Trae

in reply to "Why do whuffos walk on skydiving gear? " .................................. Something happens to a whuffo's brain when they wander around a DZ. There's just so many strange things for them to look at . All the clowns in their clown suits. All the rushy bustle of the weekend warriors. Controlled chaos and adrenalin anti-climaxes. Their fluffy heads are suddenly in the clouds and they don't consciously see all the stuff skydiver's dump on the ground. They in a dream. When whuffos are in this dream state unpacked gear really does look like rubbish .. so why not stand on it or kick it out of the way a bit. plus a lot of DZ's look like trash reclamation areas making it easy for whuffos to be disrespectful. Totally understandable whuffo behaviour

in reply to "We can all thank Nixon for his war on drugs." ............................. ...and all the little fascists that perpetuate it ! It amazes me how western countries that have sacrificed so much against fascism don't allow such a small personal freedom as chuffing on a joint. As a society we allow the prohibitionists to mess with peoples lives as a growth industry. the fascists still rule eh?

While we're dreaming... What about a bi-plane wingsuit? Might be one way to increase wing area without extending past the arms and legs. Of course there are many reasons why it wouldn't work.... and perhaps a few why it could. One poss...a tiny cross braced canopy suspended with very short lines from the torso. Perhaps the upper wing could be released to deploy the canopy.

in reply to "Are there people on this forum who had this problem too during there AFF course? If yes, do you have any tips to be not nervous the next time you have to jump? ...........So if you have any advice for me I would really appreciate it! ...................................... Its not so much NOT getting nervous it's more about how you handle the 'nerves' when you get them. One little trick I found worked for some people is to stay fully orientated during the flight to height. This gives you something to do and is good airmanship. It can also take you out of yourself and your nerves. Its as simple as looking and seeing out the window. Then when you get to the door you know where you are. You reduce the sudden blast of excitement but get a gradual build-up which may be more manageable . Sure, listen to and watch your instructor but also take your time to look around in freefal and SEE what you're looking at. Avoiding uncontrolled spins is largely staying orientated. You got to have orientation to keep it.

in reply to "I'm sure this has been discussed before, but I would be interested in hearing your thoughts. I was injured in September, and have been out ever since. The accident was serious but not at all life threatening (pretty bad ankle break requiring some surgery). " .................................... Best advice ...brush up on those PLF's.... and go into cruise mode. I've injured an ankle bad enough to put me out for a while. Jumped on it again when not fully healed and had to favour the other leg as much as possible. Staying comfortable in the plane was just as important as during the jump/landing. Its easy to over stress a leg/ankle injury before you even get out the door. I'd have to recommend staying on a larger canopy until you get totally bored and just have to downsize. It won't hurt initially to wait for perfect conditions (light steady breeze) giving you the best chance of a perfect landing. If the conditions are messy take extra care. eg land in open clear area not packing area. It would also be a good idea to only do one, max two jumps over a whole day. Adrenalin can deceptively mask an injury and encourage you to over do it. So be happy with just a few jumps over a couple of days, gradually upping it as you gain confidence in your leg again. AS to the family ?? invite them to the DZ to watch.

in reply to "it's not a black and white decision, its a grey area." .................................... mmmmm .... this incident was during a tandem training course ? and the trainee didn't cut away . Hard to believe. Sounds very unpro. Were they over water or something? Worried about losing the main? Wonder if the trainer(gear owner) took over and recommended not cutting away. ? Their decision to not cut-away sounds very questionable and seems to ignore the potential dangers .

in reply to "JM#2 started pushing and shoving me back to the first bench.. he didn't just motion or move me (or tell me).. he shoved and pushed me over and over even though I got the message already he was still pushing my legs as if idk what his trip was.. " ............................... JM#2 sounds like a real amateur. Some people get pushy when they get too excited . As he didn't recognise your reactions at the time it also seems likely he was suffering from sensory overload as well as being unprofessional. Unfortunately the sport seems to attract plenty of people that can't really be cool in exciting situations. You did the right thing going to management. They may have had other problems with this guy . As a paying customer you have every right to be treated with dignity and respect.

Oldest boldest and all round bestest bloke I've met is Gordo . In his mid seventies this guy walked ( not heli lifts like the softies) into and jumped Kjerag twice . Genuine good ol tough guy.

