Trae

in reply to "You probably already knew all of that, and the proper specialists will know way more, but I wanted to add those various comments out in the open... " Yes, very much a work in progress. Material and surfacing specialists could definitely take the component design and development way further. I'm very interested in the use of laminates and composites for the structural load carrying and light weight advantages. The skid design has a fairly low priority for me at the moment as the flight aspects of the suit(s) design are being more demanding. One idea for a skid variation is to have a skid-plate rather than separate ski's. The advantage of the skid-plate is that it would stay pointing in the right direction even if there was some sideways in the landing and would also not suffer from the possibility of ploughing or ski-separation. I look forward to sharing some other component design issues as they arise . Your (and others) intelligent comments are appreciated as this dream slowly becomes reality.

in reply to "Yes, perhaps still fantasyland. Yes, perhaps some other showstopper will come up. But I don't think ski deployments is the showstopper, as I explained above. Full circle back to what I said: "More research is needed" " ................................. Your posts have made good reading mdrejhon. Cheers. I've designed some semi-automatic ski's for a non-fabric wingsuit lander. I've called them Trailing Edge Skids or Traeskids for short. The idea is that during normal flight they remain retracted using spring and airpressure , dropping down automatically on touchdown . They can also be extended manually using foot /leg movements.

in reply to "Well, the problem landing a wingsuit head first, is you have wrong angle of attack. You need to change angle before landing to make a soft touch down." ................ Agreed. One proviso for a reasonably safe wingsuit landing would be that the WS had sufficient performance to achieve level flight as well as be able to climb during a flare...and to do it easily. Possible scenario with such a WS: pilot swoops , pulls out of swoop into level flight just above the ground, flies horizontally (perhaps for 100m or more)gradually going more head- up, as speed drops off more head up until feet/skids touch ground still flying head-up , some ground effect helping to hold flyer in a head up position. At this stage flyer may be at 45* to the ground still moving at a fair pace , as speed drops of further , flyer maintains flying control gradually going to full leg/skid support.(HP canopy pilots do something similar even though there are also obvious differences.) Admittedly this would be some balancing act! But doable ? I think so . Dreamin? oh yeah ! The dream of human flight is a powerful ongoing dream. Landing a wingsuit is just another part of the same dream. It doesn't stop after some-one achieves it. It goes on and grows into ??? The dream encourages others and enhances human consciousness. This WS landing dreamy can be approached without the death defying BS (and BS artists) being involved. By being systematic the WS can be tested and proven at higher altitudes. If it can't flare properly at say 1500' then.. more work required. By comparing flaring power at different altitudes it can be worked out how it will flare at sea level allowing for an eventual confident attempt NOT a death defying guess. The higher air densities at sea level would provide extra flaring power... so if the WS flared well at 1500' then it will flare better at 0'. This dream just goes on and on and on... For me I'm just trying to get my articulated spar prototype to pass the load carrying tests.

in reply to "Im 100% excited about seeing this become reality some day...but am also (I think) realistic as to defining something being a wingsuit landing, or something straight from the ACME archives.. " ....................... I can %100 relate to your enthusiasm... and realism. Yeah ACME archives , same old NEW ideas . Lurking somewhere in the collective consciousness is the abilitiy to make this dream a reality. Sure a wingsuit designed for repeated landings will probably look very different to todays offerings...at least I hope so. In the past, many aviation milestones have been breached by the assistance of rich people keen to see aviation advance in their lifetimes. By putting up prize money , the added financial incentive has allowed ordinary people to achieve things previously impossible. I can imagine the financial gains available to an investor . Something like wingsuit landings at Daytona would sure get the crowd going. It would also generate an increase in the advancements of the wingsuit itself. As much as I enjoy seeing the incremental improvements from PF and TS I also feel a bit duped by them. As soon as you buy the latest suit the next thing arrives to suck more money out of us wingsuiters... bit like the computer industry. Some-one with marketing skills could really have a feild day with this wingsuit landing dream.... and then it would become a reality . If the aeronautical design community got hold of this wingsuit landing idea ( nice project for students perhaps ) we'd see wingsuits actually designed for landings and that would have to mean they would fly much better as well.

