ManBird

I don't know, but the name of the image is "scottplane.JPG". Cool frame grab, BTW. "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

Was it Scott? "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

http://www.deepart.org/code/CountTracula I threw this together last night. This is a taste of what you'll find on bird-man.com in the near future. It's still pretty rough and doesn't have much testing or entry error checking, but it works. "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

Unless you've got a GPS unit and a way to record data, you probably don't know much about your wingsuit flights other than your fall rate and the amount of time you spent in the air -- if you aren't exceeding 119 seconds. Getting gadgets and software will always give you the most accurate data about your flights, but it can be a real financial burden. However, you can still collect some pretty accurate data using nothing but a ProTrack and a little math. Here's how to track different aspects of your flight on a budget. FREEFALL (f) This is the other piece of fairly accurate information that your ProTrack provides. Just subtract your deployment altitude from your exit altitude to get your total freefall. a - b = f a = exit altitude b = deployment altitude f = freefall FALL RATE (r) This is one of the two pieces of data that you can accurately track with a ProTrack. Your overall average will be the most important type of the four rates you can get with a ProTrack. If you are getting fatigued in the second half of your flight, you may want to use your first half's average to monitor progress, but you'll want to refer to your overall average for other calculations. Even if you break 119 seconds of freefall, your overall average will still be accurate. Fall rates should be measured using TAS (true airspeed) and the ProTrack should be worn in a place that gets constant, clean air, such as your front pants pocket or ankle. Wearing a ProTrack on your head will give you inaccurate results. ( f / s ) / c = r c = converter: 1.4667 (mph to fps), 0.2778 (kph to mps) r = fall rate DELAY (s) This is accurate if your delay is under 119 seconds. If it is over 119 seconds, you can calculate your delay based on your fall rate and freefall. f / ( r * c ) = s s = seconds in freefall DISTANCE (d) This one can be tricky, but if you get to know the terrain well and/or have a GPS-equipped aircraft, then you get a good idea of just how far you traveled. The most surefire way is to plan a distance and coordinate exiting from that distance with your pilot. Going for longer distances will often leave you in the aircraft long enough to be able to fly straight back to the drop zone without flight line issues. Most GPS units in aircraft uses nautical miles. A nautical mile is 1.1508 miles and a mile is 0.8688 nautical miles. If you want to travel three miles, you must exit when the aircraft is 2.6 nautical miles from the drop zone. You can only very accurately track the distance between your exit and the location on the drop zone where the GPS is set to 0nm. If you go over that point, you can still calculate your glide ratio and adjust the exit point accordingly. Look at aerial photos and maps of your drop. Study them with a key that indicates how long a mile is on the map. Plan routes, learn their distances, and follow the plan. If you do not cover the length of the route, remember where you deployed, go back to your maps, and find out how far you went. If you go beyond your route, do the same. If you cannot exit where planned, adjust the route accordingly. If you are a quarter mile further back than desired, then put your target back a quarter mile further than planned. This method is crude and the accuracy is questionable, but it will give you information to monitor your progress, understand your flight, give you an idea of what your glide ratio is, and understand the effects of the relative wind on your flight. e - p = d e = distance from drop zone at exit p = distance from drop zone at opening d = distance traveled GLIDE (g) Glide ratio is simply your distance divided by your freefall. If you know that you traveled 24,000 feet, and your freefall was 10,000 feet, then your glide ratio is 2.4:1. This can be difficult to assess if you do not know the distance of your entire dive. If you hit your distance target early, check your altitude, and only use that piece of data. If you exit at 14,000 feet and travel 15,000 feet horizontally by the time you reach 8,000 feet, then your glide ratio is 2.5:1. d / f = g g = glide ratio ANGLE OF DESCENT (m) You may find out what your glide angle was by dividing 180 by Pi and multiplying that value by the tangent of your freefall divided by the square root of the combined squares of your freefall and distance. You'll probably need a calculator on this one. ( 180 / pi ) * tangent (f / (square root ( d ^ 2 + f ^ 2 ) ) = m m = angle of descent INDICATED AIRSPEED (i) You may find your indicated airspeed by multiplying your glide by your fall rate. If you've found that you had a glide ratio of 2.4:1 and an average fall rate of 48 mph, then your forward speed was 115.2 mph. g * f = i i = indicated airspeed RELATIVE WINDSPEED (w) The effect of windspeed on your forward speed will vary depending on the angle of the wind direction relative to your heading. You can usually get windspeeds at different altitudes from various weather reporting sources, or simply take the difference between the aircraft's indicated airspeed and airspeed and apply it to your own flight. Wind direction averages are applicable. If you spent 1/2 of your flight with the wind right behind you, 1/4 of the flight with the wind at a 45 degrees angle, and the last quarter in a crosswind, your average wind direction, 123.75 degrees, is applicable to your entire flight. Use the appropriate formula to calculate the relative windspeed: If q is greater than 0 degrees and less than or equal to 90 degrees: 0 - ( u / 90 ) * q = w If q is greater than 90 degrees and less than or equal to 180 degrees: u - ( u / 90 ) * ( q - 90 ) = w If q is greater than 180 degrees and less than or equal to 270 degrees: u - ( u / 90 ) * ( q - 180 ) = w If q is greater than 270 degrees and less than or equal to 360 degrees: 0 - ( u / 90 ) * ( 360 - q ) = w q = wind direction in degrees relative to heading u = windspeed in knots w = relative windspeed in knots AIRSPEED (l) Windspeeds are usually measured in knots. Convert the relative windspeed to the appropriate measurement system and subtract it from your indicated airspeed to get your actual airspeed. i - w * k = l k = converter: 1.1507 (knots to mph), 1.8516 (knots to kph) l = airspeed VELOCITY Your total velocity is the square root of the combined squares of your indicated airspeed and fall rate. If you are traveling 90 mph forwards and your fall rate is 45 mph, then your velocity would be 100.623 mph. square root ( i ^ 2 + r ^ 2 ) = v v = velocity "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

