likearock

Members
  • Content

    2,257
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by likearock

  1. likearock

    Freefly Chronicles Videos?

    This may have been asked before but is there any way to obtain the video from the Freefly Chronicles series? Does anyone still have the VHS cassettes? Better still, has anyone digitized them? I used to have volumes II and III and they were amazing. It would be a shame if that little slice of history is lost.
  2. likearock

    Earphones????

    Just pick one, call them up and ask for a job. http://www.skyventure.com/tunnels/locations/
  3. likearock

    Axis - Niklas whos flown with him?

    Top of the line.
  4. I guess the point I'm making is that you probably wouldn't want to "encourage" the untwisting of a single line twist by pulling on the riser. Or do you disagree? It would be good to have procedure to follow if we find ourselves in such a situation.
  5. Well, except for the full line twist on the main. Would a single line twist on one canopy of a two-out mean it's not landable though? You still have plenty of nylon over your head.
  6. likearock

    Anyone flown w niklas Daniel

    Nik is a great coach. I've done over 6 hours with him during the last two Xmas boogies. Really good ability to analyze your weaknesses and design drills to correct them.
  7. likearock

    Head Down Video

    It's a "shame?" really, a shame? http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=1971076
  8. likearock

    HUGE Freefly news

    Here's something I realized during one of Francesco's angle flying camps at the Ranch: The difference between a delta tracking position and head down backwards motion is really just a few degrees of angle - they're basically the same body orientation. Once you understand that, you can see just how similar this "delta" breakoff strategy for head-up is to the widely accepted breakoff for head-down. Take a look: Beginning Head-down: Turn 180 degrees while clearing your airspace. Head-up: Turn 180 degrees while clearing your airspace. Middle Head-down: Initiate movement away from the center of the formation by means of HD forward motion. Head-up: Initiate movement away from the center of the formation by means of HD backwards motion. End Head-down: Gradually transform the HD orientation to a flat track to distance yourself from the formation. Head-up: Gradually transform the HD orientation to a flat track to distance yourself from the formation. BTW, congratulations to all on the new HD record!
  9. If the stats on the SkyVenture site are correct (12 ft., 875 HP), I'd say no. My general rule of thumb is you need to have the combined fans HP at least 100 x the diameter in feet to be able to comfortably freefly. Especially if you're a naturally fast faller.
  10. likearock

    HUGE Freefly news

    In situations like this, I've always been in favor of the simplest solution that meets all the critical requirements. Here's my take on what those requirements are (and Simon, let me know if I've missed any): - clear your airspace above, below, and around you. - initiate forward movement away from the center of the formation in a way that does not result in changing the fall rate (so that everyone's relative levels can be maintained). - gradually transform that forward motion into a flat track and create adequate distance between yourself and the others before deploying your canopy. The current alternatives (front-flip to head down vs. feet first flock away) seem overly complicated and challenging enough to be prone to error - in a bigway, all it takes is for one person to screw it up and you can have a serious problem. So why not consider the following simpler procedure which seems, on the face of it, to meet all the requirements above? - Breakoff begins: Turn 180 degrees in the sit and while doing so, clear your airspace. - Transition to the delta tracking position (belly down, head positioned lower than feet). The delta position, when angled correctly, will maintain the prevailing (freefly) fall rate and will also provide the initial forward motion away from the formation. - Gradually decrease the delta angle till it becomes a flat track while adding periodic barrel rolls for extra safety. - Having tracked away the agreed upon amount and cleared the airspace above and near you, wave off and deploy. A number of my friends will be on the Crosskeys record attempts. It would be great if there could be agreement on a single breakoff strategy by then. Thoughts?
  11. likearock

    Wind Tunnel training for 50+yr olds before AFF

    His sample size was 600 jumps with AFF students over 3 years. So how many unique students is that? If he does 10 AFF jumps with each student, then that's 60 students. And out of 60 students, how many are going to be over age 50? Maybe 10%, or 6 students. So his sample size could be somewhere around just 6 people. Therefore, all those bigger numbers about 3 years and 600 jumps really don't mean anything. It all boils down to a very small sample size of people, and that certainly is not 100% representative of everyone over 50 years-old. Regardless of his sample size, the fact that his main concern (questionable canopy ability) is completely unrelated to his recommendation (tunnel time) really exposes his bias.
  12. likearock

    Head down tips

    I'm curious about your response to 'work both sides'. why work both sides instead of just being focused on daffy with left or right leg in front always??? I dont surf switching up sides - I always have my right foot forward (its called a sex change btw and is a trick some people do mid-wave or on a skateboard midtrick). Same with snowboarding. So why is skydiving headdown different from that??? Why not always use your good side....its the GOOD side!!! curious...
  13. likearock

    So Who is this Ray Kubiak Guy???