in reply to "Yup...anything BUT boring. But it also will not be 'landing a wingsuit'. It will be landing 'something else' Awesome to talk about. Will be awesome to watch. But like Jeb also says. Something else than the 'wingsuit landing' everyone keeps bringing up. " ...................................... Just wondering ..Do you think it is still a wingsuit if you wear body armour underneath it ? How about is it still a wingsuit if it manages to spread its wings past the reach of the body? Is it still a wingsuit if it is not completely made of fabric. ? Is it still a wingsuit if it has retractable landing skids built in? Is it still a wingsuit if it is fully controlled by intuitive movements of the pilots whole body? Is it still a wingsuit if the pilot's head/neck is enclosed/protected by an articulated helmet/spine protector? Is it still a wingsuit if it needs a customised emergency parachute? eg I can understand the Skyray not being called a wingsuit.. 'but something else'.. because the pilot is suspended below it not encased within it. Ditto the Red Bull flying machine probably doesn't qualify as a wingsuit. A medieval suit of armour was still called a suit because the wearer had to wear it in the general manner of wearing clothes. A wingsuit designed with enhancements that don't rely on ram-air pressure could still be called a wingsuit?? or does it just HAVE to be totally made of fabric to qualify? (eg my V2 still has its mylar in it and a bit of foam in the leading edge as well as cables , zips and a bit of leather.) Square parachutes , roundies , triangular... you name it is still a parachute. Wingsuits mmmmm .. a suit with wings. Now what shape do the wings have to be to qualify? What material do they just HAVE to be made of ? Simple possible description: If you wear it like a suit and it has wings then it is a wingsuit. (?) Perhaps fabric wingsuits such as today's will only be the entry level gadget to much higher performing wingsuits made of whatever.. . I suppose some people will say they're something else and not a REAL wingsuit. A stealth fighter looks nothing like the Wright's Flyer. but they are both aircraft and both aeroplanes using the same basic principles of flight. If some aviation minded wealthy people put some money up for the first repeatable wingsuit landings then these descriptions are going to have to be clarified.

in reply to "When we talk about adding a kevlar pads, skis, ramps, inflating cushions, and so on, what we REALLY are talking about is some kind of a device that when added to a wingsuit will let it land safely. We already have invented that device a while ago, and it works really well, it's called a parachute rig. Look at it this way: either adding those types of devices no longer makes it a wingsuit landing and it's sortof pointless, or it still does and it's being done every single day already. " .................................. Yeah but compared to wingsuits , parachutes are boring! and it happens everyday like you say...yawn. Landing a wingsuit (even with kevlar-viagra-powered-nappy- pads ) will be anything BUT boring . ....it also represents a pretty decent design challenge . The history of birdmen who have attempted landings is not restricted to just one expression of flight. The early Birdmen tried all sorts of things without the benefit of modern materials and computer power. Aren't we allowed to think outside the little 'current expression of wingsuit flight ' box ? Pointless to you ??? So what ?

in reply to "..,the only way I see this happening is through slow flight but then we need to have someone very light AND very strong to hold those big wings.." ................................................ That's where some thoughtful design comes in . Your bubble idea led me to imagine a wingsuit without a leg wing ( as currently manifested). Imagine if the arm-wings combine and extend down over the back and legs(and further?). If this wing had sufficient pressurrisation perhaps it could maintain its shape without the legs or arms having to do all the work of holding it open. Perhaps the rear section could be partly controlled by movement of the hip/upper thigh . Then the legs/skids could drop down more easily to slide along during a ( slowed down ) landing .

in reply to " But a lot of theory here isnt really a realistic view on progres when looking at current performance and technology. " ..................................................... but this is a discussion forum so theorising seems natural here. Plus we get to extract ideas like the bubble idea. This might at first seem odd but I think it has merit as it attempts to solve the decelleration issue. Getting the legs in the correct position to support a landing is a design problem. Birds seem to do it right at the last moment as they present their wings for maximum deceleration. They have the advantage of no leg wing to stop their legs going forward. A solution to any landing problems exists . We just have to find it.

