Comments on: Top 10 Fascinating Skydiving Myths

By: Emerald Isle N.C. Wedding Photographer

Emerald Isle N.C. Wedding Photographer — Sun, 22 Apr 2012 22:03:28 +0000

Terrific work! That is the kind of information that are meant to be shared around the net. Shame on the seek engines for no longer positioning this publish higher! Come on over and talk over with my web site . Thanks =)

By: MikeJD

MikeJD — Fri, 20 Apr 2012 10:03:27 +0000

Isaac, if you took two people of EQUAL weight but one of them presented a larger body surface, then I might agree with you. But I think you are still suggesting that weight is irrelevant, and I’m afraid that just isn’t true. Proper scientific theory disproves it, and so does real-world experience.

You might have seen video of skydivers playing with a tennis ball in freefall, propelling it to one another and catching it. According to your theory, that ball should plummet away from them as soon as they release it because it offers hardly any air resistance – and yet it doesn’t. In reality there’s only one thing preventing the ball from instantly ‘floating’ off the TOP of the screen – it’s filled with lead shot .

It surprises me that people still give so much credence to a theory based on a (misunderstood) experiment supposedly performed over 400 years ago – considering that they can now actually watch effectively the same experiment repeated, over a much greater distance, and completely disproving that theory.

By: Isaac

Isaac — Fri, 20 Apr 2012 03:44:47 +0000

Heavier people do not fall faster, if anything they go slower because of the wind resistance.

By: MikeJD

MikeJD — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 13:56:39 +0000

Very nice illustration, skydive_practictioner.

I think for the uninitiated some explanation may help:

The tandem pair (one guy strapped underneath the other one) are falling very fast because they are double the mass (effectively the weight) of a single person. Because of this, for the first part of the jump the solo skydivers are having to fall head-down to stay level with them – by doing this they present relatively little surface area to the relative wind, and thus less drag.

At 0:31 the tandem instructor deploys the drogue chute (normally done just after exit), which slows the pair down to the normal freefall speed of a single person falling on his belly. At that point the other guys go belly-to-earth, presenting more wind resistance to match the reduced speed of the tandem pair.

Bottom line: all else being equal, more weight = higher freefall speed.

As an aside, I didn’t like the way that one of the solo jumpers deployed his canopy with minimal separation from the tandem pair, and facing them, while the tandem canopy was still deploying. That is asking for trouble.

By: skydive_practictioner

skydive_practictioner — Fri, 30 Mar 2012 16:04:55 +0000

They do, forget legends about Gallileo, don't twist his theories, don't compare the Piza tower to 15k skydive, look at the equation. Or simply watch this wideo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GZw2md4j_A

By: MikeJD

MikeJD — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 13:20:31 +0000

I used to jump at Gap-Tallard occasionally as well, but haven’t been there since the mid-90s.

Beautiful place, especially early in the season when there was still a lot of snow on the mountains. Must have been a nice place to work. I’d love to go back some time!

By: Geko

Geko — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 10:52:25 +0000

Eh, picture for #9 was taken at the CERPS Tallard, the drop zone where I used to work as an instructor.

Funny coincidence…

By: Ota Cervenka

Ota Cervenka — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 22:55:34 +0000

Great points. So many people still believe widely circulated fairytales, most of which you’ve covered.

Now I know what link to give those people…

Thanks for putting this together for the newbies.

Well done!

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 18:35:03 +0000

You’re right – but I think the original poster’s intention was to say that stories of people having survived terminal impact are misleading in ALMOST every case.

You’re certainly not going to live if you hit solid ground (or even water) at over 100 miles an hour. Those who’ve survived chuteless falls from aircraft have done so in freak circumstances and gone through a process of deceleration – crashing through tree branches, glancing off snow covered ridges and so on.

By: military

military — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 01:19:01 +0000

yeah…. do research before writing and publishing. There are multiple occasions during wwii where pilot bailed out WITHOUT A CHUTE (not a malfunction…. just no chute at all) and survived…. and one of which completely uninjured.