NWPoul

There plenty of pics in Russian page of the site http://www.aerotruba.ru/chronicle.htm And seems that should be web cams: http://www.aerotruba.ru/building_site.htm Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Niklas Daniel has short but IMO useful to watch videos on www.expertvillage.com here for BackFlying: http://www.expertvillage.com/video/10066_sky-dive-back-fly.htm But some real tunnel time with an instructor is much-much useful;) Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Why not to cut the knoted line and get the main with almost full speed/control range? Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

I believe, that pendulum effect has more impact on whether canopy will plane out without input (actually the system canopy-pilot will apply this input by itself due to pendulum effect) or not... And pendulum effect is a matter of canopy planform/trim/lines lngth/WL and type of turn etc... OnTopic: I Use rears to "slightshot" on every jump... seems to work for me:) Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Hi Bro! You have it right:) you should have your hands free for dock's & other stuff:) and use your legs and BACK for speed control. Wide legs is good, but not enough, just keeping your legs wide apart actually doesn't lead to increasing your surface to relative wind and slowing you down, to do so - try to squeese your knees a little bit while keeping your legs wide And... go to the wind tunnel, it's really helps a lot;) Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

1 of these , or 1 An-124 Yep) A Guiness record of throwing 600 people from one plane was planned in Ukraine on this summer... But now this event is canceled=/ Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Up to 22 at DZ's I have jumped but it's quite tight :) Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

+1 Wind which strong enough to make me worried about being dragged is way stronger than wind which I feel confortable to jump with (particularly it's wind which will push me flying back and even stronger) Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

I beg to differ but this depend on conditions and canopy For moderate to high loaded canopy (especially if it has steep trim) and light wind, slight input on rears may let you glide further... So best bet IMO would be a try and accuracy trick:) Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

I like this version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0G9vDKcdLg Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Look, with such rigs some guy's are jumping and stop worrying about a little longer closing loop Edit: 2Phoenix - actually these files are *.jpg and I have checked it's opening=/... But may be it's cyrrilic names causing some troubles so I renamed them... so as You did:) Thanks Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

I believe, that no one doubt that Atmo is a quite different than track... in technique, in feeling and in target I think that all cunfusing and arguing is about point that Atmonauts produce the lift by a some special magic way, which can not be achive in track or other tehnique (and as I find out there many people who don't believe in Lift Force of human Body at all) When Lift which you produce is the exact same nature as lift from a track... Your techinique, the way you use that force and all other which is essetial of Atmo IMO quite obviously different and it is cool! Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

I just want to clarify, that I mean AOA ie Angle between Body and relative wind, not between body an horizon:) Ok, I just though that I haven't enought right to speak regarding Atmo coz I don't feel that understand it's enough:) I beg to differ here... The Lift produced by tracking and atmo has the same nature... May bejust technique and feeling are different (but you can say that it's all about feelling :) ) But... IMO it's just like sex If one came to his girl at front while other came to his girl from backside does it mean, that one haven't sex coz came to the girl from wrong side?? So I defenetly don't think that tracking is not flying As well as that Lift produced by human body isn't a lift in compare to the planes coz the relative wind hit the body by different angle or even side:) P.S. %$#@I hope my terrible english Don't prevent to understand what I mean to say Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Hi! Greate pics! On most of them hovewer it's hard to see the angle between body and the relative wind but on these: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_attachment;postatt_id=96826; http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_attachment;postatt_id=96825; Clearly shown that body meet the relative wind by noticeable angle. Yes it is possible to get the Lift with AOA=0 even for such aerodynamic noncense like human body:) But it's seems, that this body position will be too inefficient for your angle flight. I believe, that most effective AOA for human body is about 45 dergee as we can see it in a tracking jumps But it's if we mean by "effectiveness" only L/D... For Atmonaut it can be and it seems it is - more effective not max L/D but be able to perform such cool things as you do and shown us So you find that AOA less than 45 degree (but very unlike that zero) work better for ya, and thats greate:) Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

