yuri_base

Members
  • Content

    1,063
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never
  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by yuri_base

  1. Surface area by itself is useless if one doesn't know Cl and Cd, because it's the product Cl*S and Cd*S that matters. Same with weight, it's useless by itself. Moreover, the choice of S is arbitrary - doesn't have to be planform area, can be crosssectional area - as long as Cl and Cd are measured with this convention. Again, because only C*S/m matters for dynamics. Again, poor grasp of aerodynamics and basic math is demonstrated. How can one not see it, when F=ma is expanded in the above PDF, that it's only combination C*S/m that matters for dynamics? As far as AoA, I never measured it. It's possible with the vane by using a Bluetooth accelerometer mounted on some reference point on body. The problem is... no solid reference point exists on human body! (unless, perhaps, someone has a fully fused colon and has a wireless accelerometer planted in it!) Here's a speedup footage of a jump that shows this problem. https://vimeo.com/108428363 The pole with the vane is on quite large and solid (2mm aluminum) belly platform, camera is on the pole close to the vane. The visible oscillations are not vane's; vane is steadily pointing into relative wind from 2-3s from exit till the pull. It is... my breathing! My belly moves as I breath, the pole moves, and although the vane is pointing into the airflow, it appears as if it's wobbling. So, if 2nd accelerometer was installed on the platform as a body reference, the angle between it and vane will constantly change with every breath, and AoA measurements will be like EKG and essentially useless. Also, since platform sits a bit differently on different jumps, AoA measured for different jumps will differ even if it actually was the same. Whatever place we can think on our body to place an accelerometer, it can't serve as consistent reference point because you can't put it on twice exactly, even with 1 degree consistency! As far as WSE, I'm still patiently waiting for anyone to present equations of motion for a glider, that are actually usable in wingsuiting. Photo or screenshot of a book, or an URL. "Put it up or shut up." Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  2. I've read the works of early aerodynamicists: Otto Lilienthal (1889), Nikolai Zhukovsky (1891) on unpowered bird or glider dynamics; many aerodynamics books (either read or skimmed specifically in search for WSE analog) - and never found anything resembling WSE. If unpowered flight is considered in a book, it's only dealing with parameters like AoA, Cl, Cd, surface area, etc. - exactly what the trick of WSE manages to avoid completely, since we don't know these parameters. The trick of WSE is to hide these parameters into "magic" coefficients of lift and drag, Kl and Kd, that translate into things understandable and measurable by every wingsuiter - sustained horizontal and vertical speeds. As I wrote in their publication on Dec 7 2006, http://www.pureflyingmagic.com/Content/Knowledge/Resources/Articles/en/WingsuitEquations.pdf in excitement of discovery, (imagine if all problems could be solved just by shoving them under a carpet...) This trick is what aeronotical engineers don't understand because it's not in their cheat handbooks or university books. There only two people in the Solar System who get this trick - me and Hartman Rector - and successfully apply it to wingsuit flight, be it theory and software, or analysis and planning of WS BASE flights. Approx. 6,999,999,998, including all aerospice engineers, don't. Never in the history of aerodynamics, a problem of calculating a trajectory of a glider, standing on a tall cliff and stepping off of it, was needed. Even with NASA's unpowered lifting bodies. Even if they needed to calculate the trajectory of these, they would use the data from windtunnel - coefficients of lift and drag for various angles of attack, planform surface area - to calculate forces at each moment and thus accelerations - and use F=ma at each moment of time to integrate the trajectory. We don't have these - and thanks to WSE we don't need them! - as for us, the sky is the natural windtunnel where the airflow is created not by powerful fans, but by our motion itself; by gravity. I started wingsuiting in spring 2005 (after about 275 skydives) with Prodigy and then Phantom-1, and in the beginning I didn't even think about science of wingsuit flight (and as most wingsuiters, didn't even understand the difference between L/D and GR). However, I've always been interested in flying the most efficient way, at max glide, and started measuring my flights with GPS (Garmin Vista-C), especially on balloon and heli jumps which I was doing a lot in preparation for WS BASE. And so, I made this embarrassing mistake of treating a straight part of a balloon jump (after wind subtraction, of course) in P-1 as a sustained flight with L/D = 2.9 (while in fact it was GR = 2.9 - it was a slow flare) and in search for the answers, I started really digging the physics of flight, but it took me several months looking at F=ma (expanded with Cl, Cd, S, ro, Vx, Vy, V), until I saw what was hiding from me in plain sight - magic coefficients Kl, Kd. The rest is history. For more than 100 years, WSE were hiding in plain sight. But it won't ever be on Wikipedia, because of enormous egos of those fighting for dominance on the wingsuit page. WSE are classic and eternal, the endless blah-blah-blah of aerospice engineers and other uneducated people here will be quickly forgotten, although will be a funny read years later. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  3. This perfectly exemplifies the poor education most of so called "aerospice engineers" have. Heard something (probably on a lecture in classic mechanics, while busily facebooking) and applies it to something totally different. In the former case, it's a frictionless hard surface the particle is sliding on (i.e. the normal force adjusts itself to move the particle along the path, to arbitrary high value, if needed; and the drag/friction is zero). In the latter case, it's a wingsuit, with no predefined path ("normal force" - lift - depends on speed, not on path shape, and cannot take arbitrary value), and friction - drag. Totally different, physically, situation, and solution for the former does not apply to the latter, like, at all. If such an aerospice engineer were under my supervision, I'd immediately fire them if they said something like the quote to me. God forbid they design some critical part in an airplane! But it's ok if they design a skydiving altimeter, because nobody cares/understands what wrong numbers it shows, as long as it looks cool. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  4. I proved Wingsuit Equations in 2006, see OP for the link. Now, in modern civilized countries, there's this principle, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence So anyone who thinks that WSE and related math I derived is wrong, has a burden to rigorously, mathematically - not by just blah-blah-blah - prove that they are wrong. However, as noted in Wikipedia, I guess, there are people still thinking in feudal law terms. The first here who will rigorously, mathematically - not by just blah-blah-blah - prove that Wingsuit Equations are wrong, will receive the unofficial Nobel Prize in Wingsuit Science (and probably, the official one in Physics, presented by the King of Sweden in Stockholm, for proving Newton's F=ma wrong, since WSE is nothing but F=ma as applied to wingsuits). Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  5. 5.0km How about this one? https://ppc.paralog.net/showtrack.php?track=20949 2.3km Same pilot, same suit. Why the huge difference (more than 2x)? Pilot's bad day? Nope. WIND. Apparently, at Zephyrhills the rules of the DZ mandated the jump run in certain direction which forced pilots to fly against the wind. Hence, the huge difference between horizontal speeds (e.g. 216km/h and 86km/h). So, if in Overton the actual wind, for example, was +65km/h (tailwind), and in ZH it was -65km/h (headwind), it explains the huge 130km/h difference. (The wind numbers that can be seen on some tracks in PPC are useless, nobody can know the exact wind profile at the time of the jump, the only way to measure it is to launch a weather balloon right in the place and time of each jump.) This shows that Paralog graphs are completely useless in determining the state of the art L/D of modern wingsuits. Moreover, it's not only "passively" useless, it's "actively" misleading, as the graphs create this aura of "scientificity" which misleads naive people, including PPC pilots themselves. That's how these legends of "4:1" or "3.5:1" are born - from lack of being critically analytic with data. GPS is garbage and should never be used other than a recorder of coordinates (for example, to show the flight line in WS BASE). All these horizontal (and even vertical, when there are thermals like in BASE) speeds and ground glide ratios are completely useless and misleading in determining the aerodynamic parameters of the wingsuits. When a pilot only knows GPS/Flysight, it just shows total lack of technical understanding of the problem. It's hopeless to explain anything to them, they are in the state of... CoW. Vane is the only means to completely exclude winds and thermals. L/D Magic, launched to Apple app store in May 2013, for 5 years remains the first and the only full aerodynamic measurement device (L/D, air GR, Vx, Vy, Vxs, Vys, Cl, Cd, L, D) in Solar System to date, while the freely available L/D Vario launched 3 years ago is a much simplified version of it (without Kalman filters, which eliminates the requirement to jump at precise moment, it works continuously). But nobody ever jumped with a vane, other than myself. (Not bragging, rather disappointed.) Even WSMs (!), although they should be the first to embrace this technology. The rubber band of disparity between available technology and Amish-like resentment of The Three Stooges to truly scientific methods continues to stretch for 5, 10, 12 years now. When it's going to rupture? The situation is nothing but comic now. Will they be honest and put this fact in Wikipedia article about wingsuits? *(The answer is below.) * Not a chance. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  6. I must correct myself. Some tracks, if this procedure with wind subtraction and Vx extrema is performed, result in values higher than 3.0 - for example, this track has 3.33 at 42.8s and even 3.48 at 60.8s. To me, it only indicates one thing: the wind profile cannot be known with accuracy needed to precisely measure L/D on a skydive with GPS. GPS is not an L/D tool at all. It's a ground track tool, not an aerodynamic tool. The only right way to measure L/D is with a vane, period. Or with a Pitot tube which also must be on a vane, far from the body. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  7. DIY The videos I posted in "Wingsuit Research" thread, are enough for anyone to get the idea and make a vane mount for their phone. It's a trivial DIY project. Belly platform, pole, fork, vane, balance - all can be built from simple materials in a matter of several hours. It's no rocket science. I'm not going to chase anyone. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  8. Keep pushing, you will eventually have the data Nope. Not interested in pushing anything anymore, gave up long time ago. It's hopeless. I'm creating my apps and further developing wingsuit dynamics theory purely for myself now. But whenever I come up with some idea and create, for example, an app based on it (like I did with Wingsuit FAP), I put it up for everyone to use. But pushing it is hopeless, no one is interested. And it's not like WSMs don't know about these advancements in WS instrumentation, many pilots working closely for every major WSM saw my devices. Also, the apps can be easily found just by searching app stores for "wingsuit", once in a while (I do that at least once a year - nothing new or interesting, only stupid WS games, which don't even have physics done right). They're not interested in quantifying wingsuit aerodynamics because it will work against them - people will see that nothing is really changing in yearly updated wingsuits, while using Godzilla Marketing works wonders for them as they can push these overpriced $2000 dresses as "massive advancements in technology". Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  9. L/D (not GR, who cares about it, really, other than people who don't know the difference) changing 3.0->3.5 is actually a HUGE deal. Look what the 20% change 2.5->3.0 did - we have much more massive dives and much more massive flares, and faster starts in BASE, enabling jumps that have not been possible before. With L/D = 3.5 (almost the magic L/D of 3.567), we'll have mind-blowing flares and dives, the energy buildup and retention will improve dramatically (as I wrote in the Wingsuit Research thread, the dependence of these things on L/D is not linear, it's more like exponential). As well as new jumps opened in WS BASE. I've offered my device several times, but no one is interested, although it almost happened with one world champion (I don't remember why it didn't happen - he was seemingly interested, but either I had to go, or he had to go, or what, don't remember.) People just don't understand it, and it seems weird to them. "I have a Flysight, why would I jump this weird thing?" They can have many thousands of jumps and several decades in the sport, but they don't understand the difference between GR and L/D. But surely WSMs can build a vane for their smartphone or smartwatch and use the tool to quantify wingsuit characteristics? But they don't do that, because... CoW. (and I bet they don't understand the diff between GR and L/D, either) Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  10. I've talked to "world champions", too, and they don't know the difference between L/D and GR, either. It is a trivial thing, but the number of people in our Solar System understanding what L/D actually is (that it's not just another notation for GR) can be counted on one hand... of a man who chopped some fingers off on a circular saw. It's hopeless. The wingsuiting is stuck in the state of CoW perpetually. No desire to learn anything, to think, to progress... Only endless blah-blah-blah. [inline CoW.gif] There's no need to lend anything, the tool (vane) can be made by anyone in one evening. The app (L/D Vario) is free and runs on any of the 4 platforms: Android, Wear, ios, Windows. Maybe I should start a poll asking when someone else, besides me, is going to jump with a vane (the only way of reliably and precisely measuring wingsuit aerodynamics). But it's clear that it should have only one option: "Never". Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  11. Wrong. 3.0 (+/- hundredths, maybe) L/D is not determined by speaking with folks, it's determined by rigorous calculations like in the link, or by real wingsuit instrumentation like L/D Vario and L/D Magic. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  12. I'll show how it's done. Let's take this track from Paralog as an example. https://www.paralog.net/ppc/showtrack.php?track=26916 [inline FritsJensen1.png] In 3D view, https://www.paralog.net/ppc/showtrack3D.php?track=26916 [inline FritsJensen2.jpg] we see that the flight is pretty much exactly downwind, with the wind of 49km/h (26.6kn) right on the back (257 degrees). So, we subtract 49km/h from horizontal speed. Let's use the above mentioned WSE trick to find L/D in extrema points of Vx (in these points, according to WSE, L/D is equal to air glide ratio; in arbitrary point, L/D != GR). We see several minima/maxima in Vx: t=33.0s, Vx=146, Vy=48, L/D = 3.04, ground GR = 4.06 t=42.0s, Vx=151, Vy=53, L/D = 2.85, ground GR = 3.77 t=59.0s, Vx=130, Vy=49, L/D = 2.65, ground GR = 3.65 t=74.4s, Vx=132, Vy=51, L/D = 2.59, ground GR = 3.55 t=87.0s, Vx=122, Vy=50, L/D = 2.44, ground GR = 3.42 So we can clearly see that this is nothing but gaining tremendous speed before the window and slowly (very slowly) flaring it into a better GR. L/D starts from 3.04 and continuously falls down - the angle of attack is slowly increased, L/D is decreasing. Average GR in the window - 4.195, but this is not L/D! L/D is 3.04 max. We can analyze any Paralog or Skyderby track like this and see that max L/D is never higher than 3.0 (plus/minus small change). Besides using extrema points, one can use general formula that relates L/D and GR, which is derived from WSE: L/D = (GR + z)/(1 - GR*z) where z is dimensionless ratio z = ax/(g - ay), ax is horizontal acceleration, ay vertical, g acceleration due to gravity. GR here is glide ratio relative to air, not ground! Also, when z = 0, L/D = GR, as mentioned above. Also, whenever you're decelerating (even very slowly!), z is negative, and so GR is automatically higher than L/D. This is the principle of all these competitions - slow deceleration in competition window after a massive dive, deceleration gives high GR (distance round) or slower descent rate (time). L/D is like a inverse of coefficient of friction: the latter depends only on smoothness of surfaces and has a finite minimum value (coeff. of friction can never be zero, excluding quantum phenomena like superfluidity). Same with L/D - it's a finite value from 0 to (for current wingsuits) 3.0 (+/- maybe hundredths). No one can fly current wingsuits with L/D higher than this max value! Glide ratio is a different animal altogether, it can be anything from -infinity to +infinity. Same as a skateboard temporarily moving horizontally or going up - it doesn't mean the coefficient of friction turned zero or became negative! L/D is a true aerodynamic finesse parameter, GR is for these bogus competitions with their bogus numbers (5:1, 6:1, etc.) L/D for the win!!! Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  13. I didn't vote, because with WSMs being in the state of CoW, 4:1 is not coming from The Three Stooges for sure, but will alternative designs (like traditional split planform with non-zero AoI and leg wing with its own leading edge, possibly made of PU foam) be able to achieve L/D=4.0? Hard to say. I'd be very happy if we achieve the magic L/D of 3.567. We have about 20% to go (3.0->3.6). So, if the non-zero AoI design can improve lift by only 9% (by having the leg wing produce more lift as it will have its own leading edge and higher aspect ratio) and reduce drag by only 10% (by reducing body drag by placing it at zero AoA, as well as lower drag from the leg wing), we have 20% total! We should stop waiting for miracles from the 3xS and start making our own prototypes, test them using real wingsuit instrumentation, and back up the improvements with hard numbers. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  14. Where's the graph? Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  15. Disagree. Performance comps are all about the setup dive and energy management (aka- long slow flare). Also really hard to say with any certainty the effect of the winds. Based on all the data I've seen, and I've seen a lot, I think wingsuits are BARELY above 3:1 L/D. This. Here's a little handy trick that follows from WSE: first, estimate the wind from the meteorological data and vector-subtract it. Next, on the horizontal speed graph (which now will be at least better representing the true airspeed) locate the points where Vx goes through a minimum, maximum, or has an inflection point with zero derivative. At these points, the air glide ratio is equal to L/D. You will see that it's never ever greater than 3.0. (I wouldn't recommend Paralog for this, though, since it seems to be using some kind of smoothing that produces oscillations which can be mistakenly taken for extrema.) L/D, unlike glide ratio (either ground or even air), has a very strict ceiling. No one can break through this ceiling no matter what dives, flares, etc. they're doing. GR can be anything - from 0 to +infinity to -infinity to some negative number (steepest angle going up in flare). L/D for current state of wingsuiting, is topped at approx. 3.0 with normal rig and normal body build. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  16. First constructive comment in this thread, much appreciated! 