20kN

I would take 60 WS skydives over a morning in the tunnel any day of the week. I am sure some people will spend loads there, but in the reality is WS is a fringe in what is already an uncommon sport. WS is one of the least common disciplines in skydiving, and WS to the extent that you're willing to spend money to train in a tunnel is an uncommon level of dedication to an uncommon subspecality of an already uncommon sport. If they are banking on skydivers to keep them afloat, I think they may be disappointed.

Well maybe you will--I wont. I wouldent be surprised if this tunnel is over $1500 an hour and to me no tunnel is worth that. I wouldent spend that to fly in the NASA wind tunnel. I think a lot of people are saying they will be going, but once they see that they will end up burning thousands of dollars before lunch in one session, then the reality will set in that it's probably not worth that.

That issue has also been addressed with the placement of the RSL. When risers fail due to excessive loading they typically fail at the grommet stamp since that process removes about 25% of the material from the riser making it thinner there. Manufacturers started placing the RSL connection below the grommet, basically as low as they can go, so that any failure that does occur likely occurs above the RSL placement.

Expired or not, I dont see lots of manufacturers rushing to use the Collin's lanyard design. It's not a great design in the first place and it's largely a solution in search of a problem in my opinion. The issue of a single-riser cutaway leading to RSL deployment and subsequent reserve entanglement can very easily be solved by ensuring the RSL-side cutaway cable is noticeably longer than the non-RSL side. In that case, it ensures that the RSL side riser is always last to disconnect. That is some that all manufacturers require anyway, even those without MARDs. When it comes to basic safety, simpler is almost always better and adding in extra lanyards does not really solve any actual problems, but it can create problems for sure.

Yes of course, all BASE canopies do. But they dont have direct line stowing like on a standard D bag, which is what we are talking about. As you said in your own post, that is stowless line control which is what a semi-stowless bag uses. I am merely pointing out that stowless methods have existed forever and they work fine.

Semi-stowless bags are the standard. Standard D bags are completely obsolete and provide absolutely no benefit. There are literately millions of skydives that have been conducted on semi-stowless bags. I have over 1200 on one myself. They are highly tested and highly proven. Also, reserves have used stowless methods for lines since reserves were in existence. Very few manufacturers use any form of direct stowing for lines. Also, ALL BASE canopies use stowless methods for the lines. There are no line stows in BASE jumping. The only reason why standard D bags even exist anymore is just so manufactures can up sell to a semi-stowless. In reality, standard bags should be phased out of existence entirely.

I had an adverse reaction to the 2nd shot of the Monderna product. I woke up with chest pain and tachycardia with a resting HR of 120. That was extremely abnormal for me as I run on a daily basis and have a low resting HR (50 to 65 most of the time). I took an ECG and it was sinus tachycardia with no arrhythmia and I had just completed a full cardio workup in the months prior with excellent results so I know there was nothing actually wrong with my heart. It was just a weird experience. The next morning things were back to normal and I haven't had any issues since. I have never had a negative reaction to any other vaccine before and I have taken tons of them. That was a very strange and extremely unusual experience for me though.

No suit 'requires' them. I have jumped a Katana with a Freak 3 before. However, any wingsuit and even a tracking suit can benefit from a WS canopy, or at least a 7-cell. Most wingsuiters have their first cutaways on small suits. I'd argue a beginner wingsuiter would have more of a benefit from one than an advanced wingsuiter becasue while the advanced flyer will have a larger suit, they will have much better pitching technique which at the end of the day body position is the single most important factor in WS openings, same as non-WS openings.

That is not entirely true. There is more to the fabric than just pack volume. Low porosity material in general offers for better openings than ZP does. Have you ever asked yourself why there are no ZP reserves?

No, there is no real way to make them pack larger. They are intended for people jumping smaller canopies who want to put a larger main in their current container without buying a new container. You could take it out to the desert and then it would pack larger. You could pack it only in rooms with heavy A/C which reduces humidity and that will make it pack larger. Outside of that, nope not much you can do. I am curious how you fit a 120 into a rig with a 193 reserve. I'd imagine that main is swimming in there it's so small comparatively.

That's a quite paradoxical statement considering the overwhelming vast majority of the best wingsuit pilots in America have never once step foot in that tunnel. I've flown with the current world record holders for speed, time and distance (it's not the same person for all three) and we have discussed the tunnel to which they have responded to me they have no experience flying in it. I haven't been in the tunnel myself so I cant say from direct experience, but based on the countless videos it appears they are using a low airspeed and forcing slow, high AoA flight which if true that is the complete opposite of what you want to be doing when flying a wingsuit in the sky or in the BASE environment. The tunnel does look fun, but the value is not there. When you take into account flights, hotel, all that the sky ends up being less than half the cost per min of flying, and you're doing the real thing vs a wind tunnel.

I think you already know the answer to that question. It's not smart. Can some people get lucky and not get hurt? Sure. But I have also seen A license guys break bones under a WL of 0.8. It's a sliding scale. How much risk do you want to take? In the case of an A license holder flying 1.3, I'd say the needle on the risk scale is in the red. It also depends on the canopy itself. Is this a canopy with a super flat glide that has a low decent rate, or a Katana that just falls out of the sky? Does the canopy have massive flare power and you could shut it down on a downwinder, or is it a mushy 7-cell that flares like a semi-truck on ice? Those all play a role as well.

Changing the wingloading absolutely does change the glide ratio. If you increase the loading high enough, there comes a point where the canopy becomes overloaded and it's vertical decent rate increases substantially with little increase in horizontal speed. This is very apparent in XRW where canopy pilots will hook wingsuiters on their feet and suspend their weight, after which their canopy falls out of the sky with no noticeable increase in forward speed.

That was dont a long time ago already. I think about six months back or so they changed that.

Poor attempt at trolling. Try harder... A license - Petra - Wingsuiting…..