yuri_base

Fixed it for you. Besides, you don't want me in the comp as anything other than comic relief. The way I fly, everyone else looks great. Artistic, Autistic, Authentic, Atheistic... I see no difference. However, I made an error in my calculations (again!) - I checked again and finally found 1 (one) nipple and 1 (one) ball. Corrected the grand totals above to secure our undisputed victory. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio

You called? I wasn't particularly looking, but... with 8 nipples and 6 balls total between you, Jarno and me (flying camera), we'll surely win the gold in Artistic Expression - if not in the air, then on the ground. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio

I might not have moral standards of Mother Teresa or Pope, BUT... "2 way artistic event"????? Unless the rules specify that it's a male/female pair, this is totally morally wrong... like 2-men figure skating or dancing tango. And it's alright. Wingsuiting revolutionized the archaic moral norms. Nowadays, it's perfectly fine to touch another man dressed in colorful costume in freefall, do a 50-way same-sex orgy in the sky codenamed "flocking", or perform artistic moves like in Swan Lake ballet. The impeccable straightness of nonartistically flying maxed out, swooping clouds or mountains is as hard to find these days as finding a man with four nipples. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio

You'll probably get flamed here since you were 21 jumps short of the gold standard of the monkeys. On the relevant to subject note - "getting flamed", here's the update: a "student" of mine (quotes because I did not teach him anything that common sense cannot tell and all of his further progress is 100% his achievement) whom I took for a couple of introductory flights with 78 jumps under his belt (30-40 of which were in PF tracking suit specifically in preparation for WS) can now fly for 3 minutes and 6 seconds over 11,000ft of altitude IN PRODIGY with exit weight 250lbs. That's 17 seconds average per 1000ft in Prodigy with exit weight 250lbs. (he's about 6'3" or 6'4" but that's only ~10% increase in surface area compared to 6' person that can account only for 5% increase in freefall time) That's TALENT. I bet a cold shiny Sapporo that NONE of the monkeys in this thread can do that. (don't forget to match 250lbs with lead, yo?)

Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio

Klaus, I can milk my formulas until the last drop. I was underestimating the duration of the climb and the associated importance of drag-induced deceleration, as Professor Kallend pointed out. It turns our that effect was not small. See the attached spreadsheet, it has a lot of superschweet condensed milk! Play with the sustained horizontal and vertical speeds for a fixed initial [high-speed pass] speed. The trajectory drawn is relative to ground. Negative Y is above the plane. Can you milk more milk and put a Solver in there to maximize the climb by varying vertical and horizontal sustained speeds? (I don't have Excel Solver on my computer.) Of course, it makes sense to limit the vertical and horizontal speeds by some reasonable ranges so we don't get some crazy combination like Vx=666mph, Vy=0.666mph. Of course, these calculations are in assumption of constant L/D (i.e. constant adjusted lift and drag coefficients Kl and Kd). When we know real Kl and Kd as functions of AoA, Monte Carlo simulations can be carried out to find out the optimal pitch angle as a function of time to achieve even higher climb than for constant AoA. Yuri P.S. Jarno, you're my hero, BUT... Vesa and Professor are now my heroes, too! Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio

It looks like the principles Z-Device is built upon can be used to help our brothers swoopers, too.

You are right, in a "black box" with an apparent gravity pointer there is no way to determine the direction of true gravity, but if you stick your head outside the box and see where the ground or water is, you can. This method requires taking the video of the swoop so you measure the angle the half-black, half-white disk (with one half heavier than the other) makes with the ground. But what I was thinking - there's even better way and I already have all the electronics for it! Simply take an accelerometer with you. Accelerometer measures apparent gravity. The vector sum of its components along the axes of the accelerometer is the vector of apparent gravity: g1 + g2 = g' (here prime denotes apparent gravity, vs. true gravity g) So it's nothing but Pythagorean theorem: g1^2 + g2^2 = g'^2 On the other hand, you're moving with horizontal deceleration ax (that's horizontal component of apparent gravity for you) and the vertical component is simply g (because your vertical acceleration ay = 0). So ax^2 + g^2 = g'^2 From these two equations it follows that ax^2 = g1^2 + g2^2 - g^2 and finally L/D = g/sqrt(g1^2 + g2^2 - g^2) DONE!!!

