The111

And many times flocking is not the best example of bellyflying. Sometimes you gotta look ugly to fly relative. Just look at some of those guys in S3's and V1's in big flocks, with their feet on their ass and their arms swept back. My absolute favorite is seeing Perry take his grippers and bring them in and point them downwards... me and Omar say it looks like he's holding guns. Going a bit off topic, I will add that I do not think flocking in a big suit is stupid, as some will say. True you have to fly it dirty once in your slot, but you have so much more range for getting to the formation, away from the formation, and recovering from any other unexpected problems. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I was interested in one of those but read some reviews and everybody was saying that it has a VERY slow transfer rate, takes hours to dump a full 1GB card, and drains the iPod battery and puts unnecessary wear on the heads by making it run for so long. Still does sound like a cool idea and worth checking I guess if you're not put off by the negative reviews. What I do when I am away from home, with no computer and only my CF card and iPod, is borrow a laptop from somebody (or use a public PC) and use their HDD as a go-between from my CF card to my iPod. Takes no longer than burning CD's, is easier, and works on any PC with a USB port. Even if you don't have an iPod, if you have a cheap external HDD you don't mind dragging along, you could do this. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Sorry Iwan, no access to a scanner. But I can tell you this is the original photo. I first saw it on the wall of the Bent Prop at the Holiday Boogie (where I was originally supposed to room with you and now can't remember if we even met or not ). Somebody asked me to find what was wrong with the picture and it actually took me a while to find it. So I remembered that photo and when I saw it on the cover of the catalog yesterday was surprised to see that there was no longer anything wrong with the photo apparently, thanks to Photoshop apparently. I find it funny that on the cover of Skydive the mag the photo was not fixed, but it was for the catalog cover. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

That's just the thing... there's not! I'm guessing maybe you saw the small version of the picture on the ParaGear page (not enough detail to tell) and are familiar with the original pic. There has obviously been some editing done to the one on the catalog cover though... as my favorite part of the picture is missing. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Hmm, re-reading this old thread I can't believe I missed this the first time around. I'd like to hear the full story about your AAD's going off while holding a dock. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I don't get it. Fork me? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Me too. The other problem is you lose a lot of the float your legwing gives you when you shut it down, forcing you to rely on a VERY efficient arm position to stay with a slow falling flock (which wears my triceps out fast for some reason). Omar has an idea which I've only tried once or twice but could be pretty good I think. Picture yourself lying flat on the floor in a fully extended backfly position. Bring your knees up so that your thighs are now vertical (instead of horizontal) and your lower legs (knee to foot) are still horizontal. The only problem I have with it is I've found it hard to keep my pelvis out while doing this, so fallrate can suffer this way too. I am going to play with it some more though. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I was curious what would be on the cover of the new ParaGear catalog since I had entered a submission (and failed!). It is a photo that I have actually seen before, however there is something noteworthy about how it appears here. First person to figure it out gets 10 points. Difficulty: you have to have seen the photo before. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I did not ask for a Vampire with stick-on backvents. I said that I would like a suit with big wings that inflated in any orientation. The Acro does that task very well with medium wings; it is not unreasonable to believe a similar suit with larger wings could be designed. CAD would do very little without CFD. But perhaps since more people know what CAD means it is thrown around a lot as a marketing tool? I am not criticizing PF, I am criticizing you for bringing the brandwar where it does not belong. Both "sides" of the brandwar make great suits and both sides market their suits (what smart company does not)? There are both good and bad things I could say about each company too, and if I told you which company I favor it might surprise you. But that it NOT the point of this thread, and favoring one company does not mean you have to talk shit about the other. Yes, CFD can be useful in designing a wing. Of course it can. My original comment about "3D CAD" was not a knock on Robi or PF, it was in support of my comment that with the current style of wingsuit, there's not a whole lot more efficiency to be bled out of the 3D surface of the wing (the inefficiencies are elsewhere). Lastly, discounting wind tunnel testing as useless is ridiculous. Do you know where the numerical models used to power CFD codes come from? Guess. WIND TUNNELS. Aerodynamics has always been an experimental science. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

To make the V2 fly efficiently on the back would be a nightmare. (changing the 3D arm wing shape, replacing all the cambered airfoils, butt deflector? etc). All I said was big wings. I did not say Vampire. Perhaps you can call it an HPA (Hi Performance Acro). Or perhaps somebody else can make one. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I use standard lens too. Results are fine. Many shots I've taken with it here and in June Parachutist. It is certainly good enough for tandems. I tape the zoom and focus rings down and use manual focus. It is a bit tricky to get the focus just right and if either ring slips at ALL under the tape you'll go out of focus. But I just double check every jump to make sure they haven't shifted. The lens gets best performance at widest end (18mm) which is probably where you'd use it anyway. I would like to try a "better" lens, but I'm trying to stop spending $ on new things. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

