KrisFlyZ

Hey Scott, I notice that you have posted both vertical speed and distance information. While flying, were you flying for time or distance? Kris.

Color matches perfectly...did you just use ordinary ZP vs the 1.9 Oz Balloon stuff that PF uses? OSOK, The performance will definately go up but there is no point investing in a prodigy with the intention of modding it. Unless you are super skinny or a BASE jumper, go for a acro or phantom or any of the other equivalent suits and save your shoulders. Kris

The Germans had taken some pics of this jump. They gave me the pics this year. Thanks Guys

With all the new toys...pulled over the same house? . When you say 2K barrier, is that 2k of available altitude? Or above 2K from MSL? Kris.

So this was purely a fallrate based competition?

Ha ha . It is the area(non oscillating) that the string is creating that is important. Agree with your suggestion about making the tracking suit. Kris.

Jeff, Can't there be a backflying suit and a belly flying only suit? Looks like you guys can produce one in a week anyway

Who is flying that yellow prodigy from Exit 8? That looks like an awesome flight. Kris.

Careful what you wish for...music less pov videos that look a million others that are already out there. Kris.

I'd already seen most of the bits in that video . Kris.

This has already been posted here. Kris.

Why are you tracking in a box position? Kris.

Given a reasonably larger pant radius, compared to the maximum leg radius, the increased form drag from the inflatable pants will probably be the significant factor. If the pants are made from the same material and are the same size, the inflatable pants probably provide a slower fallrate. Noticable? I am not sure. Kris.

Anysuit that increases surface area decreases fallrate. A baggy non inflating suit will slowdown fallrate but will not work that well in the tracking position. reducing flap or oscillation is important for a tracking suit to work well. Kris.

If you are bored . http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/short.html Kris.

Hmmm... Kris.

Isn't there more area as well? And a legwing that extends a bit further down. It also looked like there were more ribs. Kris.

An article on CG and L/D of sailplanes by a sailplane manufacturer. http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/schwerpunkt-e.html Kris.

well, from a very basic viewpoint... when static stability exists, an aircraft returns to "normal" after being disturbed. airfoils tend to pitch forward. so, the pitching forward gets balanced by some other force. (some applications place a "reflex" on the trailing edge to induce a counter moment... this could be mimiced by bent knees.) whatever counters this moment would be assisted by an aft shifted cg. thus, the wingsuit would not need to pitch as much nose down. a flatter pitch could lead to a better glide. humans are very good at adapting. they have also done things not anticipated by established theory. instead of wondering, why not just go experiment? I considered the very basic airfoils tend to pitch forward theory, if we consider the wingsuit as a whole to be the airfoil. But the lift from the armwings counters the lift from the legwing and we cannot treat the wingsuit as a whole to be an airfoil. Unless we assume that a) the moment of the lift from the legwing about the CG is greater than the moment from the arm wing lift about the CG and b) The suit and pilot combination must be at a flatter pitch than the suit and body charecteristics are balancing at for best L/D an aft shift in CG may not be benficial. I know that my problem when flying a phantom last year was that the suit tended to pitch me headup and put me in a stall(not an actual stall but in a slow flight mode). Adding weights to my leg is hardly the solution to alleviate that problem. Getting a suit with a relatively bigger legwing is the route I took. We'll see how that works out. I'd be experimenting a lot if the weather permitted. Kris.

I am not sure if standard glider control theory applies. you probably need flying wing theory. BUT... when a main wing produces lift, it generates a forward pitching moment. putting a lifting surface (canard) out front eliminates the pitch, but creates issues. most aircraft use a horizontal stabilizer behind the wing. this surface creates a DOWN force to counter the pitching moment. simply shifting the cg aft decreases the amount of downforce required. less downforce means less induced drag and better performance. Thanks for the explanation. Here are a couple of links if anyone is interested. http://www.meretrix.com/~harry/flying/notes/cg-perf.html http://www.westwingsinc.com/cgeffect.htm That is my point exactly. I have found a few links that have the same explanation you have given above. It seems reasonable to assume that this reasoning would apply for a glider if the implementation of the pitch control is the same as that for an airplane. Wingsuits do not use an element that produces a downward force to maintain balance. The legwing and the arm wings provide lift on different sides of the CG. Kind of like balancing a seesaw by pulling it up on both sides instead of pushing it down on both sides. The pilot can balance the suit. I can see how CG and Center of Lift being as close to possible each other would be advantageous. I have not found a reasonable explanation of why shifting the CG aft works in the wingsuit context. Kris.

Cool, I am unable to find any material (online) about the importance of the location of CG for gliders. Please post links if you know of any. Kris.

You actually got a tat on(or in the vicinity of) your bollocks? . Kris.

As long as I am cubicle dwelling, I'd like to see as many cool videos as possible. Don't tell that to my boss . Nice one. Kris.

Huh? And only 5 jumps a day with Heli transport, Robi? You taking it easy? Kris.