LukeH

You were the one that started this thread by refering to the clams in the previous one and going even further. Thanks for the attack, real class.

As this is the "reality check" thread, I hope you won't take exception to some fact based observations. The plane outs are proceeded by sharp increases in free-fall speed of about 40-50mph in a few seconds, resulting in an almost doubling of the forward speed. How does this happen without a dive? Can you do the same thing from a steady fall rate not proceeded by a dive? While you are busy congratulating yourself on proving your first post correct, don't forget the key points of -an actual dive is not even necessary. -21MPH climb -The suit can plane out to zero mph from almost any available fall rate and forward speed -smooth slow ramp down to and below 0 fall rate -usable flight range has so far gone from 90 to -21mph Your graphs so far have proved all of these claims incorrect. "Normal flocking speed" is pretty subjective but even if you are now trying to say that 78MPH is normal flocking speed for you and Skwrl, it still doesn't result in anything near a 21MPH climb. The fact that we've come this far and you are now saying that you were climbing at 25-30mph without diving says a lot for your credibility.

Thanks for posting back with real figures, they are impressive for sure, but it seems like you are shifting the goal posts a bit. The question wasn't is it possible to get a short climb. It was if what you wrote in your first post too good to be true. Accepting you analysis of the data - the real figures are closer to climb of 6mph from 78mph fall rate. Do you really consider 78mph to be normal flocking speed for such a big suit? You were flocking with another big suit right? I'd have to say the fallrate is not low, and the climb is far less impressive than your first impression. You've just proved that it's very difficult to be objective without accurate data, even for someone as experienced as you, which was my point. It'll be really interesting to see the data, hope you get to post it at some stage.

I also agree that it's feasible to make a small climb after a sufficient dive, and just as possible with prior suits. That is very different to saying that this suit is so special that at will from normal flocking speed it's possible to climb at 20MPH! That's a pretty wild claim. It's pretty difficult to say if what's happening in a video where the camera height and angle are changing and ground is sloping. You shouldn't always believe your eyes. Here is video "proof" of a car rolling uphill https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYARQoBUdxs I didn't say it didn't happen just that the claim is so amazing I find it hard to believe and I'd like to learn more about it. I don't see why it's ruffled so many feathers.

I don't think that is correct, I think that that only applies when performing a radical manoeuvre like Oliver's long dive to flare. Your flight was a gradual transition from normal flight mode? I don't think it's necessary to change the mode in that case, but it probably won't harm things too much.

No problem, without tone it's easy to take things the wrong way. No offense taken or meant. I'll look forward to seeing the results of your Flysights tests, and if you can achieve "a clean smooth rampdown to 0mph, continuing past baseline through the teens to -20, -19, -21mph, gradually slowing and reversing once again past zero into normal flight as I went over the top and bled off what little speed was required to get this." I'll be very impressed. I don't see how you can make a video demonstrating a climb with a sinking canopy as a reference... without diving (you stated "An actual dive is not even necessary. ")... yes i think it's very farfetched.

Brian, you are the one that made several very long posts about the virtues of the suit - before your underwear was dry! Such fantastic claims were sure to draw interest (you seem surprised by this?). I’d love them to be true but am a bit jaded from the long history of previous claims (boy who cried wolf etc) - hence my interest in the FlySight logs. It's pretty core to this entire thread so not really nit-picking. I’m sorry if you feel I’m heckling you, it’s not my aim. No one requested “engineering data”, a simple upload of the text log file(s) you recorded was politely requested (not demanded). It would take seconds and allow people to make objective comparisons to other log files. I bet I'm not the only one interested is seeing the data. I also asked a few additional simple questions that it appears you don't wish to answer. Looking at what you've now said about the GPS data, it does indeed appear that your review is a bit over enthusiastic. That is all. P.S. The trial version of Paralog allows you to load a log file, analyse it and upload to PPC if you wish.

No I didn't, actually I think your performance is quite good and probably far better than I could achieve. It just didn't match up to the impression I had from reading various posts of yours. I guess the whole point was that nice flowery talk is all well and good, but it's only hard data that can be objectively compared. Not a dig at you at all. There is very little to do with Flysight other than what is stated in the quick start guide. Turn it on for 15min at the start of the day, and 1min before boarding, but it will probably work even if you don't do that. The accuracy of the data, num of stats etc is all recorded in log file, so there should be no problem uploading the existing file. If you post the raw file people will be able to see if it's a good dataset or not. That aside, there were a few other specific questions in my post above that you could answer without the data. I'm not out to scorn you, just put some context on statements that seem too good to be true. Is that so unreasonable?

Best PPC freefall time and distance for an Apache is 83.4sec, 3.93km (same jump) Your best PPC time and distance in an S-bird is 76.1sec, 3.74km (same jump) As you had a FlySight on the jump, why not upload the track so everyone can judge the "multi-generation" jump in performance for themselves? How many generations are there between S-bird and the new suit? When you talk about improvement between previous generations what percentage improvement in GR do you think there was? 7-8%? Unfortunately there is long history of hyped claims that turned out to be untrue, so it's hard to see this thread as anything but an over enthusiastic/fanatic review or over amped advertisement at this stage. You often talk about your experience and "ninja skills" which sounds impressive but your performance in competitions to date doesn't seem to match. I wonder how close the real world performance of this suit is to your assessment above? To put your review in context, are you a regular customer paying full price or sponsored/paid/given a discount/ receiving any other compensation?

