pierre3636

if its in chaps im there like a circus bear with or without jarno ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

i concur - i think making an effort and going to the camps and trying hard to get a spot will teach you alot and improve your flying. its all about learning i think is what Jarno is saying. plus 70 people is a fark load ... its alot of wingsuit pilots. ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

aaaaah so much love .... ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

you dont date a girls! ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

Jarno - Im also joining you in either Gap or An72 (decided yet?) in spring and will do both the US events woo hoo its gonna be rockin ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

dude you already qualify after the performance in germany - no worries ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

my crew will be at both the events as - or at least i will be. ill back up the gayness with undone back wing attachments and 6 way diamonds ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

uh wedge - sorry sleepy me ... ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

6 way backfly diamond wont that be cool - just need 6 blades or 6 sm2s that fly the same kind of decent rates ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

im all about immediate gratification ,,, ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

nah - i own a m1 with the old stuff and SM1 with parapack - no point in going back to the old materials - the weight certianly doesnt bother me much ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

fun hu !!! ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

brian jeff everyone . . . Sorry i did go off on a tangent and to make it worse it was not even the forum topic. I should have started a new forum. Brian apologies if you felt i carried on to long but i like knowing the truth and dont just assume answers. Its my nature. Thats that i suppose. Our new sm1 with new un done wings have arrived. Doing a bunch of jumps on them this weekend. Ill let you know what i think. Have a goodie ciao ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

shot van ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

my winsguit is made of parapack but its not a BM suit. Its brilliant - very durable and much hardier than anything else - i have washed my suit a few times in the machine and its perfect. The only downside i would say is that the stuff is thicker and thus hotter and a sunny day. ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

During our PM conversations I challenged Brian to do some testing to prove these specification as listed (in lab conditions or in the sky) - he declined to do so saying that the onus is on me to prove him wrong (in his words placing the ball back in my court). I found that a bit disappointing (but that’s just me). I left the conversation saying that when he does manage to logistically get everything he needs together and he does the testing it would be great to see the results. I also asked why normal aircraft testing wasn’t done using any of the products listed above (why do aircraft have a probe sticking into clean air on static points on the frame) and why do instruments correct for an whole array of errors in their calculations. The manufacturer specification you have quoted as your call card, in which context are those parameters setup? At the least I would like to know if it was in a lab, wind tunnel, small aircraft frame, big aircraft frame on a free falling skydiver or on a wing suit flying at 30mph? Does it matter whether the device is in my helmet or my wrist or my ankle or sticking out into clear air? All done with good attitudes and in the spirit of my original post last week. But unfortunately nothing was proven…. In my travels though I have found the below from the L&B manuals… “”Definition True airspeed (TAS) and Skydiver’s airspeed (SAS) are two methods to calculate airspeeds. TAS is a term used in aviation: It is the speed of an object relative to the surrounding air, regardless of the altitude. SAS is a new concept developed by LARSEN & BRUSGAARD: SAS is the speed of a skydiver calculated from measurements of air pressure and temperature and converted to a fixed air pressure (875.3 mb) and a fixed temperature (+7.080C) which corresponds to 4,000 feet ASL. TAS A skydiver’s True airspeed (TAS) relative to the ground changes as a function of the altitude (air pressure) and temperature which makes it difficult to compare fall-rates. Example: A skydiver (in a fixed freefall position) who has a terminal fallrate of 62 meters/sec at 10,000 feet. will have a terminal fallrate of 50 meters/sec at 3,000 feet. It will be seen that the difference in altitude (air pressure) makes it difficult to compare the fall-rates when recorded in TAS. The SAS formula calculates, using the TAS information, as though the complete skydive had been performed at a fixed air pressure and a fixed temperature which corresponds to 4,000 feet ASL. 4,000 feet is the chosen reference by LARSEN & BRUSGAARD since this is the average altitude at which the working time of a skydive is normally ended. Conclusion Using SAS, skydivers in any body position can express their vertical speed by a number (SAS). This number remains virtually constant regardless of altitude with little or no variance due to temperature differences and can be compared with the airspeeds of other skydivers. This means that regardless of the elevation of the DZ you are jumping at, SKYDIVER’S AIRSPEED (SAS) will be the same for the same body position.”” My one concern with the explanation is the contradiction of “any body position” in sentence one vs “the same body position” in the last sentence. But maybe I’m understanding it wrong. But assuming the explanation means that the same SAS can be expected for the same body position it would throw out any assumptions made of comparing wing suit decent rates since we are all separate ir frames with different body position. Correct me if I’m wrong – I might be. I have fired off an email to L&B to answer my question – perhaps there is some engineer lurking in these forums that can speed up the process….does the explanation above (from the manufacturers manual) mean that SAS is comparable (after some assumptions – like its mounted in the same place AND ONLY for the same body position) to other SAS numbers but NOT to TAS which is the true airspeed? If this is the case then I suppose the manufacturer has admitted to not giving us the true decent rate but SAS which is a number ONLY relative to other SAS numbers or TAS numbers under the same constant conditiions assumed in SAS calculations. If you do not use SAS (which seems more popular so I’m assuming you do) but use TAS then I'm comfortable or more comfortable assuming that the sensors which are all within a housing would perhaps pick up a difference of 10mph decent rate from 150 mph to 140 mhp (lets say 6% decrease) but when you are flying a wing suit at 30mph that difference is a massive increment on the total available decent left to level flight - 10 mph is now 33% decrease. Measuring true airspeed TAS is a fairly delicate process with extremely delicate and much bigger instrumentation required as far my understanding goes. First and foremost you would need clean air flow (as you will see any licensed aircraft). Something almost probe like sticking into clean air - the other problem is if you would have used something like that there would have to be some kind of correction made for the affect the instrument has on the performance it measures (i.e. it changes your profile). Looking forward to any response from anyone in the field or a reply from the manufacturers...i have also asked them for proof or data sets to confirm the tolerances they have provided and the conditions under which these tolerances have been set (i think this would make a massive difference). I'm definately learning here, so any corrections in the fundamentals would be appreciated! ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

