Talk:Wingsuit flying

Need for references

It blows my mind that one of the world's recognized experts on Wingsuit flight can take the time to log in here and share a bunch of topical information, only to have it removed by someone who, as far as I can tell, has never even seen a wingsuit in person. This is indicative of all that is wrong with Wikipedia.

Which information was this? And yeah, that is the nature of wikipedia, but then you should write this person and he/she incorrectly removed the information and that it should be restored. --Costyn 11:12, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Is it just me or does this page need a little more NPOV? Unsigned

It's a great strength of wikipedia that references are needed. If an editor adds information here without references, then an editor is quite within their right to remove it. Otherwise we would have original research. --Duncan (talk) 13:28, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Experts have access to original research, and Wikipedia doesn't publish original research. Experts also have access to the best information sources available, and they should use these sources to back up the information they wish to provide in the article. For an expert, this should be no big deal. Rklawton (talk) 19:23, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Robert Pecnik designer of Classic wingsuit

Will the person who keeps changing the line "BirdMan's Classic, designed by Robert Pecnik, was the first wingsuit offered to the general public." please contact me. Otherwise we will continue modifying each others contributions. My name is James Boole, please email me at james@phoenix-fly.com.

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 10:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Nice press release?

`who would be able to carry on BirdMan's high standard of training beginners all over the skydiving world' ... looks more like a press release than an encyclopedia article. dougmc (talk) 17:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Kind of strange comparison

BASE jumpers who fly their wingsuits in close proximity to cliff walls will experience many of the same visual sensations that a hawk would experience flying the same path

And if they hit the cliff wall, they'll experience many of the same pain sensations that a aardvark would experience impacting at the same speed. Is there any point to this "visual sensations of a hawk" statement apart from some kind of unsourced macho comparison? 86.150.52.64 (talk) 03:49, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, humankind has always dreamed to fly like a hawk. But as far as I'm aware, we never dreamed to crash like an aardvark. Fransw (talk) 09:21, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Is it "flying" or "freefall"?

The article calls this both "flying" and "freefall", sometimes in the same sentence. Is it really referred to as both? I would have thought it would only be freefall if you don't have any artificial aerodynamic surfaces (or something like that. Of course pedantically you need to be outside the atmosphere for true freefall). A glide angle of 2.5:1 sure sounds like flying to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.199.93.54 (talk) 18:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Skydivers consider it "flying" at altitudes above 2,000 feet and "falling" at altitudes below 2,000 feet. Rklawton (talk) 19:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Wingsuit v. rigid wing

I suggest that we differentiate between a suit made primarily of cloth and a rigid wing. This article is about the cloth suit. Rklawton (talk) 19:29, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

The problem being that there is no other article for rigid wing human flight. A lot is dumped at Jet Pack. MickMacNee (talk) 20:04, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

That's funny, because a Jet Pack is actually a rocket. What we need is a 3rd article. Suggestions for a name? Rklawton (talk) 20:07, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, yes, there's the yves rossy powered fixed wing, but there is also the guy felix who used a unpowered fixed wing. As per this article though, there are also powered flexible wingsuits as well as unpowered. That's four variations to wingsuit flying with the common component of jumping out of a plane or off a building and landing by parachute, and flying/gliding in the middle part.

The limitation on creating a new article for just fixed wings is, any title is going to be made up, because as far as I know, rossi and felix are the only two examples of rigid wings. But ignoring that, if we created Rigid wingsuit, that suggests that this article is better off being moved to Flexible wingsuit, and Wingsuit becomes a dab page for the two types. (I think the flying bit is redundant in this articles current title).

But I don't even like the idea of calling these rigid wings as suits, because, well, they arent suits. So, no, no idea what to do. I've been thinking about this ever since updating some info on rossi after he crossed the channel, and not come up with anything. It was someone else who crowbared the rossi wing details into jet pack from his bio article, despite the fact rossi can't 'lift off' with his contraption. MickMacNee (talk) 01:30, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I suggest a new section for this kind of wingsuit totally different (because its't a suit!)... Probably, for this type of rigid wing, the most used word is “wingpack”. Also in russian the wingpacks are known as “ранец-крыло” (litterally translation of "wingpack") or as “вингпеки” (transileteration of "wingpack"). The word was invented by Ann Nocenti on 1984 for the Marvel Star Wars series of comic books, where the wingpacks were a type of glider used on a far planet. And I think that in this category there are also the model of Christian Stadler (but I don't have informations) and the jet-wingpack Atair EXO-X2 that is exposed in the Metropolitan Museum of New York.--Sviolante (talk) 19:36, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

'incorrectly referenced'

Unless there's a matter of copyright or a world-wide recognized organization for wingsuit flying, can one really judge a term for the activity to be 'incorrect'? My thought is that it can only be an 'incorrect' term, if the term in question refers to a separate activity. Otherwise it would seem to be an 'alternative', not 'incorrect'. 'Incorrect' makes it sound like someone's improperly claiming authority... --patton1138 (talk) 03:33, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Landing Attempts

Jeb Corliss' effort to land in a wingsuit may later be regarded as a historical step in the evolutionary ladder towards this goal, but he has no hope of success with his method. However, there seem to be a small number of people who are interested in solving this problem (by landing on inclinded planes, etc.). I have looked for research on other plausible methods, such as Rocket-Belt assisted landing, but so far haven't found any material. Given what is available online, should wingsuit landings be broken out as a seperate subsection, or should the Jeb Corliss reference be removed? 166.137.132.50 (talk) 18:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, if he had no hope of success, it doesn't seem notable. But how would one prove that? Why did he do it if he had no chance of success? Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 21:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Me again, from what I've read, Jeb started his efforts in late 2004, and never landed using only a wingsuit. He did land a small parachute, and claimed that was a first step towards landing the wingsuit, but then never made any further progress. He next promoted the idea of landing on a ramp, erected between or on buildings, in 2008, but that didn't pan out either. I can't speak to his motivation, only report on his progress. 166.137.132.50 (talk) 00:15, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Then it would appear one of the options you suggested is correct: remove the Jeb Corliss reference. Even the Wright brothers wouldn't merit a Wiki entry -- until the point they flew. Piano non troppo (talk) 00:59, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

British stuntman Gary Connery

no article about Gary Connery in wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.117.246.107 (talk) 13:54, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Seconded - can someone with accurate information put in info on Gary's jump? Was it indeed a world first landing? Also, some videos appear to show the second jumper land in the boxes after him - was this a second wingsuit landing, or did that jumper use a parachute? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.193.124.59 (talk) 20:03, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

As per The BBC article "Cameraman Mark Sutton also jumped from the helicopter in a wingsuit but deployed a parachute before landing." 217.42.23.215 (talk) 00:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Picture is not soaring but exit

The picture used next to the headline "training" is not a picture of a wingsuit soaring, but just a wingsuit after exit. You can even see the reflection of the aircraft in the skydiver his helmet, and you see his leg wing being deflated. The discription should be changed. (83.117.98.12 (talk) 15:53, 31 October 2012 (UTC))

Fatalities/injuries section?

There needs to be more in the article about the dangers of wingsuits, good or bad. All I see is something about a guy starting a school to dispel a myth about their dangers. It's kinda strange for an encyclopedia article to refer to this and a few specific deaths, but have no actual statistics to back up the inferences.63.229.25.4 (talk) 18:35, 2 May 2013 (UTC)