It's funny, but for this qestions there is an clear answer too: The egg was first Here is a formula: joking (seriously the eggs was here millions years before than first chicken). Back to the Force and Movement... It's even more clear The force should came first coz the force provide accseleration to start movement (or change of movement) and keep movement in resisting environment. It's a Law! So if you fall straight you have to deflect air to create the LF to start the horizontal movement and keep/increasing horizontal speed Lift is the force from reaction of relative wind, no mater from which derection (relative to the earth) this wind coming. . Again: there is only two Aerodinamical forces: Lift and Drag Drag obviously can't move you forward so you obviously need the lift Yes! coz it makes the Lift that move you forward! Have a nice flight - let the Lift Force be with you! Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

No First: It's not Me, who define what the Lift force is... it's physic... I just don't know any other definition of LF, do you?:) Second: LF is not "Horizontal movement" and even not the "horizontal Force", LF is a Perpendicular to Relative Wind Force! But for us as falling objects it's mean that at the begining LF is horizontal (later as soon as we get some Horizontal sped the LF will be directed forward and upward, coz relative wind will be not vertical) and there is impossible to get any horizontal movement without creating some Lift (or without engines). Ha-ha no camrade, I am Absolutely agree with you on this statement coz it's absolutely correct! Of course LF in the pic directed diagonal, not straight forward Of course this forward movement can be caused just by deflecting the air (since ALL aerodynamical forces caused by this reason) which create LF And of course also this forward movement can be the result of an external power source (jet)engine Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Is it just me or does that make no sense. Im sorry I dont have a degree in physics or anything but from what I can gather you are saying that you need lift inorder to get horizontal speed? right. well OK, how do you explain fast horizontal movement in the headown position, is the headown flyer creating lift to make horizontal movement? Actually it is not necessary to have a physics degree to understand this... Just definition what the Lift Force is and simple logic Again: Lift is a component of Full Aerodynamic Force perpendicular to the relative wind Another component of AF is a Drag, which always parallel to the relative wind. So in sustained nonpowered flight/freefall we have three possible to obtain forces: Gravity, Drag and Lift. Gravity and Drag is always here and only lift can be = 0 But if Lift = 0 you have only two forces which directed exactly opposite to each other: Gravity (downward) and Drag (upward) and you falling straight down. So, until you create a perpendicular component of force (which is the LIFT by definition!) you cannot move horizontal at all! Yes in HD your moving horizontal mean, that you have created the Lift Force! Again Lift Force isn't that force, that lift you up, it's a force, that moving you perpendicular to the relative wind! And only in level flight (usually powered) Lift act like many people think it's should always act - "lifting" the plane straight up... Hope this help:) P/S By the way, if you look at the blade of a prop, (which actually provide a horizontal force and speed to our jumpships) you'll find that it very like a wing And exactly the Lift Force of blades push (or pull) the plane forward! And this Lift Force directed horizontal, not upward Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Ok let's see on this pic From the pic L/D is about 0.45 (see the attached croped pic, which is a rectangular with diagonal in line with a smoke trace and with base in line with horizon... the dimensions of the crop pic is 128 pixels Hor. / 282 pixels Vert. so L/D = 128/282 = 0.454) With L/D=0.45 This jumper create a Lift Force which equal of 41% of his weight ( L = W*(L/D)/sqrt(1 + (L/D)^2) ) So if his exit weight is about 200 lbs - he create a 82 lbs of Lift Force... Is it significant? Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Is more than half of your weight (or say ~140 lbs of lift for some with exit weight of 200 lbs) "small measures" for you? if it is than yes you have it right, but for me it is quite significant:) It's not actually my comprasion... My point as simple as definition of Lift Force: To get horisontal speed in freefall you need the lift So if you have the horizontal speed - you have created the lift! period... Regarding "minimal, minor or insignificant" there is a simple way to find out what amount of Lift you get - analyse your trajectory and get the L/D and the simple formula for sustained nonpowered flight Weight^2=Lift^2+Drag^2 So you can see, that a good trackers (don't know much about atmonauts) can create the Lift Force more than half of their exit weight. Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Hi:) Yes the relative wind hit the body not only at leading edge, but at all lower surface i.e. body meet the realtive wind at some AOA But it's the same as wing of airplane does! (despite the fact. that asymetrycal wing profile can generate lift at 0 AOA, for most plaines this lift won't be enough). So if yo join and in your post it will be quite correct coz Lift is Lift no matter if it produced by deflecting air at 0 AOA (yes even at 0 AOA you deflecting it) or deflecting air at steeper AOA Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Sorry but it does not At first: there is no such thing as negative pressure:) (only low pressure relative to some reference pressure) roughly pressure is a sum of hitings of moleculas at surface... So is your body have a shape of wing or it's more like a bag of potatos, the only forces you can have - the forces of hiting and deflecting back the air particles Having the relative wind you can adjust you body position so that hiting particles coming from one side will have higher momentum, than from the other (yes, not only because of plain summary of your freefall speed and it's own kinetic enregy (temperature of gas) but also because of thier copmlicated way and behavour around you body to hit you from backside:) ) So actually all that you (me, automonuties, airplaines and whatever) can do with air to create lift- it's deflecting him with particular maner:) So when you track with L/D=1 you create quite significant amount of Lift (in this particular case L= W/sqrt(2) ) And this LIFT not less lift than that wich let the airplanes fly Using this Lift you can fly like an airplane (yet like a bad airplane:) too, if you have engine with enough emount of thrust (can be calculated from the L/D) and vice versa: Without an engene an airplanes can't fly as they do, they can only glide, but much better L/D give them much longer glide (and possibility to climb for a while untill they lost an airspeed). Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Heh, I thought to wrote "any non fully symmethrical body" but it would be not quite right, coz even a ball can create a lift, beeng placed into relative wind if you give em a spin (lift will be created by difference of airflow speed around spinning ball) so I had to wrote ANY BODY CAN:) Please, give another official definition of the Lift Force... I'am a liitle bit confused In the same post you said that "Bernulli only" flying model is flawed an the airplaines are flying with help of AOA, deflecting air and Sir Newton... And now say tha deflecting of air is not a lift Again, please give the another (LF = perpendicular to relative wind componet of AF) oficcial definition of the Lift Force... Let the Force be with us Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Hi Bro! I think, that all confusions regarding the Lift Force came from cunfusions about the Lift Force:) First: All what you can get from the relative wind you can get only by ineract with them get the feedback i.e. All the aerodynamical forces (Lift and Drag) for ANY OBJECT (skydiver, airplane etc) producing by deflecting the air some way! So saying "it's not the lift - it's deflecting the relative wing" just senseless It' all sir Newton Second: Yes the horisontal speed is quite enough evidense of Lift, coz if there was no lift (perpendicular component to the relative wind, which without any other forces beside Gravity and drag will be parallel the vector of gravity force) there was no force wich drive the body forward Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

Having read this thread can't understand about what people talking here About lift of Human Body? or About atmonauty? Can't say much about atmo but regarding lift... Comrades, pls give it a try to know WHAT the LIFT FORCE IS! Just definition of the Lift Forse can give you the right and clear answer: Human body (as well as ANY other body) CAN (and do) produce the LIFT FORCE Lift by definition is a component of the Full Aerodynamical Force perpendicular to the relative wind... So just the fact, that someone can fall not stright down but with some Horizontal speed obviusly proove, that he create the lift! 2Frost: As I said to you on SkyCentre, it's seems, that you one from few in this thread, who understand things right but, Lift Force, produced by human body is not minimal! and for example in good track when tracker drive forward on 1 ft per each 1 ft he fell - the L/D is 1/1 which mean, that he produce as Lift the same "amount of force" as Drag! Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

What people think, what people say and what they do - is often quite different things:) See this topic: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3044109;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread ...What are you trying to prove and who are you trying to prove it too? Because no-one else really cares... I don't trying to prove anything Only trying to tell and only what I have wrote: 1. What pepole write here can be differ from what they actually think and how they actually do... And those, who blame his WL@ his Jump## may made the same (or even more agressive) downsize regarless of what is good and what is bad 2. Give the link, when he can see (roughly) what actually canopy progression and downsizing is among the modern population:) Now the my wrong IMHO: I don't have enough exp. to say that WL 1.3 @ 160 jumps is too high yet usually (when asked) advice to follow the +0.1/100 jumps rule... but I just don't understand what the such outstanding difference between 1.1 and 1.3 WL may be due to the fact that personally have such WL @ 50 junps and never was find that it's too agressive and wanted it lower (even when forest crash landing) And I always was looking for exact facts of "1.3 at your jump # is bad" to support my point when I have say this to jumpers asking me for advice or forum's disscussion but I coudn't find it=/ nor in the statistic, nor in teory, nor in personal expiriense=/ Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?