podl01

Members
  • Content

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never
  • Feedback

    0%

Community Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. okay, the rocketeer has the better design - I agree Bike helmet are good idea for wingsuiting! If you don't mind about the protection issue. The issue that you can't put a pro track in it and the issue that you don't need ventilation holes as you don't sweat a lot, right? function first- then the design in my opinion. about the dangers - I had a few jumps with it and never had any problems with risers during the opening or in any other situation. The thing has an integrated predetermined breaking point. So if for some reason you crash, the helmet extension will break. We did this because in ealier times there allready have been accidents with such aerodynamic extensions (hangliding) The problem was the stiffness in most cases - due to a construction with the same thickness and no predetermined breaking point I you look at the stiffness of the extension you will find it quite soft. it is not bombproof. When you exert force on it (with thumbs for example) you will deform it already. we have been thinking of a windshield already. here the points why we don't come up with it. -you can't wear cool sunglasses -turbulences in the shield as you hardly get it airtight -is distortes the view when of rounded shape. -more expensive as you need mold for it well, concerning the simulated airflow. yes, you're right - the helmet works just in the right position. Same as wingsuits...
  2. thanks for the big interest in demo-helmets. we are already rid of our demo contingent, sorry! Yes we have test flown it. No we don't have it windtunnel tested yet. Also, the SUPERSONIC is not tuff tested or whatever, so it is nothing but ready dave, I will work over it for you, how many degrees do you want? 45° best, andreas
  3. Sorry, I know this is advertising but I'm to lazy to ask a friend if he can post it in way that it doesn't look like advertising... Anyway, we are ready with the first wingsuit oriented helmet with boundary layer separation system. Sounds funny - but so it is. It is particularly designed to fit the body position of wingsuit pilots. The airflow should be much smoother over the back and of course - it will give you extra performance. Especially when you fly fast of very fast. For flocking it might be a little dangerous because of the sharp tail. we let produce a few demo helmets soon, so please drop me a line if you want one testing... more details: www.pressurized.at (sorry again!) ps:@webmaster: I can understand if you delete this
  4. "I want to publicly announce my complete displeasure with the BASE fatality list...it's distasteful, wrong, disgusting, hurtful, sickening, offensive, abhorrent, etc. etc. etc." I totally agree - we don't need a base fatality list like this. what's with our base ethics here? Here at the point where it comes to real ethics I realize how strange the base fatality list is, "producing" jumpers who have already prepared their picture for the list, just in case... how sick is that? We for sure need a list where we can learn from base fatalities and to prevent accidents happen again and again. But we don't need personal information in it. we don't learn more about basejumping when we know the jumpers name. ---
  5. Yuri, shorter wool threads: good idea- sewing threads: not good I think - the air doesn't catch them as good as wool thread (everyone uses wool-threads ...) the wool thread video shows a ws experiment with a semi-elastic leading edge. I hoped I can reach cleaner, smoother airflow separation and better airflow over the first third of the upper wing surface. anyway, it turned out that semi-elastic leading edge is buckling too much generating a dead air area with previous turbulence. with non elastic leading edge it looks just a little different, still separating very early. by the way, the airflow over the legwing is very interesting too -much more potential of improving the ws, I think. I use a vertical rib between legwing and backspoiler which keeps the backspoiler away from getting sucked on top of the legwing for example - with very good results. but this is another topic... aero rig, aero helmet, and off we go with 1:3,5 andi www.pressurized.at
  6. ...did a lot of airflow filming in 2005 - both ws and tracksuit. The advantage of airflow filming is, that you have 100% realistic conditions. 90% vortex lift when we talk just about the delta wing. I just put a short video together, an extract of earlier R&D work. here you can see what happens with the airflow when it passes the leading edge. check out: http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=5421 andi www.pressurized.at Edited to make url clicky ~ Craig
  7. Hi there, I just want to put my 2 cents in... To get out any calculated performance of a specific airfoil it has to be made very conform to the polar coordinates. Meaning that the wing has to be built in such a way that it matches the polar coordinates as perfect as possible. Even when very smooth and polished the airfoil must not differ more than 3% of the theoretic polar coordinates (cross section). Otherwise you will get out less performance out of the wing. With our wingsuits and the elastic wing structure we are far from optimal conditions. The most precise ribs will not prevent the wing from distorting between the rib sections because of the air pressure inside of the wing. so the airfoil between the ribs will always look different because it is shaped by the air pressure. but even worse: At the first 30% of the profile (from the leading edge) the most part of the lift will be generated. This fact is reason enough to manufacture the first 30% of the airfoil as precise, clean and smooth as possible. As a wingsuit designer you don't overcome the problem that you have to consider that the pilots arm need space and you have to skip the ribs here. so you not even can put ribs into that important wing section which is most responsible for the lift. Not the 3% correctness of the airfoil is now the most determining factor - it's the missing airfoil! Maybe I'm alone here with the statement