1. Explore putting the body at zero AoA (like airplane's fuselage) and varying AoI (angle of incidence) of both arm and leg wings (requires separate arm/leg wings, like in old style suits, and leading edge on the leg wing, like Vampire series). Make several suits with 5 degree increment in AoI, study their max L/D using, for example, L/D Vario on a vane. The pilot, of course, needs to learn new style of flying, where the body is in line with the airflow, creating minimal drag and zero lift (all lift is generated by wings only). The idea is (like in airplanes) to exclude the very inefficient generator of lift - body/fuselage - as much as possibly, leaving pretty much only its cross-sectional drag. [inline 1.jpg] 2. Explore a sealed, weakly inflated (just a bit above dynamic pressure in flight) shaped leading edge made of rubber (like a bike inner tube, but profiled), with significantly more forward extension (3 inches?) than current foam inserts, yet having minimal force added for pull, etc. In attempt to make a really nice airfoil profile, not what we have now with big radius of curvature on the leading edge, which creates a lot of drag. Quantify the improvements with L/D Vario. 3. Combine 1&2. Quantify the improvements with L/D Vario. 4. Make a wingsuit with foam wings (closed cell polyurethane foam like one used in cushions, etc.) This will eliminate the need for inflation and big scoops creating drag. I've started making a prototype long time ago (2010-ish) but haven't finished and haven't flown it (the leg wing was almost done, but I don't have it with me now to post a picture). The foam is easily foldable, so the pull should not be more difficult than with regular suits. The foam wing will maintain the airfoil shape more precisely than inflated fabric can. (Also, possibly to try stepped airfoil.) The leg wing should have a large leading edge (i.e. it should start in the knee area) to maximize its efficiency, not just be a surface where de-energized, turbulent air rolls over it. The wings should have a non-zero AoI as in #1. Better yet, make wing attachment with adjustable AoI (on the ground, not dynamically in the air). Quantify the improvements with L/D Vario. 5. Superman's half-wingsuits (leg wing only). Flying with arm(s) stretched forward, or in regular tracking position. Need to fine tune the trim/balance, since with my half-V-4 stretching arms forward was producing too much "front momentum" (not enough momentum from the leg wing). Quantify the improvements with L/D Vario, compared to tracksuits. Quantify max horizontal speed and set a new world record, leaving full wingsuits in the dust! (since it's naturally close to L/D=1.4 and lacks extra fabric of full wingsuit which at this L/D is only a burden) 6. In A/B tests, quantify the effects of [in my opinion, gimmicks] innie-outie, cross-hatched fabric (?) on the bottom surface of arm wings, rubber-like leading edge material. Remove them if they, indeed, turn to be just gimmicks ("this material is used in space shuttle!" type of BS) 7. Quantify effects of various elements on max L/D, just to know, how much of a bite each is taking off the absolute max performance: helmets, cameras, shoes with flaring out soles (like on most sneakers), various rigs. 8. Study the effect of increasing surface area on L/D to see if the curve (L/D) vs. S shows an asymptotic slowdown or there's still some potential. 9. Make a gigantic suit similar to Antoine Laporte's and measure its max L/D precisely. 10. Make goal-specific wingsuits for speed, time, and distance rounds in competitions. The slowest (in fall rate) wingsuits will be amazing for BASE starts! (will be almost a ground launch). A giant suit with ridiculously thick airfoil. For speed, probably Superman's half-suit. For distance, probably #1 or #4. Let the pilots use 3 different suits in competitions! In triathlon, they don't require athletes to run and swim while carrying their bicycle, do they? Each round requires a specific tool, why not in wingsuit competitions? 11. Make a compact, low drag air intake on the helmet or short tubes protruding from armwings, with the delivery of ram air into wings via flexible tubing, to eliminate large draggy scoops altogether. 12. Overall, explore the old split-wings designs more, since no scientific study like this has been done in their era in early 2000's. I believe they still have the potential if we're made to look like little airplanes, rather than mattressy squirrels. Should be plenty for a day... No, I don't think so. People are different, differences between them and the variations in flying of the "reference" pilot are not as precisely quantifiable as aerodynamic instrumentation. In aviation, they study planes with instrumentation, not flying relative to another plane. Dynamic effects (slow planeout/flare) also cannot be excluded (while L/D Vario excludes it in real time, since L/D measured by accelerometer is not affected by "fake" changes in glide ratio). WSE cannot say which one to work more on, lift or drag. As "magic" L/D's show (1.414, 2.61, 3.567), the dynamic behavior of gliders does not depend on the nature or their absolute lift or drag, only on their ratio, L/D. For example, sqrt(2) as the L/D for max horizontal speed, applies to both wingsuits and canopies or other gliders (hang-, para-). As mentioned before, L/D is like a reverse of coefficient of friction, one should make coefficient of friction lower. So, we should always strive to increase L/D by all means, even if it means decreasing lift, but decreasing drag even more so that L/D grows. I think that airplane-like planform, with proper AoI and wide leading edge on the leg wing (much wider than on Vampires) still has a healthy unexplored potential. The mattresses reached L/D=3.0, in my opinion, purely by dumbly increasing surface area which makes the negative contribution from the body in overall performance less noticeable (like diluting very salty water with clean water makes it less salty). Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  17. Yeah, I haven't made a post in this forum in 8.5 years, since Feb 2010. Dropped by to see if the new generation of wingsuiters would be interested in some old ideas and theories they haven't seen, critical and honest evaluation of WS progress in the past 12-20 years, as well as relatively new and not widely known wingsuit-specific software and instrumentation I developed in the past 5-10 years. While I'm not surprised that those old timers who were generating nothing but noise back 12 years ago (which everyone can see themselves by reading links to my old posts in OP), haven't changed - I'm disappointed that the new generation is absolutely the same. This, unfortunately, only confirms that the wingsuiting is still staying in the state of CoW. My goal was and is and will be to further the wingsuiting by sharing freely my ideas, calculations, software, and critique to nudge the WS R&D - either hopefully by major WSMs, or maybe some creative spirit who likes some idea and makes it a product. Unfortunately, due to CoW, this has failed so far, with no foreseeable change in the near future. My main interests still remain in the area of wingsuit dynamics research, via physics and software. I've got, in meme speak, over 9000 ideas in this area still waiting their time. I'll continue working on them. It's also the area where (unfortunately - "thanks" to CoW) I have no competition and inspiration from others' work (since it's nonexistent). I have no interest in creating physical products or proving anything by winning the competitions. (I just don't give a fuck, seriously.) If anyone is interested in applying scientific methods to competitions, wingsuit design, instrumentation, etc. - post on this forum. (The info and tools I generate based on these discussions will always be public; no "secret coaching".) If anyone wants to start a new WS company and make some innovative products like "superterminal wingsuit", "half-wingsuit (Superman)", wingsuit instrumentation - go ahead, just do it! (Man, I can't wait!) Post on this forum and I'll provide my input as best as I can. By watching WSMs do precisely nothing new and perpetually staying in the state of CoW, swallowing all their marketing BS - we're just wasting our lifetimes. We could have seen so much more in the past 20 years since the beginning of commercial wingsuiting in 1998. If WSMs responded positively (not with immediate rejection and aggression, even bullying) to nudging, critique, freely shared ideas; if they actually used real instrumentation, created for them, to quantify various improvements, instead of feeding us all this marketing BS; if their goal was, too, to maximize their lifetime of being a WSM, use every bit of it to actually take wingsuiting to the next level, not do the "same old, same old" routine - man, I can't even fathom what kind of wingsuits and performance and instruments we would have today! I think it's obvious now that all faith in "old WSM farts" is gone now, they have a proven record of perpetual CoW and 3-stooging. My only hope, in terms of physical products, remains on yet-to-be-born new generation of WSMs. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  18. Not interested. Skydiving and BASE are just my hobbies. I put my ideas and software "out there in the wild" (i.e. here and some other similar forums, I'm not on social media and never will). If no one is interested, not my problem. I feel absolutely no burden, no obligation to anyone to prove anything. The ideas and software I make have value for themselves, once released in the open, they have their own life. No one interested? Fine, at least, they are just electrons, no need to store them in warehouse like physical products and sell under their value. Ideas are very hot these days in almost all areas of technology - propose some idea somewhere on the internet - and next day there will be 10 startups making it a reality. Not in the world of wingsuits. There it remains... CoW. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  19. I also used children's "sausage" balloons, inflated bike inner tube folded in half, or pool noodles to improve leading edge shape on my Phantom-1 in 2005 - this was seen by Jeff N from TS and then WSMs started making leading edge inserts. Also, my experiments with trim (jumped with up to 5kg steel weights on my ankles in P-1 and then V-2, ca. 2005-2006) showed that trim is very important, and finally, ~3 years later, this thought "clicked" in WSM's brains. (many wingsuits of that era were too front-"heavy", too much arm wing relative to leg wing, e.g. Mach-1) So, some of my work did make it into modern wingsuits. And I've done, perhaps, close to 100 test jumps with various instrumentation - Z-Device, Analog L/D Meter, L/D Magic, L/D Vario, these are just several examples: https://vimeo.com/pureflyingmagic https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFaKavzIFhlKuFp40l4osIQ (many of these jumps were with external GPS units sending data to L/D Magic via Bluetooth - no vane on those) I'm not a 1000-armed Buddha to do everything myself. [inline 1000arms.jpg] I also won't ever participate in competitions since it's unthinkable to my dignity to be a gladiator - food for lions, puppet for the show. I don't have to prove anything to anyone. However, it remains a great show to watch The Three Stooges continue to be clueless for decades! [inline 3Stooges.jpg] Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  20. Not interested in making physical products. I sell electrons. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  21. While "Agility, Safety/Usability, behavior and stability" are, no doubt, very important for certain types of flying (f1.0cking?), I'm talking about cutting edge. I'm talking Ferrari, not grandma's PT Cruiser or golf cart. A golf cart has a lot of specific features, like very tight turning radius (agility), safety (slow), usability (no doors), and stability (heavy batteries on the bottom and lightweight roof). A lot of research went into designing a golf cart, and it's respectable. But I'm clearly talking about the cutting edge, pushing wingsuits to fly even farther. Or faster. Or longer. (Is anyone even lobbying the idea of using 3 different suits, for each discipline in competitions - speed, distance, time - which will foster the development of interesting - and useful - new designs?) For some reason, WSMs (WS manufacturers) stopped working on maximizing max L/D somewhere around 2010-ish, when it became clear that T-planform is the winning formula and inlets must be on the bottom surface and scooped. That's it, nothing substantially changed since then. For almost a decade now, max L/D is pegged at about 3.0 (maybe - maybe - some pterodactyl-like pilots wearing superthin/integrated rigs, thin shoes, no or very thin helmet can do 3.1-3.3, but that performance bump is not wingsuit's merit). Because WSMs stopped trying. And because they don't use the readily available precise scientific instruments for measurements of aerodynamic parameters. And because they refuse to use even freely available ideas spoon-fed to them on the forums. I propose to call this passiveness of WSMs in the past 12-20 years (and continuing into the future) CoW - short for "Cow of Wingsuiting": [inline CoW.gif] Instead, they all engaged in Godzilla Marketing tactics with fast upgrade cycles (multiple models, upgraded every year each) and marketing speak flashfloods filled with superlatives and piles of BS disguised as chocolate nuggets. It works for them - wingsuits are flying out of the factories like hot pancakes, $1.5-2K each! (They've also raised the prices unilaterally to compensate for the new players on the market taking their slice of the pie.) This clearly shows lack of understanding where the better dive/flare came from. It didn't come from the genius WS designer's brain, from enormous effort of creating new revolutionary designs... it came automagically with the increased L/D (from mid-2's to 3.0) - which, in turn, is a result of a mere surface area increase - and from better ability of T-planform, compared to classic split arm&leg wings planform, to change the pitching momentum at will. (And T-planform was found by random trial and error, throw stuff at the wall and see what sticks.) This diagram posted a decade ago: [inline 3.567.gif] is a polar graph of current horizontal and vertical speeds after a BASE exit, in constant flight configuration (mode), for various L/D's, from 0.5 to 3.567. It clearly shows the dramatic effect that increasing L/D has on gaining more kinetic energy in a dive and retaining it longer and converting it to potential energy more efficiently. (Note that this is not even a flare, this is a natural planeout after BASE exit. Real flare differences are even more dramatic.) Let me make this analogy. L/D is very much like an inverse of coefficient of friction - the lower the friction, the higher L/D. Why? Because if you consider a force diagram of 1) a wingsuit and 2) an object sliding on inclined surface - they're identical! We have weight, then in 1) we have lift L perpendicular to the line of travel and in 2) we have normal force N perpendicular to the surface; and in 1) we have drag D parallel to the line of travel and in 2) we have friction force F parallel to the surface. In 1), we call the ratio L over D as a number (L/D), which is a measure of wingsuit's aerodynamic finesse. In 2), we call the ratio F/N as a number (k) - coefficient of friction. So, by this analogy, (L/D) = 1/k. We know that for object to slide on an incline, the tangent of the