Jasmin 0
Recommended Posts
Tom, you are right on the money.
The armwing is the best (+ innovative) feature of the V-1. The wing is manufactured as a true 3D shape, with curved bottom skin and top skin, to achieve a predefined airfoil. You really see the difference when it is inflated and WOW you can feel the difference!
It took Robi many many hours of work using CAD software (as used for modern canopy design).
The result is a wing that is a joy to fly, it inflates naturally in the correct shape and you must relax a little and let the wing do the work. (As Perry wrote in his post).
The AOA is fundamental to all flying Vector!
btw. very interesting application of the word "wank" Jasmin, must remember that one.
The armwing is the best (+ innovative) feature of the V-1. The wing is manufactured as a true 3D shape, with curved bottom skin and top skin, to achieve a predefined airfoil. You really see the difference when it is inflated and WOW you can feel the difference!
It took Robi many many hours of work using CAD software (as used for modern canopy design).
The result is a wing that is a joy to fly, it inflates naturally in the correct shape and you must relax a little and let the wing do the work. (As Perry wrote in his post).
The AOA is fundamental to all flying Vector!
btw. very interesting application of the word "wank" Jasmin, must remember that one.
BASEstore.it
iXic 0
Sweetie, don't be upset - it hurts the beauty 
...Actually you're right! Of course you have to take into consideration the prerequisites before making a new product...But than I only have one question for you? What were Jari, Robi, Juri, Slim and others doing for the past 5 years if not testing? 
...Actually you're right! Of course you have to take into consideration the prerequisites before making a new product...But than I only have one question for you? What were Jari, Robi, Juri, Slim and others doing for the past 5 years if not testing?
Tonto 1
QuoteWhat were Jari, Robi, Juri, Slim and others doing for the past 5 years if not testing?
Dreaming, jumping, smiling, flying?
There are so many people we owe for where we are today.
The 1st generation Birdmen (1935 - 1965?) did the sport such a dis service it took years before the concept of a safe Wingsuit jump was actually accepted. Several people were working on different projects simultaniously.
Lets see who we owe here... I'm bound to screw this up so everyone feel free to add and edit, OK?
1. Patrick - for reopening pandora's box.
2. Robi/Jari for the Roberts cut away system and a 1st flight training program
3. Loic for a different aproach and some mind blowingly inspirational footage
4. The Sugar Glider people for looking hard at the "Low and slow" side.
5. Literally hundreds of us ordinary jumpers who grasped this new view of an old concept and practically sold our souls to the reallity of human flight, who now sit and bicker among ourselves over small % tech improvements that do little to improve the tone of a soul in full flight.
It all comes back to that Classic section of "Jonathan"
``You are a very fast flier, aren't you?''
``I... I enjoy speed,'' Jonathan said, taken aback but proud that the Elder had noticed.
``You will begin to touch heaven, Jonathan, in the moment that you touch perfect speed. And that isn't flying a thousand miles an hour, or a million, or flying at the speed of light. Because any number is a limit, and perfection doesn't have limits. Perfect speed, my son, is being there.''
Look around you people. We are all there. Can't we just enjoy the ride?
t
It's the year of the Pig.
gus 1
QuoteThe 1st generation Birdmen (1935 - 1965?) did the sport such a dis service...
Wow. Seriously? Would we even be jumping if it weren't for them? How many early/experimental parachutists lost their lives and did they do us a disservice too?
Gus
OutpatientsOnline.com
Tonto 1
Again,
Lets see who we owe here... I'm bound to screw this up so everyone feel free to add and edit, OK?
t
Lets see who we owe here... I'm bound to screw this up so everyone feel free to add and edit, OK?
t
It's the year of the Pig.
The AOA is fundamental to all flying Vector!
You are right, but how the wing mates to the body is incedence ( how Tom described it) how the wing lines up to the oncoming air is AOA. A much more important factor.
But I see what you mean about a true airfoil. All of the designs up till now didn't have much more than two lines trailing off the arm to form the profile of the upper and lower wing surfaces, a very simple airfoil. While most of the top performing suits featured real airfoils for use in the legs. That is up till now.
QuoteYour performance will suck after a lay off but not your "safety"..
I have to disagree with this statement. Having seen and filmed many a flock were those who were returning after a lay off not only danger others in the flock but themselves. Be it either on exit or at pull time, having a suit fly you instead of the other way around can be a safety issue. The old adage "It's better to be safe than sorry" goes a long way, especially when ones life and well being is on the line.
BTW: Nice hijack
"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING
QuoteI have to disagree with this statement.
We can agree to disagree.
(you really agree with Chuck that you need to jump an S3 every weekend...?)
BASEstore.it
TomAiello 26
QuoteQuoteYour performance will suck after a lay off but not your "safety"..
I have to disagree with this statement. Having seen and filmed many a flock were those who were returning after a lay off not only danger others in the flock but themselves.
This may be a difference in the types of flying you guys are doing.
Scott, do you think that flockers ought to start with a lower end suit when returning from a lay off? Or start with fewer flyers around? Or both?
-- Tom Aiello
Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com
Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com
I think we can all agree on you guys agrreeing to disagree.
can we all just agree along !!
rodney dangerfield
Keeping it real 22x7
can we all just agree along !!
rodney dangerfield
Keeping it real 22x7
Sorry iXic, but “Speedformula” (not Bodypilot1!?) is correct. You've missed the first rule in research- to do your homework. How do you know your new product is better, if you have nothing to compare it with?
For any kind of research (incl pre-season F1 testing), you always go out and see what’s been done before & compare your test results & overall performance with historical/previous data. In cases where there's no calibration, no baseline data and no control data on record, acquiring this data through testing (be it your own or others' relevant tests) is not a recommendation for your research, but a prerequisite.
We can sit here and debate for hours about academia/experience if you want, I'm merely a "stupid chick" physicist, with thesis and publications in complex numerical modelling. But at the end of the day,
"I have x academic qualifications" doesn't necessarily equate to either of us being right.
Not to mention, its a bit of a wank.
"I wouldn't recommend picking a fight with the earth...but then I wouldn't recommend picking a fight with a car either, and that's having tried both."
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites