No more speed skydiving talk!!!

Nuh, I think it's legit. The military wants to get it's men down fast from a HALO so their all probably doin' heddown HEHE...

J

Before you buy.

People buy all those things even though they aren't involved with Speed Skydiving. You wouldn't happen to have an FS-suit and a full-face helmet, would you? :o)

No, they've just made a movie with Tom Berenger, and they're doing some extreme FS.

Those are called Ken & Barbie, and are very prevalent in the FS community :o)

Espen ALF#1

Before you buy.

Hey, I'd pay money to go see that.

And Tom Cruise already knows how to skydive....

'I feel the need... the need for speed.'

Muahhahaha

[snip]

Like computers? Cash registers? Radar?

And you'd prefer unsubstantiated opinion?

[snip]

How accurate do you think your CYPRES is?

Kevin O'Connell

(By the by, you do understand that the last 'significant' digit is also the first uncertian one? It's significant, it just ain't absolute)

Before you buy.

Cash registers?

Before you buy.

I'm not sure why, probably because of the ease of controling tone and shade, but alot of early metal devices at the beginning of the last (20th) century were black. Although the early cash registers were mechanical, they were still 'black boxes' and they did absolutely nothing except 'spit out numbers'. (Well and release a drawer mechanism). Actually, this terminal nerd/geek had a small plastic 'digital' computer which was nothing more than a miniature holerith machine. But one could program on it with small pins to make it 'spit out numbers' in a variety of sequences. It was red admittedly, but the funtion was independent of color.

As I understand it, the earliest 'electronic' computers were actually still 'mechanical' in the sense that the functions where all basically switches thrown, but by electronic devices like relays instead in fully nonmechanical devices like transistors. As I recall the Manhattan project had one of the early ones for doing complicated calculations on the dynamics of fission. There was no reporting of the color of said machine. They did apparently have a fair amount of success when they 'believed' the results 'spit out' by them.

Actually, about the only calculating machine I know of which didn't 'spit out' numbers hung over the entrance to one of the classroom areas at the airport in West Lafayette on the campus of Purdue University. It was about the size of a V-6 engine block and it's purpose was to calculate the aircraft's speed and the air density and adjust the ratio between control surface movement and yoke displacement so that overall control surface effectiveness remained constant despite altitude and airspeed variations. It was completely mechanical and was 'powered' entirely by the air pressure it measured. Today the whole thing would be on a chip that would fit on my finger and operate on the power of a solar battery I'm sure. But then it would surely merely spit out zero's and ones and have to have them converted by some resolver or A/D converter to mechanical motions.

I'm never one to advise the blind confidence in any calculation despite who or what makes it. And I understand the need to calibrate devices, even ones based on sound physical principals, over the range one intends to measure if 3 or 4 place accuracy is desired. I've often asked how these devices have been calibrated but never got a clear answer. Maybe Mr. Hansen would like to expand on this, or maybe, much like CYPRES, he considers these things trade secrets. But never the less, I'm not quite sure how folks consider the complete and utter lack of any measured data is somehow more 'reliable' or credible than data which has at least been consistenly measured, if not necessarily accurately.

Before you buy.

Hey, you got me all wrong. The wager is on. You can use your skyspeedometer, have all your cameraflyers present, I'll forego all the calibration and accuracy questions I raised and accept completely the manufacturer's claims.

Let's make it real this weekend. Me, 20% faster than your world record (which you have yet to disclose), without exiting higher than 13,000 feet MSL. You talked the talk, now walk the walk.

I'll call up ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, TNT, BET, PBS, FOX, UPN, and dress up in a Superman costume with a chicken head. I guarantee to give 'em all a whole lot of extreme speedskydiving whoop-ass. Just have some nice gear for me to show off with.

Plus, I won't pull over 800 feet.

Before you buy.

snipped a couple of pages of my previous post>

No, that would be ALF. I've even got a number to prove it. Now, you really should learn to snip some of your posts. It's considered polite towards other readers of rec.skydiving. Now, did you have anything else to say about my post? Not even a small rebuttal about how Ken Hansen and his clan of Skygods are a selfish bunch, who are inaccurately protraying skydiving as a dangerous sport? Surely you must have something left in you?

Espen ALF#1 <

Of course it's speed and not velocity. Velocity is a vector quantity; to say that one velocity is numericlaly greater than another would be as meaningless as it would be to say that one kiwi fruit is numerically greater than another. Vectors do not comprise an ordered set.

. . . But of course, you knew that already, didn't you?

I haven't seen this kind of performance since kindergarten days of, 'Of course I know the answer, but it's a secret.' Careful. You keep prodding him like that and he'll steal your lunch money at recess.

In other words, you can't provide an answer.

BTW, speaking of wagers, who are you betting on to break the elusive 400 mph speed barrier in the new few weeks, UltraSpeed Skydivers or those other guys?

You can sign up for membership. Our website will be up and running with the full multimedia experience of UltraSpeed skydiving.

Thanks for your continued interest.

Before you buy.