LeeroyJenkins

On an unrelated note what notebooks are those? They look nice.

This question wouldn't be asked if they were dropping a huge flag. Fanny pack doesn't block your handles and can be taken to terminal.

That guy is in trouble if the vegan rights brigade get hold of him.... I don't feel like watching the entire video but I highly doubt he dropped any sort of animal from 45 feet.

Math looks good. Edit: it wasn't good there was a sign messed up. Point being you can still calculate it using that formula once corrected.

What are you getting on about? The poster asked about a way to store a flag in freefall. They didn't ask about any options for rigging the flag. For all those reading it was suggested by Gary Mancuso who is the main dude on the Mile-High Demo team that said to use a fanny pack. When someone starts out they shouldn't be using drop flags anyway. Eventually you will want to move to custom containers and drop flag set ups but starting out a small flag and fanny pack will work well.

Look how productive this thread can be when you answer questions and participate in the discussion.

Foam- Between the knees sounds like a very small wing. Also my statements about the foam fitting in a plane still apples. It's already uncomfortable enough to be stuffed in a plane with our cloth suits. AoI- how are you going to attached them outside the constraints of the human airframe? It doesn't matter if your wing has a nice L/D if its too small to do anything useful. Wingsuits have terrible AR and in order to get a better L/D there needs to be a higher AR and wing profile.

You're telling me that a swift or hatch is harder to fly than a freak or CR, because they have split wings? Also, those suits have less surface area, different trim, and the same AoI.

I use a fanny pack designed for fishing. Works great and has extra pockets for a phone or whatever. https://www.sportsmanswarehouse.com/sportsmans/Allen-Eagle-River-Lumbar-Pack/productDetail/Fishing-Packs/prod99999034185/cat116991 Plenty of room for a 6x10 flag.

No doubt. Just like the limiting factor in car design is road infrastructure and garage dimensions, and human body size as well. (can't make a car that fits in a pocket) But one can have a PT Cruiser in their garage, or one can have a Ferrari. I think that the separate wing planform has not been researched thoroughly (WSMs never even tried changing AoI, only some guy at the Ranch with hands growing from his ass, did, by sewing in new cable tabs on his P-1 and V-2) and has some growth potential. With foam modular design, unlimited experimentation with airfoils, sizes, profile thickness, stepped airfoils, even high-lift devices, AoI, trim, etc. is possible - by everyone, with basic materials and tools, no significant sewing skills necessary. It's no wonder that airplanes that fly well also look beautiful. (Our eyes have a built-in evaluator of aerodynamic perfection.) Mattresses look fugly. We've got used to their look starting 10 years ago, but they are fugly. Separate wing planform just looks more aerodynamic, like that jet fighter above, vs. a mattress. It's not about the size of the garage, it's what is in it... It's so obvious your not an engineer and aren't good at building physical things. As you have stated many times. That isn't an insult, I wouldn't expect a physicist to be on the same level as an engineer. Modular foam- how are you going to structurally support the foam leg wing? How are you going to fit that hard foam in a full otter? or a 182? How are you going to carry that foam up the side of a mountain? AoI- How are your going to structurally support that? Trim- this has been done and is ever evolving. Profile- this has also been done. You don't need to answer those questions and I don't expect you too. It would be out of character. So again, the limiting factor is airframe size and the need to smash the suit into an airplane, that's not even to mention safety. There is a trade off between surface area and aspect ratio. If you want a better AR there would need to be two wings. To keep up with surface area the two wings would need to be bigger. The bigger wings would need to be supported but they can't because they would need to be ram air for the above mentioned reasons.

Nope. Not interested. I actually have a WS-related LLC, specializing in software for wingsuits and theoretical research. This is my specialization, this is what I'm best at, this is my contribution to WSI progress. Only one solution: for someone else, both smart, well educated, and good at business and managing people, to start a new WS company that will not start by copying the same mattresses, but start fresh by building something different from the ground up. (One possibility is the modular foam wing system I mentioned.) And make other WSMs to look like The Stooges by contrast. (Just like Elon Musk with reusable Falcon made Russian rockets outdated and losing launch contracts.) Elon Musk of WSI, where art thou?... Yuri, the limiting factor of wingsuit design in the airframe and the need to be stuffed in an airplane.

To add: 100+ exit practices, 100+ proximity practices, 100+ energy management practices, 100+ flares, 100+ deployments, 100+ landings in BASE environment, 100+ pack practices, 100+ hikes. Yuri, WTF do you want? No matter what is brought up you don't like it unless it's someone agreeing with you WSE which so far has been what, like 3 people? You complain about the ws tunnel, you complain about studies in university tunnels, you complain that no research happens, you complain that everything that has happen wasn't actually research, you complain that no engineers design these suits, you complain that the engineering that did go into it was only for pretty pictures. You complain no one believes your equation, you just complain.

Has been done

I don’t have a race suit. I agree on the point, but would like to see the data when suits are flying there best.

Lots of slow floaty flights. Do you have plots of HP flights.

What? I don't understand. I know you don’t and that’s the fundamental problem with your equations.

Good god you're dilsuional. Yuri, you have to proven the WSE are correct. The burden of proof is on you. The WSE are BS because the second they start they already have a mathematical predetermined steady state. This is shown by your graphs.

