Video: Wingsuit skydiving
ON A bright day in 1912, an Austrian tailor named Franz Reichelt jumped off the Eiffel Tower in Paris, France. This was no suicide attempt. Reichelt was wearing a special overcoat of his own design that was supposed to let him glide gently to the ground. Sadly, it didn't work. As the crowd watched and movie cameras whirred, the "flying tailor" plunged 60 metres to his death.
Over the next few decades, up until the 1960s, daredevil showmen continued to experiment with homemade wings of canvas, wood or silk - with one crucial difference. These so-called "Birdmen" relied on parachutes to land; the wings were just there to let them "fly" on the way down. Even so, many died, usually when their wings interfered with the parachute. The idea fell out of vogue until the introduction of safer commercial wingsuits in the 1990s.
Now a small group of fearless - some would say foolhardy - wingsuit enthusiasts is reviving the dream of the very first birdmen. Their ambition is to jump out of a plane, glide thousands of metres and land in one piece - without a parachute.
At least two teams around the world are bent on tackling this pinnacle of extreme sports, and they have very different approaches in mind. In the race to be the first, secrecy rules, but the leading contenders have revealed some tantalising details of what they hope will be - only metaphorically, of course - a ground-breaking achievement.
A modern wingsuit is a full-body outfit with wings of tough nylon sewn between the arms and the torso, and between the legs: think Las Vegas-era Elvis crossed with a flying squirrel. During free fall, the airflow inflates the wings to form aerofoils, creating lift and turning a one-dimensional drop into a three-dimensional glide. While skydivers usually fall at terminal velocity - about 195 kilometres per hour - a wingsuit flier falls at only 80 to 100 km/h while travelling horizontally at 115 to 160 km/h. Skilled fliers can perform surprisingly precise aerial manoeuvres, including briefly slowing their vertical descent to zero and even gliding upwards a short distance at the end of a swooping dive. Daring individuals have skimmed as low as 5 metres above sloping ground.
Wingsuit pilots always use a parachute to touch down safely but, perhaps inevitably, a few have started to wonder if they could do without one. It's the most common thing skydivers say when they first try a wingsuit, says veteran pilot and wingsuit flier Tim Mace. "Because they're used to falling so fast, a wingsuit seems like it's stationary."
"My resentment toward the parachute surfaced early on," says Maria von Egidy, a wingsuit designer and film costume maker in Cape Town, South Africa. "There are simply too many restrictions created by its size, position and deployment."
So is a chuteless landing even theoretically possible? "It is doable," thinks physicist and parachute researcher Jean Potvin at Saint Louis University in Missouri. For it to succeed, keeping control over the flier's speed and trajectory is key. With its high speed and tiny wing area, a wingsuit is responsive to the slightest movement- more like an F-16 than a jumbo jet- and leaves little margin for error.
Copying the way others land has to be a promising approach, and is the one adopted by von Egidy, who heads a wingsuit company called Jii-Wings. Just before touchdown, parachutists and hang-gliders execute a manoeuvre called a flare: raising the craft's nose to maximise lift from its wings while cutting its speed. Larger aircraft and many birds also flare when landing. Von Egidy is developing a suit she calls the Integrated Glide and Landing System (IGALS) that will allow fliers to do the same. It aims to achieve two things, the first being a much flatter glide angle. Normal wingsuits have a glide ratio of about 2.5:1- the pilot travels 2.5 metres horizontally for every metre of fall. Von Egidy claims she can achieve 4:1 or better by increasing the suit's wingspan, stabilising the aerofoil and changing the wing's shape.
The most innovative part of the design, though, is that it allows the pilot to drop out of the wing just before landing and hang beneath it, rather like a hang-glider pilot does, making it easier to flare without losing control. This is the key to achieving the second aim: to slow "smoothly and dramatically" just before touchdown, so that the pilot ends up flying slowly enough to simply run off the excess speed, as in a parachute landing. Von Egidy, who is revealing the concept behind the suit for the first time here, claims it has "proved totally viable" in scale-model tests. She plans to enlist stunt riggers to help set up giant swings so test pilots can practise swooping. After that will come high-altitude free-fall tests, using cut-away suits that pilots can discard in mid-air if anything goes wrong.