That is very interesting, I have never heard this from anyone before (although I have heard people who are anti-zoom, I never heard a compelling reason such as yours). What lens was it? Are you sure it was opening shock that damaged it, or for that matter are you sure skydiving is responsible at all? I'm sure lenses break outside of skydiving. Not second-guessing you, just looking for more details if you have them.

As far as I know, the only reason to use one over the other is compatibility, with a reader or writer. Most burners can write to either. If yours can't, use the one it works better with. Most readers can read either. If you know that your disc is going to be read in a reader that can only read one type, use that type. I use DVD-R, because I buy Taiyo Yuden blanks and the - is cheaper then the +. Here is a technical article that is way beyond my understanding, explaining why the author believes + is superior. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Sure, you may not be able to make it fly super efficiently on the back. But I would think that even a inefficiently shaped inflated wing would be better than backflying on a deflated (effectively single skin) wing, which is what people are doing now. These deflated wings flap around a lot and cause a lot of muscle strain (and suit wear). The simple act of inflating them would make backflying a lot smoother, regardless of the shape. I'm not asking for 3:1 glide ratios here. We are not super effective airfoils anyway, to begin with, despite what any manufacturer says about their complex 3D CAD design (not knocking you here, just stating my opinion). Any efficient wing would laugh at 3:1 glide ratio. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

If you stall your suit and then leave your body in that same position, yes you will spin/tumble out of control. I've done it, at below 3,000 feet. But as you gain experience you will learn how to predict a tumble and prevent it by dynamically adapting your body to the stall, and flying out of the stall. It's like the baby who loses his balance and falls repeatedly, until he realizes all he has to do is shift his weight and stick a foot out to stop from falling. Next thing he is walking. You will also learn to stop "flat spins" in much less than 6 revolutions and learn that (my opinion here) there is no such thing as an "out of control flat spin", at least with a modern wingsuit being flown by a competent pilot. Spins are a real risk for beginners though, I have been in dozens. (I do not know your experience tdog and am not calling you a beginner or anything, this is a general comment) A wingsuit stall is not very comparable to a canopy stall since you have SO much more immediate control over every point of the airfoil with a wingsuit. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Scott, this does not answer the "skydiving" side of the question, but I really like this website for reviews of lenses. They used a Rebel XT for all their tests/reviews, which is a plus if you have that camera. Looks like they give the lens a pretty decent review. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Ditto. Big wings, back vents. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Really? I have 200+ jumps with a 38-40" F111 PC without any problem. I also was curious about your statement, Tom. I'm not a rigger or a parachute expert, but what you said does not make sense to me. The purpose of a pilot chute is to remove the lines from the stows. Doing that a little faster won't hurt, I wouldn't think. Can you elaborate at all? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

It says "ADD and audible required". Anybody with ADD definitely needs an audible. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Get a Sugar Glider. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Extremely cool. Use the force. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I don't know of any being built by the major stock helmet companies, but Wes Rich in DeLand, of Rim World Video, makes customs helmets and composite mounts. He made a mount for Perry Trowbridge's HC1, which you can sort of see in this picture I took. Probably not the answer you're looking for, but for what it's worth, there is at least one person out there I know of with a sort of "roll cage" on his HC1. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Which means it will be way cheaper from certain vendors, probably. My DVcam was around $700 when it was listed for $999 I think. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

NO, NO, NO, NO! Putting your chin to your chest can be dangerous if there is a hard opening. Your neck muscles are near there strech limit and that snappy opening may over extend those muscles. By doing this you've already put your head on a lever arm perpendicular to the force transmitted by a hard opening. Position your head as if you were doing a squat press, so the forces are transmitted down your spine. Then your head will go nowhere. I've had some CRACKER-JACK openings with two cameras on my head with no more of a sore neck than any other weekend of shooting alot of video. Ditto. Neck neutral, focus on horizon. That's two forums.

That's good if it works for you. I have two topmounted cameras, and combined with the forward throw on a wingsuit opening, if I look up or down at all, even smooth openings will result in neck ache the next day. I envy people with a light sidemount setup. www.WingsuitPhotos.com