angle to horizon must be equal or greater than k. For example, if k = 1/3, then the angle is arctan(1/3)=18.4 deg. This is the same angle as a sustained glide angle for a wingsuit with L/D = 3.0! So, imagine riding a skateboard in a skate park. With a good skateboard with low friction, you can gain more speed going down an incline and retain this energy longer for going up on various tricks. A rusty skateboard will gain lower speed and will stop going up much faster. Same with wingsuits, really. These two factors - amount of speed gained in a dive and the more efficient conversion of it into gained altitude - are multiplied and as a result, flare is quite sensitive to increasing L/D ( = decreasing k). That's why a relatively small (50% from wingsuits of early 2000's or 25% from 2005-ish) increase in L/D resulted in massive improvement of dive and flare. Plus, the T-planform advantage in pitch control, which was copied by every other WSM. Why don't WSMs show the exact changes of this "research by flying"? Before/after. And did they quantify the before/after change? Or it's just marketing blah-blah-blah? Why didn't WSM's try various ideas offered to them for free on the forums? The non-zero angle of incidence for both arm and leg wings? ("superterminal wingsuit", link in OP) I tried it ca. 2007-8 with the arm wings on my Phantom-1 and Vampire-2, it was promising, but I couldn't quantify it, because at the time I didn't have the instrumentation. I did it by sewing a second set of tabs going from armpits towards crotch, not along the sides (which is zero AoI). This is only possible with planform designs of old wingsuits with separate arm and leg wings, and for the leg wing, it requires Vampire-style leg wing with its own leading edge. Because... CoW [inline CoW.gif] Half-windgsuit with leg wing only? I tried it many times, starting with flying just the pants of my Prodigy back in 2005-6 and the advantages in speed were obvious. Also, eventually cut both P-1 and V-2 in half and flew the leg wings. Also, cut my V-4's arm wings completely after the zippers broke, and flew it like a Superman, with arm(s) stretched forward. Flew it in Eloy, Perris, San Diego, Lodi - no one is interested. I'm sure if some WSM made such a half-WS, people will say, "wow, this is awesome, the speed is just ludicrous!" (it also naturally puts L/D close to 1.4 - the optimal for max horizontal speed) Because... CoW [inline CoW.gif] Why no WSM is using real wingsuit instrumentation, not just GPS/Flysight which can't determine aerodynamic parameters? Because... CoW [inline CoW.gif] The list of ignored ideas is very long and this post is already long, so I'll stop for now. It's hopeless anyway, as I learned over the past 12 years. The Solar System - at least in WS innovation sense - is a very lonely place, it turns out. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  22. Google Glass on ebay is around $400 used. Not "cheap" but skydivers happily pay same price for an N3. Glass fits well under a G3 and runs android. It can't just mirror phone's display, can it? (if not, it's a major turn off - adds more friction to development, need to deal with yet another SDK) Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  23. Did somebody say "HUD"? [inline 20180908_164004.jpg] [inline 20180908_163741.jpg] Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  24. Who likes cookies here? Anyone likes the smart ones packed with sensors? [inline 20180908_162038.jpg] Exact same size, dumb and smart: [inline 20180908_163242.jpg] Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio
  25. Recon runs a proprietary OS - ReconOS, which is basically a murdered Android. So, the devs have to use their proprietary SDK and jump through hoops. I strongly believe that the software is the king, the hardware is secondary. The hardware is so powerful and cheap these days that it doesn't make sense to sweat about it - if there isn't a suitable hardware today, there will be one tomorrow. I personally own several excellent $40-50 Android phones for various dedicated tasks - one for navigation, one for hiking, one for gym, etc. (they're unlocked, no cell service, basically, WiFi devices) It's fantastic. The last time I dropped almost a grand into Apple's or Samsung's pocket was 5+ years ago. The paradise is here! So, any hardware that makes the developer to jump through hoops, is out of the question for me. I spent countless hours writing hundreds of thousands of lines of C# code that if Visual Studio can't deploy it to a device, that device can GTFO. I'd rather take my Moto 360 Sport for $50 with wristband removed (it actually strikingly resembles an Oreo cookie, I'll post a pic tomorrow), put a watchmaker's loupe in a short plastic tube in front of it so that the screen is in focus, and voila! - have a "ghetto HUD" which can run any Wear OS app. Anyone can take the Visual Studio altimeter sample I posted in the other thread, customize it to their liking, and have a very personal altimeter/GPS HUD for skydiving. Android+Wear/iOS/Windows apps: L/D Vario, Smart Altimeter, Rockdrop Pro, Wingsuit FAP iOS only: L/D Magic Windows only: WS Studio