 (half brakes)... the thing is, as I've said earlier, I don't like to really go past half brakes on final approach, which brings me back to my original question: can you safely steepen your glide angle on final approach, on a no wind day, using toggles, without getting too close to the stall point? Or is it better to set up for a small undershoot and use slight brake input to extend your trajectory to get you right on target? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I understand that. What Scott taught in the class, and I haven't got a chance to thoroughly verify experimentally, is from "full glide" (toggles up all the way), your glide angle gets progressively flatter as you apply more and more brakes, even as far as 3/4 brakes. If this is true, and and the ideal glide angle (from toggle input alone) is close to 3/4 brakes, that means to steepen your glide angle below "full glide" on a no wind day, using only toggles, you'd have to go past 3/4 brakes and dangerously close to the stall point. Right? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I agree with both you and Skylark to a certain extent. Wingsuit control depends almost entirely on body position (I don't fly WS yet, so correct me if I'm wrong), while with a Skyray or something more like a hang glider, control depends on a mechanical input to the rigid wing system. Though obviously your body position matters while flying a Skyray, if you were to stick one leg into the airstream asymmetrically, you'd spin like a mofo, I'd assume. It's an interesting thing to consider... Wingsuit = skydiving BUT BASE = "related sport" ? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I realize it's a bad habit to simply quote someone else's word as gospel, but in Scott Miller's canopy course, he said in a no wind day, 1/4 brakes is flatter glide than full flight, 1/2 brakes is flatter than 1/4, and 3/4 is flatter than 1/2. I am aware that there is a point where your brakes actually do cause you to sink in no wind conditions, but if this point is really past 3/4 brakes, wouldn't it be very close to the stall point? I know that on final approach I don't feel comfortable in any deeper than 1/2 brakes. I don't want to risk a stall at 100 feet. But you know, I kind of wonder about this, since several weeks ago I had a bad spot on a no wind day, and rather than use the accuracy trick and watch what the brakes did, I simply applied half brakes and aimed at the DZ. I wasn't too worried since I was over a clear field, but I really felt like I sunk straight down. I guess what I need to do is use the accuracy trick to figure out exactly how my own canopy responds to inputs. The bottom line is I don't like going past moderate brakes on final, and if it takes deep brakes to sink you in no wind, I'd rather shoot for an undershoot, then use light brakes to glide all the way to the target. Make sense? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

This doesn't work on a no-wind day though, right? Which is why I suggested setting up for a small undershoot on a no-wind day and using brakes to flatten your glide path a bit on final, also returning to full flight before landing. EDIT: Well, I guess you can go steeper than full glide on no wind days, but that would require front riser input as opposed to toggle. Right? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Not really, but I'll share some thoughts about this. For a long time I thought that we were confined to our physical bodies and that OBE's were simply hallucinations or imagined things. I pointed out that they most often occured when the person was either severely injured or near death, and that in this state our mind doesn't work reliably and can easily imagine things. Recently though, I've changed my mind a bit. For one, I've come to believe that we are more than our physical bodies here on this earth. Believe it or not, I attribute this belief at least partially to skydiving. Unless you are someone who believes skydiving is entirely safe, the choice to skydive is an economical one: you choose whether it is more important to have fun (experience good feelings and sensations) but risk your physical life, or vice versa. By choosing to skydive, you place a higher level of economical importance on your emotions and feelings (non-physical things) and a lower level of importance on your body (your physical life). At least, this is how it's happened with me, I think. Anyway, since I now believe there is something "non-physical" inside me that will outlast this body (I'm not concerned about my "mortality"), it makes sense to me that OBE's occur near death. Since we are so accustomed to using our bodies, we don't know how to use that "non-physical" part of ourselves without our bodies. But near death, our bodies are very close to the end of their function. So it would make sense that maybe we start making that transition away from the physical and get a brief glimpse of what we are without it. But then as the body rapidly recovers we are bound to it again and returned to our normal physical confines. Again, I haven't had an OBE (I've had lucid dreams, but I do still consider those to be imagined realities for the most part), but I have heard many accounts of people near death "seeing the light" or having an OBE or whatever, and this is the best explanation I can offer. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I'm wondering if they'll release ROTK:EE next November like they've been doing. That's really my only criticism of how they're doing this entire thing. Releasing two versions of each movie purposefully. Oh well, will be great either way. Did anyone else see this? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

The pioneers of wingsuit (or any new) technology spent a great deal of time theorizing about something they had never done. Pretty silly, huh? www.WingsuitPhotos.com