    ...and flyer!
  14. likearock

    Using Tunnel to test wingsuit

    You have some serious problems with that. Think of a wingsuit as mini-parachute, that's how its designed. As I'm sure you know, an open parachute in wind tunnel is a huge problem. As far as securing it to the floor, even if that could be done, how would that even be useful in learning to operate the wingsuit? You need to be able to react to the wind and see how the wing responds. Maybe, instead of a vertical wind tunnel, you had more of a horizontal one?
  15. likearock

    USA tunnel+dropzone

    Does your DZ.com name indicate the kind of flying you like to do (freefly)? If so, I'd recommend Eloy over Perris. Most people would be challenged to do static head down flying in Perris - Eloy has significantly more powerful fans and is much better for learning the freefly positions.
  16. likearock

    Florida area - Indoor Skydiving?

    everyone is entitled to their opinion ofcourse but that doesnt mean they are an expert or know what they are talking about necessarily. when compared to every other Ifly facility, he is dead on target. Orlando was great.... 10 years ago.... Now? its in dire need of a refit. It really depends on the type of flying you want to do. For belly or back, Orlando is fine. If you want to do sit or head-down and you're not light and floaty, you'll want a tunnel with more HP.
  17. likearock

    tunnel time vs jump numbers

    Not true!
  18. likearock

    8 way vfs - freefly routines

    Amazing video, BTW.
  19. likearock

    8 way vfs - freefly routines

    Yeah, I found this also - the site is actually used as a URL shortener by Youtube. Sorry I sent out the false alarm but phishing is a real problem.
  20. likearock

    8 way vfs - freefly routines

    Any reason why this URL's server is youtu.be rather than youtube? Asking because that's usually a way to get user's to go to a scam site. Perhaps this account has been hacked?
  21. likearock

    Tunnel airflow secondary use

    My god, a green wind tunnel - that would be something!
  22. likearock

    Tunnel airflow secondary use

    I have no clue what you're trying to show here.. Sorry man... Of course e < E-E' . There are so much inefficiencies in such a system that the energy created will be much smaller than the energy powering the system. Yes, but the energy "powering the system" is E' (not E'-E). So all you're really saying with your statement is that e < E', which as I said before is not the relevant question. Let's go with that then. Say it takes 500 kWh per day to power a wind tunnel. By your calculation, the electricity that could be produced from a generator inserted into that wind would take a hit of 30%, bring it to 350 kWh. So the question is now, how much additional electricity would the wind tunnel require to run that generator? It's conceivable (at least to me) that it could require something less than an additional 350 kWh to keep the generator going. For instance, if it took an extra 200 kWh, that would bring bring the total (E') to 700 kWh. Is it so difficult to believe that air infused with 700 kWh of energy can be converted to 350 kWh? And if that were the case, you're looking at a net gain of 150 kWh per day.
  23. likearock

    Tunnel airflow secondary use

    That's the very definition of a perpetual motion machine. Forcing me to dust off my algebra, will you? Okay, here it is. Let E = the energy required to power the wind tunnel (without an auxiliary generator) Let E' = the energy required to power the wind tunnel with the generator. Let e = the energy created by the generator when it is inserted into the wind stream. Conservation of energy tells us the following: e < E < E' Violation of the above would be equivalent to allowing for a perpetual motion machine. As far as I know, it does not tell us that e < E'-E But I could be wrong.
  24. likearock

    Tunnel airflow secondary use

    you're mocking them aren't you? any idea that takes energy from the flow requires that energy to be replaced (more power consumption) - it's not 'free' from the system Agreed - to argue otherwise would allow the possiblity of a "perpetual motion" machine where all our energy problems are solved. I'm not saying that. Again agree. Clearly the motors will have to draw extra power to be able to do the double duty of power the wind tunnel and the generator at the same time. Just as obviously, the amount of electricity that could be regenerated in this example will necessarily be less that original electricity powering the tunnel motors. However, that's not the important comparison here. The key question is whether or not the difference in power consumption (between having a generator and no generator) is greater or less than the power that is regenerated. That's what would determine whether or not such an idea could be profitable. I admit I don't know enough physics to give this a deep analysis. But I do know that the consideration of whether or not using an electrical generator in that way could be profitable does not require you to disbelieve any the laws regarding conservation of energy.
  25. likearock

    Tunnel airflow secondary use

    How about just using the airflow to power a generator and create electricity that could then be directly used by the wind tunnel? Cut down on those huge electric bills.