No. No. No. You're on a roll, a few more. What is the fastest horizontal speed you have recorded during a wingsuit flight?: What is the limiting design factor of forced air wingsuits?: What do your "magic" L/D numbers translate to for wingsuit performance?: What does the max L/D number translate to for glided flight?: Did you use Bernoulli's equation or Euler's Formula to derive your wingsuit equations?:

Yuri, you honestly don't see whats wrong with you GR v. Time graph with the various L/D plots on it? After all you have said about L/D and GR being different you don't find it weird that the steady state GR=L/D? You don't think it's weird that your equation overshoot steady state? *this is not my professional opinion. This is a question of Yuri's consistency and understanding.

Overshoot is what your equations are doing. Look up Gibbs phenomenon if you want the fancy math version. Yuri, I know the difference between L/D and GR. I pointed out the fact that your spreadsheet said after 30 seconds there would be a GR of ~4.5 You claim that Yuri, your equations say that. You still didn't answer the questions. What is the fastest horizontal speed you have recorded during a wingsuit flight?: What is the limiting design factor of forced air wingsuits?: What do your "magic" L/D numbers translate to for wingsuit performance?: What does the max L/D number translate to for glided flight?: Did you use Bernoulli's equation or Euler's Formula to derive your wingsuit equations?: How do you personally calculate the coefficient of lift?:

Correct. Putting in Vxs=100mph and Vys=40mph with initial speeds Vx=0 and Vy=0 would correctly model a WS BASE jump with realistic flight mode (for someone, in some wingsuit with L/D=2.5), provided the flight mode remains constant throughout the flight (i.e. the pilot holds the same AoA and body configuration all the time). Why the results seem to be invalid? The most obvious is the overshoot in the graphs for GR. The second thing is the 4.5 mag glide that peaks.

Here is Yuri's WSE spreadsheet for a theoretical base jump. Now its been awhile since I took control theory but what's with all that overshoot in your graph? I'd take a 4.6 Glide any day. Edit 1: False, If you put in values that are well within the range of wingsuit performance you should get valid results back. I put Vx=100 and Vy=40 in the attached spreadsheet. Both numbers that are very reasonable to travel through air. Edit 2: You still didn't answer the questions. What is the fastest horizontal speed you have recorded during a wingsuit flight?: What is the limiting design factor of forced air wingsuits?: What do your "magic" L/D numbers translate to for wingsuit performance?: What does the max L/D number translate to for glided flight?: Did you use Bernoulli's equation or Euler's Formula to derive your wingsuit equations? WingsuitEquations.xls

and This clearly demonstrates total lack of understanding the basic premise of WSE: they only consider motion relative to air, in the inertial reference frame of the airmass (which is assumed to be moving at constant velocity, or be completely still). In WSE, Vx, Vy, ax, ay are speeds and accelerations relative to air, not the ground! If one uses GPS data from a skydive, with unknown wind, it's patently ridiculous to "used my GPS data in them and gotten absolute nonsense as an output". It's like recording a GPS track of walking to a restroom in a jet liner and giving it to a running coach asking, "how's my running? looks promising, eh?" Again, it's like taking the problem of determining the strategy for fastest time from A to B in wingsuit, and applying solution for a completely unrelated problem (bead sliding on frictionless string). The GPS data from skydives should be considered complete garbage, as the wind can never be reliably subtracted. The only value of GPS is for windless BASE jumps. Then it's in reasonable agreement with WSE (taking into account inaccuracy of GPS), as platypii's, Hartman Rector's, and multiple mine examples demonstrate. Use the right tool for the right job. Yuri, answer the questions they are not hard. What is the fastest horizontal speed you have recorded during a wingsuit flight?: What is the limiting design factor of forced air wingsuits?: What do your "magic" L/D numbers translate to for wingsuit performance?: What does the max L/D number translate to for glided flight?: Did you use Bernoulli's equation or Euler's Formula to derive your wingsuit equations? Incase you forgot you posted a link to a spreadsheet where you enter Vx and Vy. It doesn't mater if they are gps or from a vain, as long as they are within a reasonable % of wingsuit ability your equations should produce reasonable results.

The full copy of the thread can be found here and in earlier captures: https://web.archive.org/web/20180927232919/http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=4896302;page=1;mh=-1;;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC Yes Yuri, If you would answer simple questions most of those comments wouldn't exist. I'm not going to dig through 50 links looking for an answer to a question you can provide by typing for 15 seconds. This thread is about your wingsuit equations that you need to prove to the world because you came up with them and you claim they are revolutionary. Yet, you continuously fail to answer simple question. I am directly asking you, Yuri, the creator of the wingsuit equations about your equations and you refuse to answer the dozens of proposed questions. Here are a couple below. You can even copy paste to make answering them easier. What is the fastest horizontal speed you have recorded during a wingsuit flight?: What is the limiting design factor of forced air wingsuits?: What do your "magic" L/D numbers translate to for wingsuit performance?: What does the max L/D number translate to for glided flight?: Did you use Bernoulli's equation or Euler's Formula to derive your wingsuit equations?

We need to clarify terms. With proving them wrong, do you mean mathematical proof, or physical proof? Ever heard of proof by contradiction? We don't even need to do that. Yuri, came up with the WS equations. The burden is on him to provide the evidence to prove that the equations are mathematically correct and accurately represent the physical aspects he claims they do.