Every point you've raised is totally specific to design issues I'm having. Much food for thought , cheers. As for flyability ie ease of use: I'm finding this is largely where the work is. It would be relatively easy to make a rigid wingsuit locked in one shape, might even be fun one day . As a non-rigid internally piloted design right from the start , my design won't evolve into Rossy's or Skyray's solid wing. Not too keen on flying under a separate wing myself I'd prefer to be inside the wing and part of it. I'm concentrating on the arm wings as I feel that is where the major gains are to be had. Basic idea is to copy from the arm's structure but allow for enhanced load carrying via articulated spar/wing. The skinning takes a fair portion of the load as well. The whole arm wing/spar/skinning set up is based loosely on the leaf spring principle. As more load goes on more structure kicks in to support it. Plus the wing and spar get thicker/stronger towards the body. I've found balance points for the wrist and elbow where control input and load carrying are minimised. More work to do final placement/shape of the shoulder pivot where it attaches to the torso plates. I'm thinking this wont be resolved until full size 'back of truck' flying tests. I'm thinking these wings can work with a standard fabric torso and leg wing , simplyfying the development and testing process. My V2 lives in danger of being chopped up a bit. I'm also considering having sailcloth upper arm sections to further simplify the development process. Hearing how well your single skin arm wing extensions worked in different flight modes was enlightening. I guess the leg wing extensions on your design pushed the centre of lift back a fair bit causing strong pitch down. You mentioned you had trouble balancing this with the arm wings. This is one issue I'm expecting to arise with my swing wing design and its variable CoL. I'm hoping to counter/balance the CoL variance with extra forward surface area controlled by upper shoulders and head neck orientation(aerohelm). Or it may not be a problem eg sweep arms back, get in major dive. head up flattens it as bit allowing some wing extension for further manouvering. dangerous uncontrollability problems obvious. I know all this talk of plates and spars and skinning makes it sound rigid and unbending but the design and materials being used allow for good flexibility . Finding torsion axis and balance and pivot points is all part of the design/test process.. . Of course with your flight results in mind I'm aware early efforts may be too physically (and mentally?)restricting. The arm wings are twistable bendy things even though they might look as stiff as glass . They move easily in a wide range of movement with no load and the tests are so far positive that they will in the air as well. Your lexan and SS panhead recommendation is noted and welcome. I'm using hardware store polycarbonate sheeting (0.8 mm) mainly cause its cheap and readily available. Same with the cheap screws. I'm looking forward to using better materials once the design matures a bit. I found that I could bounnce my sledge hammer of a poly sheeted foam inner wing section without barely a mark and no permanent deformation. The poly skinning I'm using will crease however under high loads without some sort of spar / reinforcement. Thicker poly ? the extra weight puts me off a bit. However if the skinning was made of a higher quality material then the spar could be dispensed with using the skinning as the load carrying component. I hope I can achieve your level of indestructibility . I'm pretty good at breaking things. I wasn't gunna give up until I really broke something. Now I'm thinking glueing AND screwing with some integrated carbon rods in high load areas. Do you know if lexan be glued good? and heat folded. (I'm off to see the plastic wizards.) Gotta go with your disclaimer Legal Afterword To Cover My Ass: Anything and everything I say here can and may be inaccurate, and almost certainly will. Any attempt to construct and fly any device based on any advice I may offer here is regarded as suicidal, stupid beyond belief, and is extremely likely to result in death or disability. In essence, everything and anything I say about wingsuit design and construction, if you follow it and do it all right, you're still going to fucking die instantly so do not even think about it. Some, most or all of what I say is or may be purely for comic/entertainment purposes with no obvious indicators as to whether there is any fact in any of it. Building actual flight hardware of any kind is done 100% at your own risk. Building and flying anything based on information some idiot put up on the internet would be a phenomenally stupid thing to do, guaranteed to result in your death. Do not do it. Ditto for me

Gday Lurch, That was the most interesting and informative post . Congratulation's on your test pilot and design efforts , especially the test pilot bit. If they haven't already ,your test flights should be recorded in a history of wingsuit development, with photos hopefully. Then we won't have to reinvent your wheel . All the design and flight issues you have highlighted are noted , realised and extreme . The possibility of an upside down spin with one wing extended and the other crumpled further powered by an uncontrollable leg wing extension throwing the pilot into high g spasms has occurred to me Slightly more cautiously than you, I'm taking this real easy and careful like. Just like a little mouse nibbling on a rat trap.... And I know it's a trap. The bait , good flight performance gains, is still alluring. A major design issue is definitely to keep it all easily controllable and intuitive and yes this makes it all potentially very aerodynamically complex. I'm finding the design process to be much more about feeling into it than mathematics . Trial and error laced with experience and intuition is working so far . I like what you said how it would only fly ok in one position and that this made it very restricting and unfun. Noted. During my tests , I found I could increase the extended arm wings comfortable flight range ( at a cautious 100km/hr) just by altering the L.E section. A more rounded L.E. resulted in a wider range of comfortable movement and controllability of incidence and sweep. However with a sharper LE. the wing seemed to fly in its narrower range noticeably cleaner . The addition of the l.e. slats seemed to make the armwing more controllable over a wider range of movement. My first efforts went form barely controllable to easily stretched out and flown within a reasonable range of movement. Of course too much incidence at too high a speed and the wings will still blow back . Now (after a few changes ) at high incidences I can feel when its about to go and can reduce the incidence or sweep my arms back a bit thereby reducing the flight loads to more easily controllable. Variable camber via T.E.flaps are next in line aiming to further improve the low speed range of flyability of these wings. So far control improvements have been sufficient to keep leading me on to the next step. Is it all worth it when wingsuits fly ok anyway and we have parachutes for slow flight.? It seems to me that flying wingsuits at their maximum performance levels can leave the body in a very rigid and uncomfortable state. Personally I wouldn't mind if the Ws got a bit rigid if it meant that I could fly at maximum and minimum and stay in a relatively relaxed body position. The miriad of possible designs and engineering solutions may be a can 'o worms, and the solutions may not be immediately obvious, but that doesn't mean there's no solution to the issues you've raised so clearly. in reply to "You start fucking around in this territory you are up against something like a 97% fatality rate. " And loving it This is a VERY real design challenge and that is what keeps it interesting for me. After you sharing your experiences I'll be keeping the extra leg wing area very low to start with. And it'll initially be in 1/3 scale so no-one should get hurt .

in reply to: " If you experience a horseshoe, and you are using a hand deployment technique, pull the main’s hand deploy pilot chute immediately. Then, and even if you can’t pull the main hand deploy pilot chute, execute a breakaway and deploy the reserve. " .................................................... There is just a chance that the main will open after deploying the horseshoed pilot chute. If you haven't lost height awareness it may not be necessary to immediately cut-away. Very likely you will have to though.

in reply to "Any thoughts on the design? " ................. Is it totally snag proof? If not am wondering if a slope sided shroud would make it impossible to snag a line. ,

Sounds like you found a very real limitation there Lurch. Must have been fun jumps. High load on the extremities with the added leverage = no go. I'm supposing if you had such trouble with the extensions in a normal flight mode then diving and flaring such a thing into slow flight mode would be close to physically impossible without structural assistance of some kind. Possible design solutions keep coming back to that spar / semi-rigid thingy. My feeling is that a spar wouldn't need to take ALL the loading but merely assist. This would leave some arm/leg strength for control input as well as a variable share of the load carrying . The wings I've been flying out a car window (nothing over 100km/hr so far ) can be very difficult to control unless the point of aerodynamic balance is found . Then they seem to lock into very smooth flight . The l.e.slats had a marked positive effect at least at the lowish test speeds . Minimal control input has big effects. If the wing gets too sideways then its injury time for me and the vehicle. The load gets too high? A design could allow for reducing the excessive loads either through washout control and/or sweeping the arms back . The excessive load can automatically reduce itself as the loads can be made to reduce as the wings go back. This has been working with the smaller wings but the bigger ones are begging for a through spar . At high incidences they just blow back too quick to control easily. In the case of your leg wing extensions perhaps a bracing bar or two along/under the legs could have helped take the extra load , transferring some of the loads to the stronger upper leg muscles or even torso thereby soaking up the levered forces and being able to make better use of the extra lift. Perhaps one design could have you partially kneeling on the extra leg wing loads . I'm also wondering if some sort of aerodynamic balancing is possible with an idea like your semi-rigid legwing extensions. Aerobalancing works to a degree for arm-wing extensions. If the levered forces (of the legwing extensions) were balanced by a connected forward section of the aerofoil (perhaps along the outside of the legs) similar to the rudder and elevator aero-balancing on some aircraft. Semi-rigid (ie flexible) structural components always sound so large and heavy but these additions can be kept light weight and compact. The limitations you have explored are not going to change in a hurry. As you say most of a fabric wingsuit has to stay within the close confines of the body's reach. Unfortunately the flight characteristics of low aspect ratio wings are also fairly limited. I haven't done much experimenting with leg extensions (apart from filling the leg gap on my Classic2). The arm wings are proving complex enough at the moment. Do you have any thoughts on the possibility of a leg extension acting as a well defined elevator ? eg a semi-rigid extension that could be controlled by the feet to give up and down elevator.

in reply to "Hate to be the bearer of bad news but Zun has already done this. The suit and in air shots look super cool but there is a reason they decided to not build and sell suits with this feature. " ......................................... If all your news is that good bear away. Very good to see others have already had a go at something similar. Their suit and those shots you mentioned would be worth seeing . Wonder what the reason/ stumbling block was that stopped their designs progress? Do you know much about other recent experimental design concepts (outside the standard add an inch here , change a profile there, type )? Some possible disadvantages I can see for this idea are: * it could be uncontrollable without some structural help. * it might be too dangerous /difficult to get the optimum dimensions worked out without a wind tunnel * perhaps in some flight modes it could seriously harm the pilot eg bend arms back too far. *awkward deployment procedure The disadvantages must have outweighed the possible advantages of a greater range of flight modes and potentially enhanced control input. I wonder if their design had a spar ?