We can totally use lazy Gardiner cops as aerospace scientists standing with radar guns next to swoop course anxiously waiting for fresh L/D data! Here's another idea: g divided by deceleration ax is nothing but the cotangent of the angle that apparent gravity (for the swooper) makes with the vertical. Therefore, we don't even need to measure speed as a function of time to measure the deceleration, we can simply use any device that indicates the apparent gravity - like a plumb-line in decelerating train. Plumb line would be affected by drag, a better indicator would be a disk with one half heavier that the other, or a small vessel with liquid. The cotangent of the measured angle is nothing but crystal pure L/D!

Amazing, simply amazing... Every step in great detail, with photos, descriptions, ideas, data, and formulas dancing in one inspiring dance... the name of which is "Love to fly"... Just another example: Solar Powered UAV Project What about us?! A list of people going to boogies and a traditional "someone dared to ask a question before 200 jumps" catfight. Monkeys, monkeys, monkeys everywhere...

Right on, Darren! I think compared to RC enthusiasts, technically, wingsuit flying is much more primitive not only by the level of current development and discussions, but by the nature of task at hand: for example, UAV guys need to solve so many problems - aerodynamics, GPS navigation, Kalman filters, all that complex electronics, programming IC boards, etc. etc....... We only need to apply very basic principles of aerodynamics to develop new mean and lean gliding machines of the future. But we still have no clue and resist any innovation. We still resist the idea that a glider needs to be balanced to fly efficiently. We still resist the idea that a glider needs to have an aerodynamic leading edges and efficient, precisely defined wing profile. We still resist the idea that flying with "fuselage" at the same AoA as the wing is something that will get any aeronautics engineer fired. We still have no idea what optimum AoA is and what AoA is at all. We still have no distinction between the powered level flight and nonpowered gliding flight and constantly apply wrong concepts from the former to the latter. We still have wingsuits with poor pressurization, weird inlets destroying the very idea of the leading edge, and refrigerator-sized "butt deflectors" that nobody proved to be efficient. We still have wingsuits that are advertised as having maximum lift AND drag. We're still not much different from the retarded ninjas of the 1930's who were smoking god knows what. We still haven't moved an inch since Patrick De Gayardon circa 1997. The time has come to look at the mirror and see our monkey faces. "The situation is critical in the extreme. In fact it is now absolutely clear that to delay the uprising would be fatal." Long live the wingsuit revolution!!!

Yo! If it's not a hundred-page list of people going to a boogie (in fact, simple math shows that for N participants adding themselves one by one to the list the thread will contain N*(N+1)/2 names - for N=100, that's 5050 names of which 4950 are uselessly repeated), it's a discussion of a 200-jump rule. Here is an example of productive online sharing of ideas and collaboration - all in pursuing a different side of the same thing: the dream of flight. From RCgroups.com: UAV - Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Modeling Science DIY Electronics to name just a few. Read informative discussions there, watch step-by-step developments of new projects, schematics of cool devices and airplanes, sharing and assimilating of knowledge. Compared to them, we here are prehistoric primates making unintelligible noises and throwing banana skins at each other. Yet every time I go to a big gathering of wingsuiters, I count at least a couple of PhDs in physics or math, a couple with aerospace background, a few with engineering degrees, electronic whiz's, lots of programmers, mechanics, machinists, porn stars, people with unusual anatomical features like extra nipples and armpit ballsacks... the list goes on an on. If we could combine only 1% of our collective talent, we'll be flying amazing machines that look like those from the 22nd century - but today. Or we could remain monkeys falling in our squirrel Halloween suits like banana skins.

You are right, and Vesa's 30 degrees may be actually closer to the "absolutely right" answer than 45. Also, the optimum angle will depend on wingloading, type of suit, body type, etc. I was leaving this out because 45 degrees is a reasonable first estimate and we do not have lift and drag as functions of AoA yet. But we will. The data will allow one to do Monte Carlo simulations and find the best angle. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio

Of course, if the person is not in the spot where you took the first picture, the calculation will be wrong. But why would you do a wrong thing when you can do the right one? In this particular example, I took the first picture while standing next to the trash can. Then I put the camera on a tripod about 100ft farther away from the bridge, turned on the timer (10 seconds) and ran back to the trash can. I did the right thing and got the right result.