I went to a snowboarding contest last year (audience... nowhere near a competitor). There were 26 professional competitors. There were 3 ambulance rides. Two broken legs and a serious skull fracture. It says something... "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

BTW, thanks for the tip, Obi. I'll have the stitch position on mine changed this weekend. Edited to add: I apologize for the bad advice in my write-up. As current as I'm getting on my reserve, I'm seriously considering getting my rigger's ticket. I'll keep my laptop shut on rigging matters until then. ;) "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

I wish it was spandex. I wouldn't have had that impossipull otherwise (which would have been fatal on a BASE jump). My theory is that it might have something to do with shrivel flap mounting, but that really shouldn't be too much of an issue. That's a great idea, Tom. Maybe even a wider pouch with a spandex pouch inside... that'd be the best. Spandex just might make my F1-11 PC come out with a little less effort. "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

I don't know either. Maybe Joe got sick of my moping and made sure it was done. I really wish you would have been there. I think what I'm doing now has improved my forward speed quite a bit, but I seriously doubt I could match yours. You have a better overall glide than I do. With the forward speed you've been getting over the past while, I don't doubt at all that you could have covered three miles in 50 - 55 seconds. I'll be out there this weekend. Weather permitting, we really need to throw a square on Joe's back and get him in flying. "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

Nice! I saw that one video where you almost crossed the road, then I saw the video of Robert crossing the road... now this! That's awesome. Very impressive! "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

Yeah, what Kevin said. I agree 100%. "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

500 feet is more than enough. But don't get any ideas... "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

Mainstream media tells us that there was no more than a couple ankle fractures. "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

Just wondering what your thoughts are, as a BASE jumper, on skydiving in relation to staying current and/or getting freefall skill. I see a lot of people that have significantly more BASE jumps than skydives. Being that BASE jump and freefall time accumulation tends to go more slowly than skydiving jump and freefall time accumulation, I'm wondering if any BASE jumpers out there see direct benefits of skydiving for BASE. I'd imagine that a lot of people are disproportionate in this way because they enjoy BASE more and put their efforts into it more wholeheartedly. However, I can only see racking up several minutes of tracking or wingsuit flying as a benefit to what one would do in freefall on bigger objects. "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

After sitting on the ground for hours waiting for a reserve pack job, crapping my pants because the uppers were cranked up to 65 knots (75 MPH) and gusting above that... from altitude to 3k. There was a slight body position adjustment that I wanted to try out to get better forward speed/glide with minimal fall rate compromise. The first three miles of my first jump were insane. There was a lot of distance and junk after that, but the first three were the best I've ever done (and the easiest/most consistent to track). The freefall was almost exactly 10k (14k - 4k) with an overall average of 43 MPH TAS (~158 seconds). The three mile mark (exit position based on the plane's GPS) was hit at 10,800'. According to Jumptrack, I was between 36 MPH and 38 MPH (37 average) down to 8,000 (where my arms started to die and put me at 45 and then 50 for the rest of the jump). It took right about 60 seconds to get to 10,800 feet. 3 miles in 1 minutes comes out to 180 MPH. 180 vs 37 gives a (severely wind-assisted) glide ratio of 4.86:1. It felt and sounded like going headdown, but sideways. It was very, very much on the verge of instability. I felt wobbles just looking at my altimeter. I've never felt anything like it before. It felt like I was flying in a hurricane. So I went up and went way, way further out. Pretty much the same deal, but worse fall rate (never under 40 MPH), and got an overall glide ratio of about 4.2:1. I did one more after that, and just sucked, as I wimped out, but it was still a lot of fun, of course. This, again, really leads me to question the "90 MPH max" theory on forward speed. Not to hurt anyone's feelings, but I think a lot of people are now breaking triple digits on forward speed without wind assistance... not by much, but breaking it nonetheless. Got to try out my smoking suit today. Only from 5k, but gave it a shot. So on my first jump, I got 27 seconds saddling out at 2,500 feet. It felt slow and floaty, but I didn't cover as much ground as I would in a normal track. It definitely felt long for not having a wingsuit on. The suit didn't flap around too much... it was fairly rigid, but it did flap more than expected. I only did one other jump today before the clouds hosed us, but I took my Pantz this time. Got out at 5k and was saddled out at 2,400 feet. Only 100 feet lower, but got 27 seconds on that one, too, and covered more ground. Granted, I only flew the suit once, and didn't have much time to figure it out entirely. But I only have nine or ten jumps on my Pantz (but am doing much better with them than I did on my first jump). The smoke suit did start up significantly sooner than the Pantz, though. I basically hit my stall speed, started moving, and never went past that fall rate. On the Pantz, I exceeded my stall speed/average for the jump and then built back up to it, but eventually covered significantly more ground. From a BASE perspective, which is less relevant to me right now, I can see the advantage of the smoke suit, as it'd get you away from the object sooner. Only got five in this weekend due to waiting a reserve repack yesterday and then getting hosed by the weather today, but man, these were five of some of the best jumps I've ever had. Kirk! You shouldn't have left early! "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

JJ (linestretch on here) got this shot before he shipped himself off to Guam. My face looks all fucked up, but that's more my problem than his. This is one of those "peel-off" exits... don't fly at 100%, but have the wings open for the most part and fly right out the door, off the jump run. Yeehaw. "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

Are you sure he didn't mean a straight up non-suited belly flyer? It just doesn't make sense. He's flyin' all Escher-style. Who is it, anyway? TELL US!!! Er... "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

OH, i didn't realize that you meant another wingsuit flyer on their belly. I thought you meant a non-suited skydiver on their belly. Yeah... flying on your side for any amount of time won't do much for you. The other wingsuit flyer wouldn't not be able to be in full flight and stay relative at all. "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

Yes, but if you're trying to stay with belly flyers, that's one way do it. There are other easier ways to do it, but that one's pretty cool. "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

Makes sense. I'd imagine that the lower arm and leg would be pulled in, allowing the high wings, when extended, to act as a stabilizer... like on a spaceball or those newer d-bags. Never thought of that before. Very cool. "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

I semi-disagree with you here, but just semi-disagree... Yes, as these wings get more surface and a thinner profile, and therefore more efficient, they become more and more difficult to fly both technically and physically. However, I seriously doubt we've hit the limit with the S3. In 1998, if you gave someone a S3, they'd flail like crazy and feel like their arms were ripped off. But in 2003 we have a number of things that they don't. We have training. We have smaller suits to fly to build of strength and skill. We also have people that got off their asses and started working out specific muscles, specifically for wingsuit flight. I don't think the suits can physically harm you yet (with the exception of my thumb dislocation due to an improperly positioned swoop handle... but that doesn't really count), and there's a LOT more you can do to them before they actually can. I know that myself and others that found the S3 unstable and extremely exhaustive at first are now flying smoothly and are staying maxed out for over 10,000 feet down, four or five times in a day, before we really get exhausted. Personally, I'm ready for more. I've put about 130 flights on my S3, and while I'm still finding out lots of fun stuff to do with it, I'm also anxious for the next big (literally) thing. BirdMan continues to work on bigger, more efficient suits (ie, the S4 prototype), I see a technically landable suit and pilots that can fly them, coming up in the future. Though I do love flying my parachute. :) "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

You can already do that with the leg wing, and it works (to a degree): http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=700179#700179 "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

Nice! I need to score me an old school Suit... "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

Yeah, it's called a leg wing. ;) "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

A) If that isn't calling a "band" a "point", then I don't know what is. It should be phrased as "It starts from the point" as opposed to "It's the point". B) That's not what the power band is. Slaton went over this simple concept in great detail. It was the most prevalent piece of information at the seminar. The power band is the constrain of power generated from diving a canopy using front risers. Why is this so hard to understand? "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click

Nice! I did the pants and jacket last weekend and, weather permitting, will be jumping it tomorrow. Can't wait to see what happens. Getting that fall rate's pretty good for one flight with just the pants. That's about what I get with my BirdMan Pantz, but it took about five or six jumps to get there. "¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click