in reply to "Does that have something to do with diminishing returns in performance with increasing area due to no change in span but increase in area? Or worsening Aspect ratio and thus more induced drag? AR = (wingspan * wingspan)/WingArea http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lift-induced_drag Induced drag decreases with speed but bigger wingsuits being slower overall at best L/D must be worse off relatively than their smaller counterparts in this regard. As we cannot simply increase wing area and add taper to the wing geometry, the increasing length of that baton(wingtip) to make a bigger wing suit must contribute negatively as well. Diminishing returns again? ...................................................... Even though your interests lie elsewhere I appreciate your thoughts on this subject. As you say adding wing span doesn't solve the L/D issues without adding new problems. I'm guessing if the wing extensions were particularly slippery and yes non-fabric then the diminishing return limitations could be pushed out a bit. Handling the extra leverage from extra wings would imo need a throughspar of some kind. It seems possible that a fishing rod type spar would help take some loads and still be compact and lightweight. If the wingtips were gradually increased in size then an optimum tip area/load/spar size and weight could become apparent. Since seeing Gisellemartins design concept (prototype?) with its extended wingtips , it has struck me that the basic aerodynamic idea is sound. Forming the idea into a workable wing is another thing. I've ad some fun the last few hours throwing together a few of the ideas including washout and wingtip extensions and yes reducin the aspect ratio. The result is in the attachments. Just a very rough concept model but the possibilities seem to be there. The wingtips could be made to fit over a fabric WS's exisiting wingtips with some mods . Handles could be similar to gripper styles on the market. So instead of making the wing area larger near the body perhaps making more area at the tips could be one answer . I'm guessing that there would be a point of balance in such a wingtip where a pilot (with the spar's support giving some leverage) could handle the control forces required to wash the tip in and out. Flaring into low speed flight with the help of washout wingtip discs ....dream dream....

Hi KrisFlyZ, Thanks for your reply in the recently locked 'Hand glider' thread re washout . As washout directly relates to slow flight characteristics I hope its OK to continue the discussion in this thread. you stated in the other thread: "Washout? Seriously!! It can be done to some extent in practice on today's suits. This can be seen in videos and on posts made here by people that have figured it out from experience. On fabric wings, the technology does not exist to allow the designer to have strict control on the run-time shape of the wing and also allow the human flying it maximum ease of flight. Trying to implement wing washout without pilot input is not possible on soft fabric wings. The span of a wing suit is roughly 6ft, without a sizable wingtip, the area of the suit goes down drastically. How much washout would drastically reduce the induced drag of a low aspect ratio wing? Angle of incidence, Camber, thickness etc. parameters have all been used in real world implementations since 2004. Angle of incidence has seen both sides of zero. " ....................................................................... Washout ? Seiously ? Yes I'm seriously interested in its application to WS's . I've used washout since childhood in model aeroplanes and like its ability to change a poor performing aircraft into a nice flyer. Wingsuits have such poor flight performance they need every little bit of help they can get. Allowing for improved use of washout is just another little thing that can help improve WS flight performance. I suppose the key here is that with pilot input the use of wash out is a viable option ... especially if the slow flight characteristics of a suit are to be improved. As you stated its already in use on some suits to a certain degree just not built in as such. Washout is not just useful at slow speeds as it can help the flow of air over a wing even at high speeds and it helps reduce wing tip drag . As you are no doubt aware (although some readers may not be ) washout can keep the outer part of the wing flying after the inner wing has stalled thereby improving stall characteristics. Ie the wing doesn't all stall at once giving the pilot time to react and sense a stall as it approaches. No doubt expert wingsuiters use control input washout without thinking about it too much if their suit allows for it to a degree. The inability of current fabric WS's to easily make extensive use of built in washout is another indication of fabric WS design limitations. Most modern wings have washout . I believe it is possible to enhance its use in WS's perhaps by the increased use of wing tip batons or the enlargement of the wingtips along the lines of what GiselleMartins has shared with us. ...................................................................... In that other thread I said "I'm expecting the BM Classic to be reinvented anytime soon it was a great suit. Laugh" -------------------- You replied "Is that is all you can see of the ideas that went into wingsuit development since the Classic? " ................................................. No. I'm impressed with the performance increase my V2 has in comparison to the my Classic2. Anyone would be . However performance gains seem to be slowing down now . Its difficult to get excited about the small incremental changes on offer at the moment. IMHO the minute % improvements don't seem to be worth the ever increasing trade up price for less performance gain. It'd be good to see the manufacturers being more aerodynamically adventurous not resting so much on their ram air fed fabric marvels. In the meantime the Classic is just that a true Classic design, innovation for its time and groundbreaking in its commercial application. Like I said I'm waiting for a new classic to be invented....(not holding breath) Perhaps a real slick one with partially non-fabric batoned wingtips incorporating just the right degree of controllable washout.[;

in reply to "How slow can a wing suit pilot fall ? At 2;40 in this video the pilot says as slow as 30 mph . Is that accurate ? I have been wondering if it is possible to fly in formation with a wing suit pilot with my hang glider. " .................................... gday HGpilot, I really like your threads. your other one was a beauty. Its as if a true flier has descended amongst us to show us the path back to flight. Perhaps as wingsuits become more like hang gliders weall can form a new type of club that has gliding as its basis not just parachuting. And if all the females are gunna be like Giselle then wowee we're all in for a good time. ...but that's in the future so I better be careful round here amoungst all the (male) flat earthers. Well placed batons on a wingsuit seem like such a good idea. Anyone who has actually had to put a HG together before a flight knows how important they are to maintaining a good aerofoil shape. With well placed controllable batons wingsuiters could actually get control over their wings and (gasp) make use of things like wash-out and variable camber. Oh on that baton point any-one with a V2 ? It might be prudent to check the control batons on the wing-tips. Mine cut themselves loose and after removing one from my chest cavity after a landing I found it was made from aluminium tubing which had been sharpened like a hole punch. BTW HG pilot do you know the smallest hang glider that has been flown and it swing loadings Keep up the great thread work.

Nice post Skwrl You raise some good points and discuss them well However I disagree with some of your conclusions. in reply to "You do realize why we all disagree with you on this, right Giselle? " ............................................... You don't speak for all of us. I don't disagree with gisellemartins statement "soon wingsuits will be big enough to be able to fly up in thermals and ridge soaring give it 5-10 years time." In fact I would go further and say it is already possible even with current suit design. You might have to do it in the Patagonian mountains or somewhere with strong updraughts (eg under/in a thunderhead , but it is a feasible if very dangerous possibility. Of course where there are strong uppies there are also strong downers. A good steady updraught and yep its totally doable. Condors, pebbles, rocks ,foliage , branches and other loose detritus does it whenever the wind blows strong enough...so WS's could too. I'm a bit surprised no-ones tried it somewhere. ...oh that's right we'd have to ask permission from TS or PF ............................................................... in reply to "But believe me - if something approaching your design actually could work, Tony/Jeff and/or Robi would have snatched up the approach and made the Condor, the Q-Bird, or whatever the Hell they would call it. " ......................... You could be right here. It seems very likely that current WS manufacturers would indeed 'snatch up" other peoples ideas especially as modern WS's seem to be very much more of the same lately. I'm expecting the BM Classic to be reinvented anytime soon it was a great suit. Are those guys/companies you mention just copying each other lately or what. Not taking anything away from their magnificent achievements but ...please.... the people you mention didn't invent WS's they just commercialised them. As wingsuiters we all help fund WS development by buying manufacturers products. We should also support potential designers not ridicule them. If we all have to rely on such a small number of people for innovation in the Wsing world then it's gunna be very much more of the same until some new blood shakes up the entrenched mindset or 'they' snatch up others ideas.. .......................................................... in reply to "Induced drag is a hell of a strain. Don't believe me? Check out this guy: http://www.parapente-saintevictoire.com/...x/rudolf boehlen.jpg. His name was Rudolf Boehlen. .............. The wing handled, by all accounts, very badly - the induced drag generally pinned his arms closed - or open but one at a time - resulting in crazy spins and erratic falling. Not surprisingly, he died as a result of gear problems. ................................................................. Induced drag on a flappy over sized fabric wing is a problem. Its my guess that Rudolfs wings could only have worked if they had been locked open somehow. A well designed aerofoil has surprisingly little induced drag depending on several variables. eg thickness, camber , angle of incidence, degree of washout, l.e.profile . Its more the inefficiencies in the wings that induced the uncontrollable drag that contributed to Rudolfs death. eg flapping fabric, uneven surfaces, . His design also has what looks like a built -in leverage disadvantage due to the placement of the handles. If his design had a leverage advantage he may have been able to overcome the induced drag and open his wings instead of dying. More likely his design really needed non-fabric wings then the induced drag would have been much more controllable. Pity he didn't test it in a wind tunnel first. ............................................................ in reply to "Now, your reaction to Boehlen may be "but now we have space age polymer whatsit fabric thingies that are way lighter!". But the problem isn't the standing weight of the wing. The problem (as I mentioned before) is the induced drag created by it. ........................................................... Once again the induced drag in a well designed carbon-fibre wing would be way lower than that scary looking flappy canvas wing of Rudolf Boehlen. ...................................................................... in reply to "A related problem is that we would need to redesign the parachute harness system. We would need a spring loaded pilot chute design, since the traditional bottom of container deployment system would not be reachable. There are again reasons why people don't like spring loaded pilot chutes. If you look into the history of that, you'll find out " ................................................ Every skydive reserve system except for the Aussie Woomera (which has a hand deploy reserve) relies on spring loaded pilot chutes. Modern spring loaded pc's use top grade spring metals with excellent launch platforms to give a pc deployment superior in most circumstances to ANY hand deployed system . I'd be quite happy to have such a deployment system on a main parachute as well as my reserve. And it s no biggie to put a ripcord system on a main . Most experienced riggers cut their teeth with ripcorded rigs. Its perhaps bad memories from student training that have created the myth that there is something wrong with spring loaded pc's. .................................................. in reply to " Another problem is that you won't (easily) be able to exit from an aircraft - at least an aircraft other than a tailgate aircraft. Several people (Leo Valentin being the most famous) died using rigid wing designs that either didn't quite get out the door safely (Valentin's broke when it hit the door frame and it killed him) or were designed to "snap open" and the the predictable went wrong. ................................. Have you watched Yves Rossi exit from a Porter with his quad jet wings.? He gets his contraption out the relatively small door of the Porter and flying consistently without resorting to a tail gate aircraft. Admittedly it doesn't look easy. You can bet your bottom dollar he would prefer to use a Skyvan or a Casa if he had easy access to one. In the US there are many DZ's with tailgate aircraft. Travelling to one to fly a high-performance non-fabric wingsuit would be a pleasure. ......................................................... in reply to "It's the wrong tool for the job. . It also won't look like your albatross design (research hang glider shapes to learn why). It would be more of a delta wing. ....................................... Only the early hang gliders had true delta wings. As HG's were developed the wings were stretched out and now are only mildly swept not delta wings any-more. Most designs have refined trailing edges with relatively complicated profiles not simple delta shapes. In general the higher the aspect ratio the better the glide and hang gliders have made full use of this princliple. Your post does voice legitimate concerns. It is my belief that some of these commonly held concerns may be unfounded.

in reply to "Flying a wing suit must be amazing. I am envious . " .............................. Get yeself to a DZ ? After 200 ordinary skydives you can experience WS for real. 100 flights later you could be launching from 3000'+ in the backwoods of Norway or Croatia or somewhere. Most of us just couldn't stop ourselves...can you?

in reply to "Hello everyone . I have been watching some youtube videos of wing suit flying. I must say it sure looks like fun. I have been wondering what you all think about hang gliding ? Seems that most HG pilots think you guys are crazy,witch is kinda ironic since most folks that don't fly think we are crazy. " ........................................................ I think hang gliding is a flight phenomenon but can be a difficult one to learn. I found the hang gliders controls non-intuitive and the craft itself basically unstable. In comparison I found wingsuits to be more intuitive to fly and naturally stable. During HG training I was the over-controlling student from hell. One thing I learnt during my HG student training . ..you can have a nasty crash and still walk away uninjured. I proved it several times. After several relatively minor crashes, including a wheels up landing on rocks , I culminated my hang gliding career by almost managing to barrel roll my instructors HG from 60' breaking the spar and other bits. I wish HGing had been more natural for me cause it looks like one of the best value airsports for time in the sky ... and you don't even need to be crazy.

in reply to "Wow. You are a true visionary sir! I would recommend obtaining the appropriate sensors to data log every aspect of the landing angle and speed before actually trying to land it. Then create a mock situation where you act as if 5000ft is "ground" and you start your "landing" at 5500ft and record horizontal speed, vertical speed, glide angle, lift, etc to see if its realistic. A video guy is a must. Better yet someone in a stationary non-descending object such as a ballon(cheaper than helicopter to rent im guessing?) to datalog with video, radar gun, range finder. On second thought might need 2 ballons one at 5500, one at 5000. I guess the point is its your life, there is no expense to great. You might could get funding from red bull, monster, etc. BTW, whats your avatar pic, its hard to make it out? " .................................................. Nice recommendations . I like the idea of a second balloon to fly-by and test the level out and flare. Even on a normal skydive the level-out and flare could be tested via GPS down to 2000'. Using base gear and a balloon it could then be tested down to say 500'. It's enlightening experiencing the air density changes on a wingsuit base jump. As you get lower your descent rate decreases very noticeably. The new HUD's could be good to provide instant feedback. As you've outlined there's a cautious , considerate approach possible to this challenge. One baby step at a time to do this properly and make it repeatable and something fun to do . I've seen enough base jumping videos of people who don't truly value their lives " going low for their Go-Pro". I'm hoping that whoever does manage to land a wingsuit does it with a view to advancing our sport not just showing off doing stunts and big-noting themselves. I can see a possible future where any wingsuiter can learn to fly and land high performance wingsuits without the feeling of having to cheat death to do so. The jpg attachments are of some things I find recently insprirational. *The F-4 Phantom flew like a dog at slow speed until designers /builders put leading edge slats and decent slotted flaps on it. Incorporating the same type of slats into the l.e's of the wingsuit arm wings will further improve their slow speed and flaring abilities. These l.e.slats can be made to pop-out automatically , manually or can even be built into the wings permanently extended. *The BV246 was a WW2 German gliding bomb with a glide ration of 25:1 . aspect ratioof 25.5:1 and wings of steel bars and cast concrete. It had the incredible wing loading of 102 lbs/sq.ft but could glide 130miles(209km) when released from an altitude of 34450 ft.(10,500m) Makes me wonder how far a high-performance wingsuit could glide from 20,000. Future wingsuiters might have 100mile flights to look forward to on the weekend. As far as funding goes , some runs on the board will help . Hoping to get the flex torso wing built and full-size testing started within a couple of months. We'll see what happens. (ps my avatar is a solarised shot of one of my early swing-wing models.)