i rest my case. ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

ok brian - its all very vague - which data aquisition technologies are we talking about and which ones are being used to state the claims a few posts higher up? brands and models. where are the "data aquisition technologies" in each case mounted? what are the controled enviroments ? how are you creating a "level playing field" for your observations. are these "data aquisition technologies" effective enough to measure a change in 5mph decent rate on a low base lilke 35mph? consistently? reading your first sentence again slowly i get he impression you are assuming perfect data unless proven otherwise? thats not an argument im trying to understand your logic. is that the case? PM me - lets chat. lets not re thread again aaaaaaah purple mike ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

well it was heffro and jarno - they both fly diff suits and they argued so yes it was a manufacturer thing in my mind, agree with the rest of your post. im over this - not opening this thread again over and out ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

Been thinking about this thread (well the off topic part of it). All these claims from both sides ... tonysuit folks and bm folks. Every single number both of you quoted is absolutely worthless in my opinion (and I'm sure any statitician or scientific minds).Firstly ~ the devices used to calculate your decent rates are highly flawed. Inconsistent at best PLUS your decent path if you can call it that is different for every jump and every single other person jumping on every single different airplane. Higher exit speed equals longer hill ride for starters - so max it out the door or open wings earlier or whatever you do you are using the planes forward speed to get lift to start off with. When does your calculator start the measurement? Hardly scientific. Secondly ~ claiming that you have had "some" experience of a certain decent rate is a worthless statement - everyday is a different statistical event, today you wake up fresh as a daisy and had some sugar on your cereal and fly at 98% of your personal and body type capabilities. Tomorrow you wake up with a hangover and less sleep and only manage 75% of your capabilities. Doing it once doesn’t mean its better than anyone else’s experience… You need to have a large number of events (i.e. jumps) and under the same circumstances to derive a mean/median decent rate if any kind of claim wants to be made. The bigger the sample the better your chances will be of getting closer to the true average (as we all know from statistics 101). One jumps means nothing ~ I cannot stress that enough ~ event 10 jumps mean nothing ~ its an outlier, which means at best (which is measured by a alti or Neptune or whatever which is fallible in its calculations at BEST plus you are including the lift you get from the planes fwd speed)….catch my drift. Too many variables. Worthless argument to quote or graph your decent rate for any one jump. Show me 50 or 100 and ill be closer to believing you. Thirdly and by far the best part ~ if we all had the same body types then there would be some sort of constant which we would have been able to eliminate putting us closer to a true average (after many many test jumps with the same exits and the same suits ect). BUT WE DON’T. Nobody is build and flexes the same. So WTF is the point of claiming anything ?! If I throw a paper jet out the door it will kick anyones ass. And if I put a label on it and stap a Neptune to it which reads a 10mph decent rate would I be the winner? This is stupid logic – sorry for ranting but these arguments are BS. Both sides or both parties arguments are flawed in my mind – but maybe I know nothing. ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

ill prob be there ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

cool - ill check this weekend ... should be easy. ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

ANY PICS YET ?? ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

in all likelyhood the cut away you will experience more than any other while jumping a wingsuit will be a spinning canopy under line twists. DO NOT MESS AROUND - do not ever wingsuit a canopy or risers without hard housing ,,,, you will become unstuck (no pun) ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~

would the term - its the indian (apache or not) not the arrow be appropriate) heehee ~ time is ~ time was ~ times past ~