I agree with Lama. The question was not who swoops farthest, or fastest, or makes more ninja moves. The question was simply "who is the BEST canopy pilot in the world?" Best means have no one even close. The answer is obvious: SONIC. The rest just pales in comparison. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio

Laszlo, it works and the principle behind it is solid - it's just simple geometric proportions. Check out the link above, can you prove that formulas are wrong? The lens needs to be linear (i.e. not wide angle). If you take a picture of a yardstick, 1 inch in the middle of the frame should be as long as 1 inch at the edge of the frame. I took the picture with Canon 50mm f/1.4 lens, which is known to be high-quality, and Canon 20D, which crops the field of view by 1.6x factor (which further limits the nonlinearity). But even with P&S cameras, it'll still work and is accurate enough for the intended purpose. Yuri Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio

Posting a pic here simply to link to it from basejumper.com - that buggy site does not allow to make attachments (randomly). Link to post there: Simple height measurement method Sorry for the offtopic, the subject does have some relevance to photography. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio

Jarno, you're my hero. With 4 nipples, you're two revolutionaries in one. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio

You are 100% correct, Sir. L/D flying is not gay. Flocking is.

Received the reply from Boris. Ladies and gentlemen, we gonna see some cool shit in 2008. The old WS world in counting its last days. The revolution is imminent. Your only option to survive is to participate!

Too bad Z-Weather turned out to be shit this long weekend, my plan was to go to Z-Hills to do more tests. But the day did not suck here regardless, as I won three Nobel Prizes in one day - wingsuits, BASE, and canopy piloting!

Checked recently Gibolin's log. After a couple of Sapporo's, this inspiring letter was born in the "Industrial Secrets" post.

Yo! It just dawned on me that when you swoop your glide ratio is infinite (you guys are pro's and know this since you dragged your foot on the ground for the first time; it takes years for the retards like me ) and thus in the wingsuit equations - which are actually applicable to any non-powered gliding flight - from L/D = (G*(g - ay) + ax)/(g - ay - G*ax) with G = infinity it follows that L/D = g/|ax| In other words, if you simply take a video of the swoop and calculate the deceleration from it (for example, by having an object of known length in the frame or even simply using wing's chord as a unit of length), you simply divide g by that deceleration and get the lift to drag ratio at each moment. Since the speed is purely horizontal during the swoop, it's easy to measure the angle of attack when you're on the rears and bingo! - you have L/D as a function of AoA (as well as for different brake inputs when you transition to brakes). And since during the swoop lift is precisely equal to weight, you get lift as function of AoA and since you know L/D from the first step, you know drag as a function of AoA, too! Complete polar curve can be derived by just taking a video of the swoop. A simple idea for you canopy researchers - PD, Brian, and others.

I want to measure L/D of ABBA wingsuit! Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio

Another illustration of the simple and beautiful physics of non-powered flight: What jumprun speed do you need to start climbing above the plane - with or without wingsuit (in tracking position)? To start climbing right after exit, you need lift be greater than your weight: L' > W (here prime denotes high-speed pass values). If in sustained tracking or wingsuit dive your total speed is v and lift is L and you do high-speed exit at speed v' at the same AoA and body position, L' will be increased by the factor of the speed squared: L' = L*(v'/v)^2 In sustained flight, L = W*(L/D)/sqrt(1 + (L/D)^2) Combining everything, we get this condition: W*(L/D)/sqrt(1 + (L/D)^2)*(v'/v)^2 > W or v' > v*(1 + 1/(L/D)^2)^(1/4) For example, if you can track at L/D = 0.8 with total speed of 115mph (90 down, 72 forward), you can go above the plane at the jumprun speed of 145mph. If you fly wingsuit during flocking at 60 down, 60 forward (total 85mph), you need the minimum of 101mph to start climbing. If you're a heavier jumper with 70 down, 70 forward, you need 118mph. Anybody climbed above the plane without wingsuit in tracking position at 45 degrees? Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio