Glenn Posted March 28, 2005 Report Posted March 28, 2005 Damnit Glen. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hey I was trying to prove he couldn't do it. However, I'm not gonna lie, or withold information. Quote
LineSki Posted March 28, 2005 Report Posted March 28, 2005 damn, thats just nuts. when i ever i see that super g on oln it doesnt look at like they fly 200 ft. Quote
AtomicSkier Posted March 28, 2005 Report Posted March 28, 2005 damn, thats just nuts. when i ever i see that super g on oln it doesnt look at like they fly 200 ft. super-G has maybe a small little jump, at most. It's DOWNHILL that has the huge jumps. Quote
LineSki Posted March 28, 2005 Report Posted March 28, 2005 oooooook then i have never seen a downhill so now i cant comment if they go 200 feet. Quote
insomniac Posted March 28, 2005 Author Report Posted March 28, 2005 Do they slick downhill courses? Quote
skidude Posted March 28, 2005 Report Posted March 28, 2005 At Snowbasin for the 2002 olympics they took fire hoses (probably similar to snowmaking hoses) and covered the trail with water. Insted of Utahs usual 10% water content in the snow it was about 65-70% water. Mmmm nice and fast Quote
Gurp Posted March 28, 2005 Report Posted March 28, 2005 glenn, can u repeat that whole process again in simpler format? I totally got lost. Quote
Glenn Posted March 28, 2005 Report Posted March 28, 2005 glenn, can u repeat that whole process again in simpler format? I totally got lost. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ok, without all the math and physics lingo here a simple explanation of what happens. When the skier leaves the even ground, he will continue moving across as fast as he was going when he left the ground. So I found how long it would take for him to travel 200 feet across with his "across" speed being 80 mph. Once I knew this time, I figured out how far down you will fall in that amount of time. I then created a right triangle with these two distances being the two non-hypoteneous legs (the two short legs). Using trig I figured out what the angle of trianle, which is the pitch of the slope. If the slope has a greater pitch, the skier will fly further, if the slope has a milder pitch the skier will fly a shorter distance. Quote
AtomicSkier Posted March 28, 2005 Report Posted March 28, 2005 uhh, according to your equations however, he will ALWAYS fly 200 feet straight out at 80mph. That won't change. How far he DROPS, will, which relates to the angle of the slope. But that one leg of the triangle will always be 200 feet. Quote
Glenn Posted March 28, 2005 Report Posted March 28, 2005 uhh, according to your equations however, he will ALWAYS fly 200 feet straight out at 80mph. That won't change. How far he DROPS, will, which relates to the angle of the slope. But that one leg of the triangle will always be 200 feet. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, at 80 mph, with a steep pitch, he will drop futher, but that will also give him more air time which equates to further in air travel. Quote
Gurp Posted March 28, 2005 Report Posted March 28, 2005 i gotta question.... Does any of this really matter like at all? Quote
soldier32 Posted March 28, 2005 Report Posted March 28, 2005 he was comparing air in racing to air in parks/jumps Quote
insomniac Posted March 29, 2005 Author Report Posted March 29, 2005 Just because you don't get it doesn't mean it doesn't matter. Quote
Glenn Posted March 29, 2005 Report Posted March 29, 2005 i gotta question.... Does any of this really matter like at all? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'd rather know about how far a DH racer travels in the air off a headwall than what skifreak is eating for dinner. Quote
skidude Posted March 29, 2005 Report Posted March 29, 2005 I'd rather know about how far a DH racer travels in the air off a headwall than what skifreak is eating for dinner. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Now Glenn...What if there is a slight incline before the headwall Quote
Gurp Posted March 29, 2005 Report Posted March 29, 2005 What if theyre is a change in the pitch of the landing, and there is a 30ft high kicker right before the headwall. How many backflips could a person pull on that? Quote
insomniac Posted March 29, 2005 Author Report Posted March 29, 2005 That's either a dumb question or a bad joke. Quote
Gurp Posted March 29, 2005 Report Posted March 29, 2005 actually i was curious if he could come up with a mathmatical explaination for it. Quote
insomniac Posted March 29, 2005 Author Report Posted March 29, 2005 It would depend on how fast he flipped. Quote
Glenn Posted March 29, 2005 Report Posted March 29, 2005 What if theyre is a change in the pitch of the landing, and there is a 30ft high kicker right before the headwall. How many backflips could a person pull on that? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> If there is a kicker than there is more hangtime. A 45 degree angle upwards provides the best distance, assuming you launch with the same speed. Of coarse you will loose speed when you head up the jump. As far as backflips that has way too many factors involved, such as the excection (how they actually move their body), body type, weight/length of skis, etc etc etc. However, in terms of freestyle sking/boarding hangtime is more important for spins/flips etc than distance. Sure its more insane to do a big spin off a long jump, but in terms of how far one can spin, or how many flips, how long the grab can be held etc etc etc, hangtime is the most important. Jumps provide much better hangtime at low speed. Quote
insomniac Posted March 29, 2005 Author Report Posted March 29, 2005 Jumps provide much better hangtime at low speed. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> They do? Quote
Glenn Posted March 29, 2005 Report Posted March 29, 2005 Sorry, let me rephrase, they provide better hangtime at low speed compared to headwalls. Quote
skierboi Posted March 29, 2005 Report Posted March 29, 2005 i would never go off a 50 ft jump, ive watched people do it in hood though Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.