bdrake529

Thank you Jarno. You got where I was going with this rant. And actually, your 25 page PDF provided confirmation for my disappointment. I thought for a while that perhaps my expectations were overblown, but in that article you quite accurately pointed to some of the barriers that have prevented the discipline from maturing (which indicated I am not alone in thinking the maturation process should be further along by now). The sad thing is, they aren't real barriers since there's no need to re-invent the wheel (as you point out by referencing RW). But I think it's lack of discipline and/or motivation that's stagnated the development of a large number of flyers. Brian Drake

Travis, I didn't mean to offend you. I was just jabbing in fun, as is the habit on this board. Should I have prefaced my comments by calling you gay?.... The second part of my original post was really not aimed at you (and was disclaimed as such), so I regret that the negative (just useless venting) tone of those following comments colored the playful jesting that was actually aimed at you. Brian Drake

I'd love to be there, unfortunately, that's the weekend I return from Israel so I won't be able to make it. And I'm not bragging on my "skills" but rather expressing my disappointment in regards to what I've personally experienced so far. Brian Drake

I realize this. Obviously there are a lot of "unsung heroes" and even of the stuff that is broadcasted, there is a lot of talent and skill out there. I should have qualified my gripes by referring to only the "flocking community" that I've met so far. I've flown with probably 40-50 people so far, and I'm still apalled at the number of those (with more than 50 flights) that are essentially MIA after exit. And I'm referring to anything from 4-ways to 15-ways. I could care less about East vs West. I was simply amused by three land-locked states being referred to as "West Coast" and had to make a jab. That was the playful part of my post, the rest was just venting. I agree, and it's part of my gripe. It's not that hard to develop the "essential skills" for flocking, yet many people can't even be bothered by that small taks. Amen. I don't mean to be a crank. I just had some steam to let off. As I said, I am optimistic about the record attempts (with their schedule of skills camps) forcing a lot of unserious people with wingsuits to re-assess their goals and actually work on developing the skills necessary to fly with each other. I'm hoping the general quality of flyers a year from now will be a quantum leap from where we are now. Brian Drake

Not to be too nitpicky, but have you looked at a map of the US? When has Arizona, Utah, and Colorado ever been considered "West COAST"? Last time i checked, you've got to be on the ocean to be considered "coast". "playful smaller flocks" have their place, but only if the dive plan calls for it (or in absence of a dive plan). Otherwise, I'm still baffled at how many people have never made a serious effort to develop slot flying skills (I'm referring to people with >50 wingsuit flights). It's not rocket science (though Yuri may disagree here), just a slight bit of training and effort. My hope for this "world record space race" is that people fill finally stop goofing off and actually take the discipline serious (at least some of the time). That's not aimed at you Travis, but just a general frustration. There are plenty of exceptions to this, of course, but overall, the lack of skilled flying ability in the "flocking" community is depressing. Brian Drake

Jarno, I just about pissed myself when that pic displayed. Funny stuff. Thanks for the giggles. Brian Drake

For the record, the details of the cause of that 1 wing suiting death were never determined (or rather, those details leading up to the death). Whether the wingsuit itself had anything to do with the death was undetermined. Brian Drake

Aren't some here ignoring the fact that both events have a published list of training camps (read: auditioning camps) scheduled throughout the year? We're not talking about including everyone with a wingsuit who shows up. I'm trusting that both Scott and Jeff have criteria which must be met for each individual involved. If you trust the organizers to make the invite list purely on demonstrated skill and safety, then I think this conversation is moot. If not (you don't trust the organizers to be impartial), then....well there's not much you can do but stay home. Brian Drake

Considering your level of involvement with both events, Matt, I'm curious why you're publicly airing your doubts as to their viability and the wisdom of the plans (or do you just take sadistic pleasure from capturing mayhem on video/stills...). Though I agree with your realism, I think its worth pointing out that FnD 3.0 wasn't invite only and there wasn't a full year of training camps leading up to it. When people start to realize they've got to have the skills to be invited, I think enough will step it up and a 71-way (or bigger) won't seem as audacious. And actually, since these are international events, I'd suspect we're close to the desired size in qualified flockers at this point and we still have a year of training to go. Brian Drake

So you're selling the "mercury" style now? Or were you just off-loading some prototypes? I was under the impression that you and Tony (and Chuck Blue Blasphemy) preferred the pure SM1 and the "mercury" was just an interesting R+D project that ultimately vindicated the SM1 as a better design. Brian Drake

Good tip. Thanks. Brian Drake

That's the famous one where he buzzes over some skiiers, correct? Or is there something else where he actually landed without a chute? Brian Drake

Anyone have any idea what this is referring to? Has anyone seen this video? More importantly, anyone know where I can obtain this video? Brian Drake

