Ronaldo

Hello Douglas, I tried these settings but Sothink and TMPGenc (both trial versions) could not open the .avc file. I'm probably doing something wrong, could you please check? BTW, which authoring software you recommend for the home user? Thanks a lot for taking your time to help Ronaldo Edited to add file Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Hi folks, What is the best setting for rendering Gopro R3 video in Sony Vegas Pro 9 and recording on standard DVD (not Blu-Ray)? The video is short but I want to get the best quality possible (for a standard DVD). This is the configuration I used but was not very pleased with the results on a full HD TV. I’d like to know if I can make it better Fyle Type: .m2t Audio: 384 Kbps; 48.000 Hz; 16 Bit; Stereo; MPEG Video: 29,970 fps; 1440x1080 Upper field first; YUV; 25 Mbps Pixel Aspect Ratio: 1,333 Sothink Movie DVD Maker for DVD burning I’m a complete ignorant in video stuff so any help will be highly appreciated. Thanks Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Try slow and controlled reps. BTW, do you have equal strength on both legs? If not, exercise one leg at a time until you match strength. Talk to the physical trainer of you gym and explain what you want, he may recommend specific exercises. Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

If you have a little bit of time and patience you may try to make a base for yourself. Just get epoxy resin and release wax (you can actually use any wax or even shoe polish). You may follow the steps 29 – 34 of my helmet to create a pattern. You don’t have to proceed to the step of creating a master mould. Just trim the pattern with a handsaw and sand paper and bolt or glue it in place. Make sure the helmet is positioned in a 0º angle on a table while the resin cures (step 31). This will create a flat top in the correct angle for camera mount. Buying one may cost almost the same but making one is much fun. The good thing is that you can make the exactly size and shape you want. NOTE: test the wax/ resin first in other part to make sure it releases once cured. Let me know if you have doubts and I’ll try to help http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3286816#3286816 Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

May I suggest a different solution? Have your rigger to make a soft handle and sew it to the PC (across the width). You can use the cordura you have to match your rig so it will look like it was factory made. These are the pictures of the handle I made to replace the plastic pipe on my wingsuit PC. The template I used is very simple, I can make a sketch if you need. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3964552#3964552 Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Well, not a rigger but I have one copy Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Thanks Paul, just one correction in the above example: CD for the Clark-Z would be about 0,015 instead of 0,03. Sorry, it was very late and my eyes were not as sharp Still it is a much higher CL/CD ratio for the FX 73-CL2-152 Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

I believe it is due to the changes in airfoil shape. Without any brake or riser input the airfoil has basically a flat/ convex profile or camber (much like a Clark-Y airfoil). When you apply light brakes or rears you change the profile into a convex/ concave airfoil which produces higher lifts (and higher drags). If tail deflection is light and the airfoil is not brutally distorted, the gain in lift coefficient (CL) surpasses drag coefficient (CD) increase. Take these airfoil examples at 0º of angle of attack and Reynolds=100000 Clark Z (no tail deflection): at 0º CL=0.5 and CD=0.03 http://worldofkrauss.com/foils/781 FX 73-CL2-152 (1/4 brakes or rears): at 0º CL=1.3 and CD=0.03 http://worldofkrauss.com/foils/753 Comparing both airfoils we can see that the convex/ concave shape produces much more lift for the same amount of drag which would lead to a better glide. Obviously a parachute would not have the same smooth curved shape and the gain wouldn’t be as good but possibly high enough to make a difference. When you apply deep brakes the airfoil is severely distorted and drag wins the battle decreasing glide Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Hi Paul! This is what I was taught by Luigi Cani during my canopy piloting course. He explained that he participated in a couple of tests with other canopy pilots flying side by side equally loaded canopies (I guess when he was still working for Icarus) and the tests showed that flying slightly in brakes (actually 1/4 not 1/2 - I will correct that on my post) presented the best glide for all cases except nose winds (in this case you should apply front risers). I have been following his advice since then and I'm usually flying in brakes during my canopy ride unless I'm bellow other equal or lighter loaded canopies and need to clear the landing pattern quickly. Although I don´t have data to prove I felt an improvement in flight distance with this technique. Cheers Ronaldo Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

I bought a Tri 160 recently for my wingsuit jumps (1.3lbs/sqft). I've jumped a Spectre 150 a couple of times and believe the Tri is trimmed slightly flatter. This is my first 7 cell and I felt a huge difference in glide. Be prepared to fly in 1/4 brakes to make it back from long spots. The flare is decent (my Tri does not have the brake mod). At your wingloading I doubt you'll have any issues landing it I'm really enjoying the canopy (I even get some nice swoops with it), give it a try if you can.

