The111

You are correct. Because I have the feeling that even if I explained it to you, you would refute its veracity. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/refute So you won't explain yourself because you think I will prove you wrong? In other words, you think you are wrong? Also, other people were asking you the same question before I entered the thread, so don't blame it on me. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Nothing more ironic than the following exchange: Guy 1: True! Guy 2: False! Guy 1: True! Guy 2: False! Guy 1: True! Guy 2: False! Guy 1: True! Guy 2: False! Guy 1: True! Guy 2: False! Guy 1: True! Guy 2: False! Guy 1: True! Guy 2: False! Guy 1: True! Guy 2: False! Guy 1: True! Guy 2: False! Guy 1: Hey! Don't you have anything better to do than argue with me all day? A more perfect definition of irony may not exist. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

#1 #2 #3 And here's another cool trick I did with my calculator: 200 - 85 = 115. Pretty neat, right? Don't worry Phil, I still love mrbiceps and his massive upper arms. But not as much as I love Peggy Weggs. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Yes, and it references it in a completely irrelevant context, that of what is apparently a pullout deployment system. You have yet to answer the question: in a throwout deployment system, how can the bag overtake the inflated pilot chute (the very thing which is pulling it out)? I doubt you will. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

From your link: I hope everyone realizes, that if the bag does leave the container while the pilot chute is in your hand, the assembly is defective. The test is this: While wearing the rig pull the main pin, if the bag falls out of the container the assembly is defective. The container must be so designed as to hold the bag in place until positive pilot chute tension is applied to the bridle, beginning the rotation process of lifting the bag out of the container. He is saying that if you are holding the pilot chute in your hand, the bag should not come out of the container. It sounds to me like he is talking about a pullout deployment system, which isn't even remotely on-topic. It's not really possible to tell without seeing what he's replying to. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

First: Then: An opinion from a major H/C manufacturer (via Spot) saying exactly the opposite. Now: So which is it? Is it a universal truth that "anyone who's been around skydiving for more than a few years" will know about or any H/C mfr will agree on? Or is it just your personal opinion that maybe certain mfr's (you haven't stated which ones yet) support? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

whats up your ass buddy, i am asking a simple question, so fcuk off out of my thread if u havn't got something constructive to say. Regardless of how you took it, my comment was actually very constructive. The best thing you could do at this point is stop trying to buck conventional wisdom and get on the horse early (as you've done in now three separate posts in the past few days). The people who regret their first wingsuit jump won't be in this forum posting about it, because they don't fly one anymore. I have met a good amount of people at boogies who have jumped a wingsuit once, and are now afraid of them. In all those cases, they either got really poor instruction, and/or were not ready for it. /fucking off... www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Give it up... www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Who's Sandy Reid, pardon my ignorance? I'm assuming the designer or your rig (Voodoo)? And you say "if" he tells you it's bullshit, I'm assuming he did tell you such? In which case, we now have one real H/C mfr weighing in. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Disregarding any potential safety issues (whether or not they exist) that would discourage using dynamic corners... What would be the reason for putting dynamic corners on a normal skydiving rig? It is harder to pack and offers no real benefit for freefall (non-WS) deployments. So even if there were no "legitimate issues," I don't think we'd see dynamic corners standard, as you say, because there's no reason for it. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Add another one to the list that says this makes no sense, physics-wise. The drag on the PC is far too great. I remember hearing years ago (from an RWS rigger I believe) that you should leave 1/3 of the stitching intact, the reason being that it gives the bag a lip to "rotate over" to proper orientation... and for this very same reason packing grommet to BOC can lead to very nasty deployments UNLESS you cut the corners all the way. I just PMed Bill Booth to see if he will chime in. Let's hope he does. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