- Like what you've just read?
- Don't miss out on the latest content from New Scientist.
- Get New Scientist magazine delivered to your door, plus unlimited access to the entire content of New Scientist online.
- Subscribe now and save
If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.
Have your say
Maybe air-bag landing system would work, like those that land probes Spirit and Opportunity on Mars?
... Beagle had an airbag system...
Safe Landing
Tue Nov 17 14:32:31 GMT 2009 by Eric M. Jones
http://periheliondesign.com
The Mars rovers had heatshields AND drogues AND parachutes AND rockets AND airbags.
Hey, that might work!
yes, but entered atmosphere at speed 20'000 km/h. this is several magnitudes lower
Safe Landing
Wed Nov 18 01:16:54 GMT 2009 by Paul G
http://airships.paulgazis.com
A great article. But as a long-time hang glider pilot, who's been flying since 1986, I'm afraid I have to quibble with some of the numbers. I'm 1.81 m tall -- close to the figure quoted in the article -- but my wing only has an area of 14 square meters and it soars quite nicely. Indeed, I got a nice hour-long flight in thermals just the other day.
Can I suggest attaching rockets - just enough reverse boost to slow down - and land on a slippy slope with running water going down it.
Maybe one of the larger waterfalls of the world.
isnt the solution obvious? ask any navy pilot on an aircraft carrier how to shed lots of speed quickly... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arresting_gear
Safe Landing
Wed Nov 18 18:48:44 GMT 2009 by maria
http://jii-wings.com
Thanks Paul.. As always detractors exaggerate the challenges involved in achieving something new.. I have based my work on the premise that the two square meters of wingspan that modern wingsuits boast is inadequate for a decent glide, and that even double will contribute much better performance. Then to compare a flying lemar to the wingsuit is laughable- its not the same animal. If you are interested i will send you a copy of the full text as i contributed to the article- it explains why i long since abandoned any design based on gliding mammals..
kind regards, Maria
Touchdown Graphic
Mon Nov 16 07:54:47 GMT 2009 by Cate Turner
http://www.jii-wings.com
your graphic accompanying the wingsuit story states that a wingsuit flier will need an enormous suit to have the same glide angle as a flying squirrel but then shows the glide angle of the wingsuit ti be much greater than that of the sugarglider - I'm confused... ?
Actually the article states that a human would need this large wingspan to glide as slow as the flying squirrel. The graphic also represents this, if you look at the scale on the bottom of the graphic. The flying squirrel lands at approximately 40 km/h whereas the wingsuit would land at approximately 125 km/h. The comment from someone else regarding the hang-glider was very relevant and by the graphic, it lands at the same speed as the flying squirrel. Oh well.
Touchdown Graphic
Thu Nov 19 18:04:07 GMT 2009 by Julian Smith
http://www.juliansmith.com
Actually, it says the huge wing would be necessary for a person "to soar like a flying squirrel" - more specifically, to have the same wing loading (weight/wing area, in the squirrel's case about 0.66 g/cm^2), allowing him or her to land like a squirrel as well: slowly enough to avoid injury.
Van Warren's calculation assumed wing loading is the single factor most controlling landing velocity. See http://www.wdv.com/Aerospace/Wookie/index.html
If they swooped down alongside the top a high cliff normally used to base jump from, then maybe they could attempt to land on top of it.
Would need a straight enough cliff face so they could swoop down alongside, and turn up and in to land on top of the cliff.
If they failed could resort to the normal base jumping parachute technique, as they would still have some altitude.
And if they swoop down and fail in the opposite direction it could result in a red stain on the face of an otherwise scenic cliff face
This comment breached our terms of use and has been removed.
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving just isn't your sport.
All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.
If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.