There are many threads at DZ.com about this subject but the main consensus seems to be to avoid handles which are heavy and/or attached by a single point. Heavy handles will tend to invert the PC allowing the bridle to float and “dance” above it, finally looping and creating a knot around the PC. A center point attachment will create a snag area around it. By your video it seems like you have a plastic pipe handle attached by a center point (which is exactly where your bridle is wrapped). I made a pud handle for wingsuit PC to reduce this risk. The pictures show the original wings handle (center point attachment) and my wingsuit handle (sewn through the entire handle width). The handle was made with cordura and EVA foam and is very lightweight (actually much lighter than the original one). You can check with your rigger if can do a similar (well, probably better) handle for you. Also, it is highly recommended to throw the PC out vigorously to the side so it can reach clean air as quick as possible. Good job saving yourself, congrats! Edited to add PC throw tip Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Yes, the sentence looks redundant. What I was trying to say is that some jumpers believe that if you leave the risers connected, the chances of a 2 out (biplane, side-by-side or downplane) are higher than an entanglement (the tests made by PD many years ago showed that). At the same time, if the risers are disconnected you either get an entanglement or (luckily) clear deployment. Some believe you have better overall chances if the main is still connected. Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Quote Training, at least mine, says that if you have anything out (i.e. you PC) then you cutaway before deploying reserve and I would be interested on theories about how that would have ended up. You were in one of the worst positions - a PC in tow.Quote This is usually what is taught for students mostly because it is the standard procedure for 99% of the malfunctions (you don’t want students to learn different procedures and mix them up under stress). Some experienced jumpers opt for not cutting away the main under high speed malfunctions like a PC in tow. This is due to the possibility of having the disconnected risers/ lines entangling with reserve lines/ PC/ bridle, etc. Some people believe there is a higher chance of having a 2 canopies out situation if the risers are still connected and handling with that is preferred than with an entanglement. People have died using both methods so in the end it is just a matter of making an informed decision and sticking with the procedure you have chosen. Our friend survived not cutting away his main but we will never know how the outcome would have been if he had done differently. Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Hello Billvon, I believe the comparison is not exactly like this. Narrowing inlets and using diffusers have more to do with improving gas expansion. Less air is forced more efficiently through the inlet which creates a higher expansion at the chamber. Gas expansion draws heat which promotes cooling. IMHO the extremely flat trim of the Xfire plays a big role in the collapsing issue. Safe skies Ronaldo Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Hi Jerry! Hope all is well. Yes I have already relined at least 5 canopies using this method. One of them with cascaded Vectran lines but the other ones with continuous HMA. You only need a sewing machine to attach the lines to the stabilizers. I have also replaced a few brake lines and kill lines using this method. I have 2 canopies relined this way, one has over 400 jumps with no sign of trim change. Blue skies Ronaldo Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Check the Pinnacle Studio, it is really easy to use and has some really nice features and effects. I learned to use it by myself. Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Triathlon 160, stable, great openings and amazing swoops! Not the best glide though... WL=1,35lbf/sqft Edited to add wing load Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

I bought a well used Tri 160 for my wingsuit jumps and I'm loving every aspect of it. I replaced the lineset with continuous HMA and the openings are just perfect (I didn't jump it with the original lineset to compare though). I'm really amazed with the swoops I'm getting from an almost square 7cell at 1,37lbfs/sqft! Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Check the manual, I found great info there including a solution to a problem I was having with deployment. Have some experienced wingsuit flyer to jump with you and video. You may be arching or bending the legs which reduces forward speed. The manual has great pictures of the basic flight position. I will try my EXPERT this weekend for the first time. Have fun with your PRO!

