Wingsuit landing next month?

http://iwmagazine.com/2012/03/02/bremont-supports-its-wingman/

Is this really gonna happen or is it just a "buy our watches" marketing ploy?

*Edit for clicky!

It looks like it's for real. The article says he will land on a box rig:

box rig n. [bäks rig] a box rig can substitute for a stunt pit. It can also be used to catch objects. The way a box rig is constructed is by using several cardboard moving boxes that are stacked and aligned in rows, X wide by X long by X tall. To keep the boxes from shifting but without making the box rig too rigid of a structure, they’re wrapped together with plastic wrap. Like the kind used to wrap pallets (think saran wrap). The cardboard boxes crush or give way upon impact allowing the objects to safely stop. Box rigs are affordable and a low-tech solution. Interesting factoid; box rigs are great for catching cars that need to be flipped upside down without being severely damaged. The boxes cushion the vehicle upon impact. Yes, enough boxes that are properly stacked can safely catch a full size car or truck.

stunt pit n. [stuhnt pit] a large rectangular shaped foam pad that a stunt performer would use to fall into. It’s not just an ordinary big chunk of foam. These pits are specially constructed to safely break the performers fall without causing harm. This is achieved by using several different layers of foam that vary in density and thickness. Some of the foam layers have channels to help expel air upon impact. These pits are covered with a durable vinyl canvas on the bottom and sides with a mesh across the top to allow maximum air expulsion. Though its not uncommon to see some stunt pits with mesh on the sides for added air expulsion. Most pits will measure at least two feet tall or thick, five feet wide and at least eight feet long. Though the size will vary depending upon the stunt.

Gary was testing his new Appache (not the one in the pic) at Zhills for a few weeks in Jan. It be for real.

Sounds neither challenging nor like an actual landing to me, but probably still fun to watch.

planes land on a runway... what if this became the runway needed for wingsuits so to speak? I think it counts as a landing which would make him the first to do it. There is a large amount of skill involved in doing what he is doing. Divebomb a small patch of cloud 100 times and tell me how many times you hit it? now doing it now while diving but while flaring and know that if you miss you are a stain with a watch symbol on your back... Hats off to Gary for it.

My 0.02 cents

I think this is as close a real landing as we can get, there is just no way we will flare and land on a branch in the middle of a tree.

Would it be a real landing if he used wheels all over his suit to roll away? Would it be a real landing if he used a "sled" or air mattress to slide away? If the only way to get a real landing is to be able to land it anywhere on any surface like a bird than I don't think we will ever see it unless there is a dramatic change in the suits, next time you jump your canopy put your feet in the risers so you are belly to earth and don't attempt to flare...

These suits we have today will always need something to help us land... Other than balls that is!

I think the closest and ballsiest to a landing would be a ski slope like the sequence filmed with Loic jean Albert skimming close the ground. Jumping into a pile of boxes whilst requiring some basic glide path skills and bottle as the ground rush kicks in. Is not a landing its a controlled crash into boxes, if it was a landing you could land anywhere. Its like saying driving a car into a wall with an airbag on it is parking your car. Its a stunt period, it does not push the sport forward as it could be done tomorrow or a year from know. But its not a new means of safely landing a wingsuit, its simply a stunt and I am sure will be great fun to watch. Fair play for having the balls to do it but its still a stunt that does not change how wingsuits are flown or landed. When that happens then their will genuinely be a step a forward until then its a fun stunt; but it wont be going down in aviation history as quoted lol. And the first wingsuit jumpos were not 1995 they were way back in 30'-40's when Clem sohn was first flying wing structures.

A Loïc style landing would just be a controlled crash on a slope, same thing as the box stunt only in my opinion a higher chance of not making it even if you hit your mark

Quote

A Loïc style landing would just be a controlled crash on a slope, same thing as the box stunt only in my opinion a higher chance of not making it even if you hit your mark

My point was its a natural location not a staged pile of boxes. At the end of the day landing in a pile of boxes wont change anything. It'll be entertaining but it wont change wingsuit flying.

So when they fit tundra tires to small aircraft and land them in a bush is that not a landing? A jetlines uses a runway is that not a landing? If a bird puts its feet out is that not a landing?

I kind of see a need for all landing gear to be integrated into the suit but at the same time there are very few man made things that can land anywhere without some form of prepaired landing area.

Bottom line if it is repeatble it is a landing with a landing area (no different to a jet) if not, it is a crash (kind of like table mountain )

Right, I got that but you said the closest we got to landing was the Loïc flyby... Actually I think it was Jeb's crash in Africa but whatever, landing the wingsuit on a slope will hurt or kill you no matter what so it will never count. We need a whole other design (in my opinion) to be able to pull that off in which case the major advancement will not be the landing but the new design of suit that lets us land it.

If you walk away from landing on the ground in a wingsuit without ever deploying a parachute or similar drag system it counts as a landing in my book!

Quote

Bottom line if it is repeatble it is a landing with a landing area (no different to a jet) if not, it is a crash (kind of like table mountain )

A lot of pilots call a good landing simply a "controlled crash".

It would be a landing 100% :) We talked about this option about 5 years ago, but the stunt team I was working with at the time deemed it unsafe and felt chances for success were far to small. We looked for better options and found them. Just much more costly. If he goes for it and succeeds it will be a great accomplishment :) I wish him luck and I can't wait to see the footage :)

Jeb

So according to the article he's jumping a modified Apache that will enable a 60mph forward speed with 22mph descent rate, is that right? Anyone know what the modifications are?

Quote

It would be a landing 100% :) We talked about this option about 5 years ago, but the stunt team I was working with at the time deemed it unsafe and felt chances for success were far to small. We looked for better options and found them. Just much more costly. If he goes for it and succeeds it will be a great accomplishment :) I wish him luck and I can't wait to see the footage :)

Jeb

If Gary Connery does succeed to land the wingsuit next month, is it worth pursuing the much more expensive Jeb Corliss landing version?

It seems much less appealing to the media (and less justifiable to explain the cost) just to be the "second man" to land a wingsuit.

p-s: should do an interview with Skydive Radio while you're taking a "forced vacation"


Cheers!
Shc

Doing things first is not always the most important thing :) If he succeeds it will only help me in what i am trying to do :) What he is doing and what I will be doing are two very different things :) My goal is not to land a wing-suit which is what a lot of people have miss understood. My goal is to land at terminal velocity :) It has always been to jump from a aircraft and land without using a parachute. The wing-suit has always been a very small part of a much bigger plan :) I want to land at 120mph or as close to it as possible :) So if he slows to 60 or 70 mph lands, it will be very impressive but not what I want to do :) Plus he still has to land without getting hurt :) So we will see :)

There is one thing, I can't understand here:

Guy A - spends years talking everywhere about magic ramp, NASA technology, etc etc. That generates massive attention from media, skydiving community, BASE community. Every average Joe in any DZ around the world is talking about that, whuffos are exited as never before. However, the jump does not happen and no one know, whether it will happen at all.

Guy B - is actually going to do that in few weeks. And nobody cares?? Threads about someone not knowing how to dress up for the first jump of the season or discussions about breathing through the skin during freefall generate much more attention???

Someone please explain this to me

A couple of reasons, marketing and firsts.


The first here is planning it...that's all that had happened so far so the FIRST guy planning it gets the attention.

That will change after somebody actually does it ...successfully.

I don't get how this is "landing".
It's a stunt from a decent altitude into cardboard boxes.
IMO, that ain't landing.

Quote

I don't get how this is "landing".
It's a stunt from a decent altitude into cardboard boxes.
IMO, that ain't landing.

I figure that every jump is going to end with a landing. If he walks away from this one, I'd call it a good landing.

in your own words define landing?

So how is landing a parahute after jumping out of a plane or top of a B.A.S.E. not just a stunt? Because it is done on a daily basis?

It's all the same landing is another word for stunt... Pretty sure after the first airplane flight (ever) people were saying "Hey that was a nice stunt"

I under stand what you're all saying.
We don't normally crash land into some sort of pillow, cushion, or airbag.
That's just what this seems to me.

Quote

I under stand what you're all saying.
We don't normally crash land into some sort of pillow, cushion, or airbag.
That's just what this seems to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYlil2qIhpA