Just some more theorisings about landing a wingsuit on flat ground. Prediction. When a wingsuit can easily climb after a flare then a controllable, survivable landing will be possible and some brave soul will no doubt make an attempt. Instead of using the flare’s energy to climb, a well timed gradual flare could be used to slow down as well as maintain level flight...just like a well executed H.P.canopy landing. A perfect wingsuit landing would perhaps end with the wingsuiter still skidding along on their (ski-shod) feet in an upright position. A less than perfect landing would perhaps result in skidding along on torso skids. A bad landing would obviously end in serious injury or death. The first modern wingsuits could not achieve horizontal flight. After about a decades development some currently available wingsuits can fly horizontally for a short time after a dive /swoop/ flare . I believe it can reasonably be extrapolated that wingsuit performance levels will continue to improve and eventually achieve the required performance levels to land on horizontal ground. Some Landing Requirements. Wingsuit performance. : Ability to dive swoop flare and then fly horizontally for some distance. : Ability to fly back up after a flare : Ability to absorb landing forces eg via sprung skids/ski's. : safety back -ups , eg face-plate, chest guards limb protection, steel undies) in case of rough landing. Favourable landing conditions. : cool dense non- turbulent low altitude air. : a strong headwind. : large open area landing strip ; wet grass, water Pilot preparation. : Base jumping and proximity flying experience would be very helpful to get the appropriate mindset to ensure this is not just death defying stunt BS. : there will be a 'go/no go' decision to be made at a safe parachute deployment height : radio confirmation from the ground that good conditions exist; eg wind speed still high. : use of modern technology to increase pilot confidence eg HUD airspeed altitude vertical descent readouts : LOTS of practice flaring Of course some skinny Norwegian will probably land without any of the above There was a time parachutes only descended. Then they were designed with the ability to flare, slowing down vertical landing speeds. Now modern parachutes can easily climb after a flare at low altitudes turning their high forward speeds into powerful flared landings with little or no vertical speed. Prediction : One day wingsuits will do the same . and the next day ?

WoW this jet stuff is really working. Has any-one other than that finnish guy flown one of these ? Perhaps if the test-pilot was a long and skinny lightweight we'd see a big increase in the performance levels. What a pity we'd all have to be millionairs to have a go.

in reply to "Id say pressurization in all wingsuit models coming out the last year or so has been more than rock solid.. How far you could extend wings outward, I dont know....but how about stopping the theory, and making the suit you propose " ................................. Got some development $$$$$$ ? I'm working on it ....slowly. Every wingsuit pilot I run my ideas by react against an imagined rigidity to the design whereas my design basis is flexibility . Design is always compromise . Theorising is an important part of any considered design. This idea is gelling slowly but surely and when it does the jets get put on. Ps has Ferrari been having wingsuit dreams too?

in reply to "I dont know how many recent wingsuit designs you've flown, but in the whole range from Tony or PF, the wings are rigid like concrete...fabric flappers is not really a term of this day and age when it comes to naming modern-day wingsuit design.. " ........................................ I've been flying my V2 but not as much as I'd like to . The pressurisation is no where near like concrete....more like marshmellow . In your estimation is the most recent suits pressurisation strong enough to allow the arm wings to extend say a foot each side of the body ? Watching jets wings increase their wingarea for landings and takeoff has filled me full of ideas for something similar happening on a wingsuit. It would be a good thing if wingsuit pressurisation could power such lift enhancers. Its my feeling such gadgets will need a bit of manual help to extend and retain their shape. ..perhaps then it'll be wingsuit landings on flat ground at moderate speeds

in reply to "This is all well and good but as soon as we start introducing spars and extra cables and exteneded wings etc we reinvent the hangglider. Whilst landing is a nice aspiration I would really like to be able to take off ;) The reality is we have a niche between aircraft and hanglider and non wingsuited freefaller. If you chose a big air bag as in certain ideas, or a ski slope you could land the wingsuit today. However what does that actually achieev if not repeatable safely at low cost. Its a nice stunt, I expect the "stunt" will officially be done at some point. But I dont think we will be landing safely repeatedly for all any time soon. Would love to be wrong. :) " ........................................... For me its not about being right or wrong. I also see no need to reinvent the hang-glider. The idea of rigid extensions and contraptions also leaves me cold. Flexibility is the word I prefer here. Also retractability , extendability I like those words too. Some of the newer plastics have properties much more applicable to aerofoils than siliconised fabric. These materials keep their shape much better while still providing sufficient flex to allow the range of movement required by wingsuiters. Admittedly such a wingsuit may be heavier but if the shape is more consistent then the wing efficiencies will be much higher. By skinning the wings with a material that will maintain a consistent surface (unlike any fabric wingsuit on the market ), smoother and more powerful flight characteristics will result. Such material would also provide such possibilities as variable camber as well as such things as swing wings. It would also provide a surface fro the use of slats and flaps . The future of wingsuits is much bigger than simple fabric flappers. Keeping an open mind allows further creativity and design innovation to enhance our sport not restrict it.

in reply to "If such wingsuit mods could add add another 30 seconds or a minute to a wingsuit flyers experience,...wwll THAT would be cool for flyers of ANy size,,,,, AND such mods might lead to new numbers on vertical and horizontal speeds of some certain wingsuiters ( with say 20#'s less weight) that could then make a landing more potentially survivable...." ......................... Some good thinking there . The $$$ and time factor is a restriction but I'm sure there are plenty of test pilots out there willing to try one of your designs. It seems that if the wing area could be say doubled at the same time improving the actual performance of the wing (ie making it efficient .) then a landing would be entirely feasible. Such a wingsuit would not have to extend 20 feet ,as mentioned, but could perhaps extend a couple of feet out from the body in any direction required. An increase in wing-area could be achieved by extending a semi-flexible section of extra wing stored within the wingsuit. Perhaps bungie controlled as you suggest. With arms in delta postion they could be retracted , Dive, flatten out into horizontal flight , stretch arms (and legs? ) out and the extra wing extends. I agree that a spar of some sort would be desirable to take any extra lift loads. Perhaps then with the extra wingarea a greatly improved glide angle would be achieved making a landing no more difficult than deadsticking a cessna. Perhaps you have some thoughts about semi-flexible wingsuits with efficient non-fabric surfaces . I for one would like to hear them.

in re to "Well, I'm glad at least a couple people have been willing to think about what I'm saying and respond with some reasonable suggestions and comments, rather than just making willfully stupid remarks. :-/ " ............................. I'm wondering if it is possible for a seasoned skydiver NOT to kick when they've got line twists. The only time I didn't kick I chopped . Every other time (hundreds under f111) kicking worked just fine. Perhaps with modern canopies its a good idea not to even try and kick out due to loss of height awareness , imminent death ,etc. I'm sure many people would still be alive if the instant reaction to line twists under ZP was ....CHOP.

Nicely done. What a supreme effort this guy is putting in. Just wondering , do you know if Yves is planning to do a take off from the ground ? Now that I want to see.

in reply to "They use a runway...or gras..or sand...but flat surfaces regardless Not a multi-million dollar waterslide.." ............................... If the multi-million$$$'s was spent in developing a truly high performance wingsuit perhaps the expensive slidey water thingy wouldn't be needed. Some-one's just got to do something about the currently atrocious wingloading and low wing efficencies. Current wingsuits are really only designed to fly downwards and across. eg no flaps to flare with , no working spoilers for low speed lift and as for landing gear With a few mil available some-one on the planet could design one that flies across and across...praps.

good recognition skills bloke National parks would make such good proximity DZ's eg Yosemite, Grand canyon. ..sigh

in reply to "May simply be the issue of too many practical problems. If I fly close to a mountain, I need to have a BASE container on my back. Surely, you agree that having a skydiving rig means opening at at least 3000' above solid ground. Depending on the mountain topography, this might mean peeling away from the mountain about 1000-2000' above the 3000'. How many mountains are there that have walls at the correct angle for proximity flying for thousands of feet over 5000'? " .............. yep agreed. Opening altitude is one of the main issues here . Getting the gear right is another biggy. as for legality hurdles Admitedly most of this flying would be well under 5000' and probably more limited to about 3000' terrain . Not extremely long flights but the intensity would make up for that. I see many good flight lines around and abouts and I live in fairly low country -nothing much above 3000', they just lack good wingsuit base launch sites. So an exit from say 4000' followed by a fly down to 1000-500' could deliver the goods. Equipment very much like base rigs would seem more appropriate than regular skydiving rigs. 500' for a wingsuit base opening is reasonable - even highish for some. If the flight lines allowed a good margin for error , say 1000' agl openings it would be possible to use some skydiving or base, reserved rigs. Given the increasing numbers of wingsuiters and wingsuit basejumpers the gear issue may not be the large one it would appear to some. on the money side ..If the DZ was sighted well a range of flight lines might be available for the cost of a hop n pop. Seems like the legal issues could be the real stumbling blocks. If the cliffs in the attachment were around 3000' there would be more than a few possible flight lines providing good outs and readily accessible opening areas as well as some cruisy proximity flying.. hope this sort of thing happens more in the future

in reply to "The reason I want to get into skydiving is to one day start BASE jumping as well. " .................... You're not the lone ranger here If you really want to learn and do Base jumping you can learn it with no skydiving experience. You and others may find it preferable to have a few specific skills before you go base. eg being able to fly. Not many people can do this without some practice first. Time in skydiving world can be used to your advantage if rather than getting too distracted you focus on learning skills that will be useful while basejumping . eg*Canopy control . learning to fly a canopy accurately with confidence . You can use a base type canopy while skydiving to rack up heaps of 7cell experience. If you want it is even possible to give yourself malfunctions and practice dealing with them as per base procedures. *body control. learning to fly your self . Similar thing as with your canopy . I'd suggest not being too jump number obsessed but more interested in actual skill acquisition. 200 skydives can get you a lot of tracking skills if you tracked on every jump. If you practice a proper accuracy approach on 200 skydives you could almost be an accuracy champion as well. Then when you go base jumping you don't have to worry about flying .....only jumping. enjoy

Thnx. so................ Not much happening in skydiving world.........yet.

Is anyone out there doing any regular proximity flying from aircraft.? of course most of us have seen the usually base video's from Switzerland , Norway and other European locactions. It seems that it would be possible to get many beautiful proximity flights on other continents if we weren't reliant on the base exit. Money saved by not having to travel to remote european loacations could be spent on aircraft hire. dreamin on : wingsuit DZ near swoopable mountains : mobile 'DZ' aircraft taking wingsuiters to a variety of sites . : Proximity training camps and Boogies from aircraft Is any-one developing this side of the sport?

inreply to "Serious answers only cause this is open to a lot of ridicule. Rig on my back....me on my motorcycle. Good idea....or bad? Has anyone done it? " ................. Definitely bad ! This killed a well known and loved Aussie skydiver , Tony Lee, in the late 80's. The gear on his back shifted at high speed causing him to unbalance and fall. We lost a phenomenal skydiver , one of the good guys . A lot of people's lives were lessened by his tragic loss. but of course it's your choice.

"What exactly is the best way to get the gripper out of the way when pulling in a P2? Or do you just pull while still holding the gripper? And no, its not a joke. I genuinely am this stupid... " Nice idea to let go of the gripper first. After holding it during the flight I find it helpful to do a definite release by flicking fingers fully open rather than just casually letting go. Your fully open hands with extended fingers are much better at feeling what is going on during deployment than a crunched up semi-closed hand. As for stupid, my first flight on a Phantom I happily deployed the gripper and took at least another 1000 very flappy feet to finally get a pilot chute out.

ibn reply to "with all due respect, 10 mins is too short. When I teach helicopter aerodynamics, it takes probably several full days to do so... Flexible wing is a bit simpler than things like retreating blade stall and autorotation, but it's still quite complicated. " Considering the relatively high performance of modern canopies available to beginners 10 minutes briefing on how they fly does seem inadequate especially given the high landing incident rate. So much of the FJC is about minimising information to the student in the hope they won't be overloaded. And of course most places ust HAVE to fit in all into one day . Many places pride themselves on doin the FJC thing even quicker. Striking the balance between necessay information and too much forgettable 'rubbish' is part of the job. Students, if they progress, will be exposed to ever increasing levels of canopy performance. They need to be taught properly how the things fly . With canopy landing speeds approaching and in some cases exceeding aircraft landing speeds it would seem reasonable to expect the skydivers of today to recieve extra training similar in some respects to pilot training including a good uderstanding of the aerodynamics involved. The continueing incident rate suggests otherwise . IMO the skdiving community has been unable to recognise its own inadequacies in dealing with the HP canopy issue. 10 minutes of aerodynamic training says it all. People presenting such poor trainging standards as acceptable merely perpetuate low industry standards. Some FJC's used to run night school as a way to provide necessary information in a proper learning environment . Teaching aerodynamics as a necessity might scare away the dummies and that might be a good thing.