in reply to "Not enough? How about collapsable carbon kevlar(or similar) wings. They would probably need to be made from long thin 1-2" slats that were collapsable like an accordian(picture one of those chinese fans that fold up). ................................................................... I've been thinking about your chinese fan idea as it could have some application on one of my designs where the arm-wings join the body. With my swing-wing idea there are some issues with the wing retracting into the upper part of the torso wing. Chinese fan type venetian blind folding might solve the prob. I'll let you know if it works. For now I'm getting a bit bogged down in structural component design and testing. Here's just some more high performance wingsuit ideas and possibilities on the road to a landable wingsuit. The flex-torso design study (demo model pictured in attachment 1) is an investigation of the possibilities of a flexible torso wing . The general idea is to try and make the torso wing enclosing the torso , legs and rig, as efficient as possible by making its shape close to the best aerofoil shape . ( any ideas on best aerofoil profiles welcome?) The pilots arms would be free to move round but in least drag flight mode would lie alongside the torso wing in channels provided. The 'Aero-helm' design makes up a large part of the leading edge. The design issues as I see them are * maintaining sufficient body movement to keep flight controls intuitive * keeping full access to handles. *finalising the 'aero-helm' design * rig integration. * getting the thing in a plane (gotta luv tailgate aircraft) My feeling is that this flex-torso-wing idea would make a good performing wingsuit even without arm wings, working out at about 15 sq.ft for a 180lb , 6 footer giving 12 lbs /sq.ft. Not easily landable perhaps, but add a couple of 5sq.ft arm wings and the loading goes down to 7.2lbs /sq.ft which is approaching doable. I'm calling this torso-wing design a "SuperTracker". The second diagram shows a 1/3 scale swingwing test . It was built mainly to get an idea of the force required to manoeuvre the swingwing into different positions as well as getting an idea about how it would fly in different swing settings. (The 1/3 scale tester does not have the same wing shape as the full size wings. but uses a similar swing design) Turns out it is easy to swing forwards and back and holds its position without excessive blow back force at least at 100km/hr. (I couldn't convince my gf to go any faster) Surprise surprise it also flies nice and smooth in the various swing positions. The main issue emerging on the full size swingwing is handling the incredible lift.(once again no faster than 100km/hr so far) I'm still trying to make it strong and light enough where the arm-wing joins the torso pivot box. Building a strong enough test rig for the back of a truck is also looking like an unfun job. Landable wingsuit main components as envisaged so far. Arm wings * controls (swing and warping ) * spars * hinges/pivot boxes * skinning Chest/torso plates * incorporating main wing pivot box * torso protection /cushioning Torso wing * incorporating 'aero-helm' * more internal cushioning protection * trailing edge leg/foot controls * rig integration * skid/ skid mount integration Skids/ rollers / shock absorbers I'm trying to integrate the forward section of the skid housing with the main pivot boxes . As for the actual flying ..... Anyone used to driving/riding fast will have no problem with the approach and landing speeds. I envisage no need for a mad spiralling swoop. More like a bit of a steep approach (eg 45degrees) to keep the speed up followed by level out , leading to flare etc etc.( as previously discussed). So the plan is --Flight test Torso-wing first ,then add small test wings. then full size wings. If it all checks out , then add the skids in preparation fro a landing attempt. I'm planning to fly it ,test it and land it myself so it will have to be easy to fly If I can do this whats stopping the rest of you? Happy New Year.

in reply to "Will the rigid wingsuit you are referring to look something like this: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/12/look-out-below-wingsuits-pushed-for-airbone-assaults/ Or this one with rockets: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0E6Yh_mSx8 " .............................................. Here's one of my dream machines. Wings back to swoop and motor , swings forward for low speed flight/flare. By the way its not rigid ,it is distortable , flexible, twistable, and powerful. The full size wings generate a LOT of lift . Even the 1/3 scale testers are powerful lifting devices. For any worries about efficient wings ripping out shoulders with increased flight loads an internal hinge box takes the loads generated by the wings through the spars spreading it over the chest/torso plates (with careful attention to the alignment of the centres of lift and gravity) and 'viola' succeeds in holding up the pilot, arms and all in the magic of flight . And yes the odd titanium component especially around the hinges would come in handy. Now , where to put the auxiliary fuel tanks and oxygen? As to what the Russians are doing? As usual we will usually only know if they tell us. merry xmas