Thanks Jarno, I’ve always thought the cutaway option could be used for freefall instability. Anyway, just read the full manual that came with the suit (the one at the website is only about gearing up) and it has a detailed explanation about deployment which includes the statement: o Your arm should be back, beside your leg; you then follow your leg up to the handle. o If you go straight for the handle, the tension on the suit can prevent you from taking the handle. Which seems exactly like the problem I’m having (thanks Scott and Patrick for the tips). I’ll jump it next weekend and check how it feels Thank you all for the inputs, they were all extremely helpful Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

I understand your concern, the thought of silver crossed my mind immediately after I realized I was having problems to reach it. I knew where the handle was and felt the suit restricting me. I bent my knees and twisted my torso to grab it. With both arm wings closed and knees bent it was instinctively easy to arch and get stable for a belly to earth for deployment. I understand your point though, if for some reason I could not get stable an belly to earth and decided to pull anyway the consequences could have been really bad. The correct procedure would have been to cut away the arm wings, get stable and deploy but I didn’t practice it also (another link in the chain of events that almost led to a disaster) Thanks again Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Hi Jarno, That is exactly what I experienced with the M+ suit even adjusting the loops. I made a huge mistake of switching suits without taking some time to perform practice pulls on the ground. On the first jump I simply could not reach the handle and ended up tumbling like crazy to reach it. Once I grabbed it I rolled belly to earth and deployed normally. On the ground I tried again and noticed I could not reach it at all. I moved one loop more and was able to grab the tip of the handle with a little arch. The next jumps were all very uncomfortable at pull time (tumbled again and had to roll belly to earth to deploy). My new suit is size L and is in fact quite baggy for me (see pictures) so I believe size is not the issue. I guess the combination of cables, stiff fabric and reinforcements makes the suit much less flexible. Deploying on my old suit was like deploying from a track wearing a freefly suit, IOW zero resistance. Cheers Ronaldo Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Hi Chuck, I have always deployed in full flight. I keep my legs straight and apart and aligned with my torso. I jump a Tri 160 for my wingsuit flights and get very soft openings. Bending the knees may work well for skydiving but I believe it is not the recommended method for BASE. I guess the loops are well positioned because I have to straighten my arms and hands to the maximum to put some tension on the wings. I’ll move one grommet and check how it goes. I tried the suit again a couple of times and was able to reach the handle with a reasonable comfort. I noticed that a small variation on the technique made a huge difference. On the practice pulls, while putting tension on the wings, if I bend the elbows before dropping the arms, my elbows get locked inside the suit which limits the movement. If I relax the arms and drop them a bit before bending, my elbow moves freely inside the suit allowing me to have a better range of movement. I would have to jump it to make sure I can pull with 100% confidence 100% of the time. Ronaldo Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Thanks Lou, I just tried the suit again and still have to make a lot of effort to grab the just the tip of the handle. I had surgery on my shoulder many years ago which combined with the short rig may contribute to the problem. Considering I chose this suit with BASE in mind (I wanted a no grip easy to fly wingsuit) I doesn’t make sense to have a suit I can’t deploy comfortably. I guess I’ll return it and buy another no grip suit made of common fabric such as the Acro. I gained about 22 lbs (luckily working out) since I made my old suit and that is the only reason I decided to replace it (it is way beyond tight now). Anyway, I’ll try it again with the technique you described (I have already lost the day at the DZ) and let you know. Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted

Hi folks, Does anybody have tips to pull (main handle) on an SFly (EXPERT)? Last weekend I borrowed a friend’s suit and made a couple of jumps on it. I really liked the feel of flight but had problems to reach the handle in all jumps. I thought it was because it was tight (it was M+ and I’m 6’2” which requires an L suit). I just received mine (new stock suit) and tried it on the ground yesterday but experienced the same problem. I have a reasonably small and short rig (Wings) which makes the main handle positioned a little up on the back. The rig is custom sized and fits me perfectly. The handle is in a very comfortable position and I never had problems to reach it even with my other wingsuit (a local made design similar to a Skyflyer S6). My impression wearing the SFly is that the material is so stiff that it makes it difficult to squeeze all the fabric under your arm when you reach for the handle. Since I bought the suit with BASE jumping in mind I will definitely return it for a refund unless I can find a comfortable deployment method. Thanks Ronaldo Engineering Law #5: The most vital dimension on any plan drawing stands the most chance of being omitted