No quantum physics needed, just simple motion. It will look much funnier when 6 people in a row burble each other from flying too close. I've seen it happen enough. Watch my Z-Flock 2.0 video from a couple years ago. That's a difference of 10,000 feet, and a factor of 6. Whether you are 3 feet away from somebody or 9 feet away, your perception of motion is pretty much the same. Your point is well taken though, there IS a point of diminishing returns. Flying formations with 100 foot spacing would make no sense. There is a sweet spot which is neither too close nor too far. Your ideas make sense in a certain way, but the truth is a little counter-intuitive. The same way tailgating makes sense to the tailgater. I can say from about attending probably a dozen different significant wingsuit events (medium and large formations) over the past few years that the spacing used at Jeff's recent event in Elsinore was the most successful in practice, yet. Yes, tighter spacings are possible, but they won't make it easier, they'll make it harder. As the skill evolves though, that will be totally doable, to a certain extent. But when engineering bigways you don't make them harder on purpose, you make them as easy as possible. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Whether or not you "over brake" has not to do with how close the people in front you are to each other. It has to do with how much faster you are going than the guy you are approaching (speed variance). If you don't want to have to hit your brakes so abruptly, then start hitting them earlier, so that when you reach him you don't have such a large speed variance. If you are trying to get even closer to him with a large speed variance, you'll just make the problem worse (more chance for collision or overcompensating on the brakes). Also, please pass this advice on to American automobile drivers. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Yup, I was just about to say the same thing. The OP's idea of using traffic as an analogy is a good one, but he's using it backwards. "Stop and go traffic" (or traffic waves, which have been observed by me and studied by MIT) only happens when people are too close together. Smooth moving traffic is spaced much better. Off topic, but this is why I hate tailgating. It actually promotes traffic jams, which is ironic since the impatient people doing the tailgating think it will get them to their destination faster. And here is a really broad analogy: it's much like all the fools who thought getting deep in debt economically (poorly financed highly leveraged houses as "investments", or general credit card abuse, or using home as ATM) would get them "ahead" - on the contrary, their impatience has brought both them (and their entire economy) to a state of near ruin. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

True, my Icon "standard bridle" is longer than my V3's standard bridle, but not as long as the V3 extended bridle I had. I didn't mod anything on my Icon, and with the bigger suit the hesitation is definitely noticeable. Especially since I sink out my deployments due to the weight on my head, for less whip on opening. The "sink-out" process just makes the burble worse. Without the cameras I'd just dump in full flight and the burble wouldn't be as much of an issue. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Anybody know the standard for measure bridle length? I'm assuming it's from pin to PC attach. What is considered "standard" and what is considered "long"? I think my old rig (V3) had a longer bridle than my current one (Icon), which is still longer than "normal" but shorter than some. I've noticed a bigger hesitation with my SM111 also and it probably wouldn't hurt to get a longer bridle. First I need to measure mine and compare to what others are running. On topic, in my mind the other mods aren't that important, but the long bridle is a must. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Nice job of totally missing the Even sarcasm has an underlying message. If he misunderstood yours, then what was it? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

C.Y.A. No person in their right mind would not help. But if the life raft they throw ends up knocking the person out, at least Disney has their ass covered since they told you not to. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I hope you haven't been counting on a monitor to solve screen resolution problems since it's your video card that matters, not your monitor. Try again. In 1995, you would have been right. These days, I would challenge you to show me somebody with a system where the video card cannot handle the LCD's native res. I've never seen it on any pre-built system, and if you're building your own system, you're smart enough not to have that happen either (I'm actually not even sure it's possible... even the absolute weakest on-board graphics could probably drive an internet browser in 1680x1050, 1900x1200, etc, which is more than enough). LCD's are designed to run at their native res, and are packaged with video cards that can do that for most tasks (with the exception of 3D intensive tasks). www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Thanks! www.WingsuitPhotos.com

In that case, I will faithfully believe that your last post was an endorsement of atheism. And even though history may prove me wrong, that's ok, because I don't have to back up my faith with facts.

Do you agree with Bush or not? Is the Bible 100% true, or not? Can't you see he's not talking about truth? He's talking about whether or not it's useful to him. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I am totally the same way with the dictionary! www.WingsuitPhotos.com

It is not him of course. It is the reaction some people experience when the evil they harbor and cherish is exposed by the Truth. That's me to a tee! I harbor and cherish evil. EEEE-vil! www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I cant speak for james, but for a lot of people the only reason to want to see was to see WHAT was done. See the pretty picture of 71 wingsuits in formation. Be it 100% slotperfect or 99,9% slotperfect. Its just because of wanting to see something awesome...Not to rate it. http://www.matthoover.com/gallery/skydiving-photos/2008-11/2008-11_p43.html#navbar http://www.matthoover.com/gallery/skydiving-photos/2008-11/2008-11_p60.html#navbar Two pictures with 71 wingsuits in formation.