that I think the airfoil shape is not important at all! As long as it is drop-shaped to reduce drag. 90% lift generated from the wings comes from vortex forces! and that is what I like most of robi's statement: "I have mentioned similarity in shape between wingsuit and space shuttle. For lift generation, space shuttle relies heavily on generation of vortices over the whole airframe. These vortices are accelerating the air flow around space shuttle, thus generating higher pressure difference i.e. more lift. We can assume that the same thing is happening with the airflow around the wingsuit (and it is rather difficult to obtain experimental confirmation for that, as I explained some time ago). So, in the end, some vortices (turbulence) does not have to be a bad thing in the end." In my opinion this statement gets it to the point. though it's not assuming anymore, it's fact that we fly our wingsuits due to vortices. Our accurate lift theory is not the classic lift distribution of rectangle wings. With our wings we belong to the delta wings, getting lift due to vortex forces. For lift we don't need a clean airflow ower the upper wingsurface only for reducing drag!. That's the reason why we get more performance out of the wings when we fly faster. the vortices get stonger and suck more on our wings and body(!) Have anyone filmed the airflow over the upper wing surface? I was astonished when I watched the wool threads dancing against the flight direction. I will try to get a video here soon. Thats how I understand the aerodynamic of wingsuit flying so far. It had been said here before - I just want to strengthen the theory of vortex forces at that point. anybody who find spelling mistakes can keep them andi www.pressurized.at
  8. here's my input to your questions: first of all, my experiences are based on the pressurized suit because I mainly use that one We were discussing if we should recommend a minimum of skydives on our suit. But it's not the question of how many skydives you have, at the end it's the question of how comfortable you feel when you launch from a cliff with unknown equipment. You feel much more comfortable when you know your equipment! For most people that's when they have already done some jumps from a plane and already know how to fly the suit and how to recover from an unstable body position. I saw both: people who first took the suit into skydiving to get used to it and people (already experienced with tracking) who jumped the suit from a cliff for the first time, felt safe and flew like hell. When I hear that a guy turned towards the wall, then it probably would have been better for him to jump the suit from plane first. If you're used to the suit then you don't turn to the wall, it's more like the opposite- you get distance to the object after a few seconds! There's no discussion that an airplane is the best choice for getting started with any kind of suit. A friend of mine is a good example for that. He did several jumps from plane and really got familiar with the suit. He was almost affronted when he was not allowed to jump the suit on his first E. about low pulling I agree with what has been said. It's obviously that lowpulls bring extra risk into a jump, and there's no need of more extra risk in this sport. sometimes it's just hard to put this into practice... andreas www.pressurized.at
  9. Hi there, yep, I heard about the suit and I've already flown that funky suit several times No need to compare the suit with others, it's different in design and requires different flightstyle - both resulting in more closing the gap to a wingsuit than to fit the classic trackpant category. It's a bit like in ski-jumping, you can go over the ramp with parallel legstance or you use the V-style. personal choice I would say. have fun! andreas
  10. ...I try hard with marketing seriously, I didn't know that there are highspeed and lowspeed tunnels- and that baggy jumpsuits are for old-schoolers. since tunnel flying is a pretty expensive way of skydiving I just thought if the energy costs would be much lower (because of very low airspeed) the jumptickets could be less expensive also? Just a thought... thnxs! andreas
  11. Hi there, I have never jumped a tunnel so far but I'm wondering if a tracksuit can be of use for "tunnel-jumpers" also. From skydiving experience with the PRESSURIZED tracksuit I can say that the fallrate is very low, also in a "box-position" with zero horizontal speed. And it is very stable. I guess a third of the tunnel-airspeed will already let you float. what do you think? andreas www.pressurized.at
  12. Hello, check out http://www.pressurized.at/download.html for the latest footage of PRESSURIZED tracksuit cheers! andreas www.pressurized.at
  13. thanks james and all other guys who worked on that information! I think it will cover a lot of questions someone will ask when preparing for the first drops! ...you forgot to mention the 10sec rule the way to go! andi www.pressurized.at
  14. thanks! of course you can't compare the performance of the latest wingsuits with our brand-new tracking suit, even when we already track further than early wingsuits! Our target was to achieve greatest efficiency without the use of wings and all benefits in safety. (pulling/ emergency procedure) The technology of PRESSURIZED tracking-gear is based on the theory of lifting bodies: specially shaped bodies are able to generate lift in the same way as airfoils do. (in fact, airplanes have been built without wings- lifted by fuselage only!) And this is what made the enormous increase in performance of our gear possible! Our pants do not just inflate to get more surface- they also develop best aerodynamic properties resulting in smooth and stable flight characteristics!Same with the jacket. Spoilers help to develop the lifting body-effect and reduce the interference-drag between your rig and your back! By the way, demo pants/jacket will come soon... regards andreas www.pressurized.at
  15. Hello skipro101, maybe you're right and there're some austrenglish parts in it, sorry for that! please let me know where to find a real good grammar editor and I'll check again. (hope I made no mistake here) andreas