in reply to "Can you help me better understand what this "spar" is that you are referring to?" .......................................... A spar is generally an internal load carrying component of a wing. In metal aircraft it often takes the form of a built-up box or extruded tube which extends for the full wingspan. In early aircraft you can see the spar(s) and accompanying ribs through their fabric wings. Many aircraft have more than one spar to help spread the load around more than one component. Current fabric wingsuits rely heavily on your arms and shoulders to do the load carrying from the wings to your body. This has its limits as your arms /shoulders are easily fatigued druring normal flight. We are lucky wingsuit flights are generally very brief. As flights get longer and wings get bigger the loads on the arms increases hence the need for some help from a load carrying spar. If the wings get more efficient and create more lift the need for a spar is even greater. I've been working on a flexible spar that will fit into just about any fabric wingsuit. The natural progression of my idea is to eventually make a completely non-fabric wingsuit. All the tests (of non-fabric wings) so far show hugely increased wing efficiencies calling for a good spar to carry the extra flight loads. Now it looks like the Russians might beat every-one to a wingsuit landing. edited to add diagram of spars and ribs. Pretty basic stuff but adapting it all to a wingsuit design that remains flexible and useable equals heaps of design fun.

in reply to "This thread has some of the craziest and stupidest ideas ever... Where do I sign up ?!! " ................. Sounds like ur already committed Even though this IS wonderfully crazy stuff there is some logical sense to it all. Some comparisons with other crazy landing scenarios could be helpful here : In WW2 gliders were used to land soldiers and equipment into battle fields. No second chances for those heroes. The gliders usually had skids to land on . The pilots were often very inexperienced and undertrained by modern standards. Of course being war time there were lots of bad accidents. eg: the British Airspeed AS.51 and AS.58 Horsa. This aircraft had approximately 1100sq ft of wingarea and carried a maximum load of approx 15500lb making a wingloading of about 14 lb/sq.ft (all specs here from Encycopledia of World aircraft (SB edition) all maths approximate) Another WW2 aircraft that was expected to and often did land on skids was the Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet (rocket fighter). There were many reasons why this aircraft was very dangerous to land . Wing area :211sq.ft landing weight : (est.) 5000 lb loading ;approx 23 lb/sq.ft If a wingsuiter had an exit weight of 220lb(100kg) and a wingarea of 20sq /ft then the wingloading would be approx ll lb/sq.ft. exit weigh of 180 lb (80kg) and w.a. 20 sq.ft then wingloading = 9 lb/sq.ft If the wing area could be increased to 25 sq.ft with 180 lb exit weight then the loading drops close to 7 lb/sq.ft. This loading is getting into the region of light aircraft with some aircraft around this loading being capable of extremely slow flight and landing speeds as well as being able to make reasonably straightforward unpowered landings . So ...if wingsuits could achieve a wingarea of between 20 - 25 sq.ft and a landing weight of between 180- 220 lbs then wingloadings between 7 - 11 lbs/sq.ft are achievable. Reasonable loadings for a serious attempt at landing a wingsuit.? Modern wingsuits are more like 10 sq.ft (obviously different for different sized people). A 200 lb (90kg) exit weight with even 12 sg.ft = nearly 17 lbs/sq.ft ,which is more than a fully loaded troop carrying WW2 glider but also less than the Messerschmitt Komet . Unfortunately a fabric wingsuits wings are nowhere near as efficient as those old aircrafts wings. So ... wingsuits would need to approximately double their wingarea AND improve their efficiencies to be a reasonable chance at repeatable /survivable no parachute landings. I suppose it is possible that a fabric wingsuit could be developed with a last moment flaring ability enabling it to stall perfectly just above the ground. It seems way more likely to me that wingsuit designers will slowly begin to skin their products with better materials that improve the wings performance and allow the wings to spread out past the reach of the arms and body. Getting such semi-solid wings , or bits of wings , to fold and extend and stay fully controllable in flight is a very possible future of wingsuit design. Such a wingsuit may be less comfortable on the ground and in the plane but would make up for it by being more comfortable in the air. There are many advantages to a non-fabric surfaced wing . Too many to ignore. It also opens a wonder world of exotic and varied design possibilities. Supporting the extra lifting forces of a more efficient wing could be done by some form of non-fabric structure ( eg a spar ) . There are many possible flexible spar designs. Its another little prediction of mine that various forms of spars will begin to appear in wingsuits as the obvious advantages become apparent to wingsuit designers. Not crazy just a sensible and natural progression. Why use your arms/shoulders to take lifting forces if the wingsuit can do it for you ? A spar would free up the arms, not exhaust them ,allowing full arm/shoulder strength for control input and emergency . Integrating a spar into a wingsuit would be fairly straightforward, no rocket science involved. Once this is done successfully there will be significance performance gains over non-sparred wingsuit designs . "I want the one with the spar in it thanks" Landing forces would preferably be taken by something other than body parts (hence the use of skids or even light-weight retractable u/c or wheels) . Some lite weight shock absorbers in the landing mechanism could be helpful. Crazy enough for you yet? The non-fabric wingsuit design challenge here is to incorporate the components required into a lite-weight unit that feels natural to fly .....and land. The fabric wingsuit challenge is to try and keep up.