Interesting....thanks Yuri. I'll chew on that for a while. Brian Drake

Uh.... that's way over my head. I'll ponder those equations, but for the meanwhile, they're not sinking in. What I don't understand is that you only have Jeff's vertical speed. Couldn't those numbers be posted by an object falling straight down? How are you able to determine 1) he was moving forward at all 2) the efficiency in how he was flying 3) the capability of his suit? I'm a Super Mach 1 fan and I know Jeff can turn on the speed, so 2.5 L/D isn't unreasonable, I just don't get how you can calculate that by only knowing one variable. Brian Drake

I was afraid you'd say that. Brian Drake

Yuri, How are you able to extract Jeff's horizontal speed and therefore compute his L/D from the data Tony provided? Brian Drake

Damn, Matt. You just beat me to it. Here's all of Tony's data plotted out. No extra effort to "input" the data since it was easy to split the data on hard-returns. Brian Drake

Scott, That's hilarious. Thanks for the laugh. But you may want to disclaim that it is indeed a joke. Otherwise, if my experience serves well, you may start getting a flood of orders from people (a few suit manufacturer's too) who actually think it's a legitimate product. See you at Eloy for the boogie, Brian Brian Drake

Pierre, I'll let you have the last word on this in the forum, so your version of our conversation will be the one for the record. Blue skies, Brian Brian Drake

For the record: Garmin Foretrex 201 GPS GPS accuracy: Position: < 15 meters, 95% typical Velocity: 0.05 meter/sec steady state DGPS (WAAS) accuracy: Position: < 3 meters, 95% typical Velocity: 0.05 meter/sec steady state L&B Altitrack Tolerances: Exit altitude: +/- 1.2% Deployment altitude: +/- 1.2% Freefall time: +/- 1 sec Speed (TAS/SAS): +/- 3 mph (+/- 5 kmph) Present altitude: +/- 10 ft L&B Protrack Tolerances: Exit altitude: +/- 1.2% Deployment altitude: +/- 100 ft. (+/- 30 m) Freefall time: +/- 1 sec Speed (TAS/SAS) when mounted on the wrist or leg: +/- 3 mph or +/- 10 ft/sec +/- 5 kmh or +/- 1 m/sec L&B Viso Tolerances: Exit altitude: +/- 1.2% Deployment altitude: +/- 1.2% Freefall time: +/- 1 sec Speed (TAS/SAS): +/- 3 mph (+/- 5 kmh) Present altitude: +/- 10 ft The respective manufacturers market and sell their products with these specifications listed. In other words, if these numbers are wrong, they've committed fraud. I've yet to be convinced they're guilty of such deception, but I'm open to that possibility. Please, someone provide more than pseudo-skepticism and innuendo (reports of experimentation without any proof/data are inadmissible for any useful purpose) to contradict the claims these manufacturers have made. Blue skies, Brian Brian Drake

Glen, while I am skeptical of your integrity due to a certain photograph (ahem...), I don't want to devolve this conversation into attacks on each other's honesty. If you post data, I would not presume you had tampered with it or fabricated it. I would like to perform said experiment some day, but please, it's not something I can just do tomorrow. Where am I going to get 3-5 loggers of the same type to jump with? All of these devices (with the exception of GPS), also double as visual or audible altimeters that people rely on to jump so it's not really that simple a proposition to arrange for 2-4 of my friends to skip several jumps just so I can conduct an experiment. Plus, even if I did get people to lend me the loggers, I'd have to pay for several new logger licenses just to be able to see the data using Paralog. In other words, this experiment is going to require time and money. Both of which I'm willing to expend at some point, but for the sake of this thread, it would be very helpful if instead of innuendo, you provided actual data. If you have the data, why won't you simply post it? That way we don't have to solely rely on your analysis and can draw our own conclusions. Brian Drake

Who's not having fun now? Brian Drake

Glen, First, we've got Jeff and Tony claiming a breakthrough in performance, but they've yet to provide the much requested data for us all to drool over. Then, you bring up a very thought-provoking experiment that you've obviously drawn conclusions from, but you can't save us the trouble of repeating this somewhat logistically-demanding test because somehow the "data is way too erratic to post in this forum". I don't see the difference. Both appear to be unproved assertions when the simple posting of some data would go a long way to shutting us all up (or probably not, since that'd give us even more to bicker about, but still...). My original post stated: At this point, I don't think we're much further along. At least Jeff and Tony have the platinum selling "Chuck Blue Blasphemy" to back up their claims... Peace, Brian Brian Drake

That's actually the name of the first track on the self-titled album that "Chuck Blue Blasphemy" just released on iTunes. Brian Drake