Roughly 10-15 seconds to get to 2-2.5 GR from standing start. Distance fallen with vary greatly, but 220m - 270m is the right ballpark.

It's very similar to the WBT 201 (I had one of them) with a better chipset and a few other slightly nicer features. If you already have one, it's workable as long as you don't mind a bit of work managing files, importing them etc. If you don't already have one, Flysight is a significantly better device and gives more accurate data because of the way it calculates speeds (I'm assuming the WinTec doesn't use Doppler shift but I could be worng on that). The latest versions of Paralog play very nice with Flysight, significant effort has gone into supporting Flysight because so many people are using them. I'm not sure to what extent the WinTec 202 is supported by Paralog.

Not to turn it down, but there is an option to turn the sound off at a certain height, e.g. if you don't want the beeping when you are under canopy.

I was thinking it didn't look right based on it being a bit low and that perhaps the airspeed was ground speed (obviously it's not airspeed because gps doesn't give you that) - that's why I asked if it was 3d speed. I don't find 3d speed particularly useful so would suggest showing ground speed instead, but it depends on your intended audience. Yu don't have to listen to people on the internet, put what you want to.

The glide ratios don't look right, how do they compare with what Paralog gives you? Why show Air speed (is this 3d speed?) and fallrate rather than ground speed and fallrate?

The speeds mentioned seem plausible to me. He's a professional stuntman so I'm sure he is well used to working that kind of stuff out and doesn't need armchair critics analysing the data at the 11th hour, or giving him legal advice I reckon his chance of succeeding with only minor injuries is quite good. Best of luck!

The reserve did not activate with the suit closed, even with in excess of 50lbs applied is various directions, and even with the reserve out of the pocket. The activation at 50lbs occured with the suit open, so the handle could move away from the jumper.

That's a bit of an understatement of the situation. The tests in the video below shows cutaway pull force exceeds 30lbs and the metal reserve cable cannot be pulled even with more than 50lbs force applied in any direction. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zJFQdOs1Ic Recommend? You should insist that none of these suits are used for skydiving until the problem is properly analysed, fixed and tested. This is a fatality waiting to happen. The subject of your post says 'URGENT' why is this information not on your facebook page or website?

Worth is very subjective, and will depend on how you use the suit. If you are just flocking with your friends I doubt you'll need it, but if you are interested in getting some extra performance at the top end I think the foam will provide it. I don't have back to back jumps with and without the foam to compare, however I did notice a long time ago that I seemed to have better flights when wearing a heavy fleece than in a t-shirt. It could have been all in my head, but it seemed to make enough of a difference that I noticed it. I'd expect the foam to have a greater effect and it would be worth €50 to me.

When looking at any of these figures you should bear in mind that they can be greatly affected by wind, diving/flaring & for base jumps thermals. The two tracks you posted are in opposite directions (but as drunk pointed out second one looks like profile of tracking jump). It's quite possible that one is down wind and the other upwind. The winds aloft could also have changed in the 3 hours between jumps. Of course it's possible there was a strong tailwind on the jump in the video, but I'd guess less than 20knts. I suspect there is a strong tailwind on most skydives showing a sustained GR above 2.8:1 For every 10knots of tailwind you can add about 5meters in distance per second of flight. In the Paralog competition the vertical 1000m usually takes 50-90 seconds. 40 knot tailwind for 60 seconds of flight will give you 1.2km extra distance!

Most suits can impress off the big walls with the right pilot https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9C0PeZIonzo Getting a suit you can learn to fly really well is the important part. Then actually learn to fly it well rather than up-sizing quickly.

Butters: If people followed some manufacturers recomendations they'd be on their 3rd suit (an advanced model no less) by the time they got to 25 jumps. To the OP: You are right to short list the Phantom as one of the best options for a first suit, but as already said it's a good choice for intermediate and experienced jumpers too so should last you a long time. Don't take my word for it, try one and see (try a Shadow too for a different feeling) and whatever else is available. One of the reasons that Phantoms have such good resale value and are always in high demand is that many people don't sell them when they get other suits because they still like them so much. Be wary of people trying to sell you bigger surface area suits, especially if they use terms like "more range".

The grid system is terrible, hopefully whatever is changed is an improvement (I can’t imagine it being worse) and we will see better record formations. Can someone post a photo of this 4 way? I can see two reasons for peoples outrage: 1) they have poor skills and have no hope of being on a record now 2) their (or their friends) business plan was relying on the number of participants increasing steadily from an already high 68. I have little sympathy for either, save your outrage for something important. Where was all this uproar from your side and others when the Grid was proposed to the USPA and IPC without ANY community input? Jarno, I have no affinity for "the grid". As you know, I made my own, quite different proposal. However, continuing to badmouth people who set records according to existing rules, whether or not you like those rules, is very low class.

No. Student Cypres is designed for student type mistakes and student type canopies. What attributes of the Student model do you think would benefit someone in a large wingsuit?

So in 13 years taking all of the low hanging fruit we've managed to increase area by .8sqm and seem to be approaching the limits of what humans can handle for a couple of minutes without mechanical assistance. If it were possible to keep that rate of increase it would only take another 130 years to get to 10sqm or 65 years to get to 6sqm. But even that is just silly, trees don't grow to the sky

Cool, that makes sense and sounds resonably accurate. Can you run the same calculation on the same body size in a Birdman Classic(like this yellow suit http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_attachment;postatt_id=98883;t=search_engine), and also without any wingsuit? I'd be interested to compare the 3 to see how far we've come since 1999.