Icarus lives...

[ddavid 149]

I was amazed when I saw this:

But is it real - many folks think not. Here's a good summary of the pro's and con's:

http://m.gizmodo.com/5894904/man-flies-like-a-bird-flapping-his-own-wings

What do you think...

Cheers - Dai.

[mutley 4,498]

What happens if he gets a call on his smartphone? Will he crash?!

[allardjd 1,853]

I don't think he qualifies for a Smart phone...

John

[Andrew Godden 943]

All the sceptics and naysayers that have commented on the web site link only compare it to their own experience in their secluded world, such as hang gliding or as an airline pilot.

As for the Airline pilot, with his "...25 years airline experience, 7 years Air Force experience, 8 years kiteboarding experience and a background in aeronautical engineering...", who, on that basis, claims to be an authority, he ignores the airfoil design in the wings, which is actually evident in the video with the ribs in the wings and the fabric tensioned over it and discredits it because the wing "...never loads up...". Ah, that's right, have a closer look at the actual facts Mr Sonny Jim Pilot and using your own self annointed and opinionated authoritive logic of flight, can you see the wing of an aircraft "load up" with it's tensioned metal skin. By the way, when was the last time you saw an aircraft flying as a result of it flapping it's wings. He also claims that "...Since the wings aren't loaded, they aren't producing lift. Not even the glide is real. It isn't a matter of opinion. It's simple fact. If the wings aren't producing lift, this has to be a fake. Period. If the wings were producing lift, they would show that they were under load. They never show a load, so they never produce lift..."

Yet, birds fly and not every bird that flies displays consistent glide characteristics. Hell, some even hover. But can I see their wings "load up" when under a flapping motion?

Anyway, I thought it was unreal. Clearly I am also a sceptic though, but only against those who are self opinionated, self annointed authorities and blinded by small minded and constrained logic.

Cheers

Andrew

[allardjd 1,853]

I'm going to jump on the hoax bandwagon here. From Wiki, the Snowbird project was the first documented successful human powered ornithopter flight. It looked nothing like the one above, barely maintained level flight at low level for about 20 seconds and requried a tow to get aloft. Given that the Canadian effort documented by Wiki required a university sponsored project with a $200,000 budget, high tech materials and design and a 737-length wing, I don't think a handful of guys in a park with a rag/frame lashup and a couple of video cameras are going to exceed that performance by an order of magnitude (non-tow launch, sustained flight, significant climb to altitude).

If it's real, I would expect significant media coverage and invitations to demonstrate it in front of impartial witnesses. As far as I know that hasn't happened. Until it does, I'm in the hoax camp.

John

==========================================================

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowbird_(ornithopter)

From Wiki:

Ornithopter Project

The Human-Powered Ornithopter Project (HPO) started in the summer of 2006, as a spin-off of the University of Toronto Institute for Aerospace Studies (UTIAS) flapping-wing research program.[11][12] The design was run in simulations to check feasibility before committing to construction.[13]

The aircraft has a wingspan of 32 metres (105 ft)[14] (comparable to a Boeing 737),[5][1] and weighs 43 kilograms (95 lb).[14][5][1] It cost $200,000 Cdn[14] (approx. $200,000 USD), not including donated material and time.[14] It was built primarily with carbon fibre, balsa wood, basswood and foam.[14][6] The pedals are connected to the wings through a system of pumps and pulleys.[15] Snowbird does not have launch runup equipment, because of the need to limit weight, and requires a tow-assist at launch.[4] The downward flap required 700 pounds-force (3,100 N). It was built under the supervision of professor James DeLaurier, a NASA alumnus.[14] The craft was built under the University of Toronto's Human Powered Ornithopter Project.[14] The team that built it was composed of five students.[15] The name came about when, during testing on a snowy field, the cockpit became filled with snow.[7]

The team expects that revised iterations of the aircraft with greater performance will be made.[16]

Flight test history: Snowbird completed successful free-flights prior to its officially monitored record run. It took to the air on 31 July 2010.[16]

Record run: For its official aviation-first flight, it was piloted by Todd Reichert, a 28-year-old PhD graduate student of the University of Toronto's Institute for Aerospace Studies.[14][17] The record flight was observed by a certified official from the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale (FAI),[14] and GPS data detailing the altitude and length of flight were given to the organization for certification.[14] Snowbird flew for 19.3 seconds in a straight-and-level powered flight run under human power alone.[14][6] It averaged 25.6 kilometres per hour (15.9 mph),[5][1][6] over a length of 145 metres (476 ft).[1][6] Take-off was assisted with a tow from a car to get the aircraft up to speed, before flapping for lift-off.[1] A total of 16 flaps were used on the run to maintain height.[1] At the start of the flight, data indicates that Snowbird was able to gain height, while maintaining speed, indicating that there was more power than necessary to maintain straight-and-level flight.[18] The run occurred at the Great Lakes Gliding Club,[1][6][19] in Tottenham, Ontario,[19] on 2 August 2010,[14] at around 6:45am.[7] Reichert estimates that each stroke needed 600–700 watts (0.80–0.94 bhp), with 700–800 pounds-force (3,100–3,600 N) on each stroke.[7] Analysis of the flight afterward indicated that 15-20 power strokes is the limit of endurance for the pilot.[18] The validity of the record claim has been disputed due to prior claims and, apparent in Reichert's flight data, a downward trend in total energy and airspeed during the 19.3 second interval claimed as a sustained flight.[20]

Fate: On the last flight of 2 August 2010, a main drive line failed. Fatigue wear was noted on many components. With training of the pilot, with the intent of peaking for the record attempt, it was decided to end flights for the season.[16]

The team hopes to find a home in a museum for the aircraft and have an entry in the Guiness Book of World Records.[16]

[Andrew Godden 943]

Maybe I still believe in the original dream of flight, but I also can't tell from the video whether it is real or hoax. Rather than rule it out for now, I am prepared to wait until the guy is vindicated or vilified as appropriate. He has put a lot at stake by being so public with his web site, so any vilification will be gruesome.

The guy's web site Humanbirdwings provides a lot of detail and he claims to be a mechanical engineer and hang glider pilot. The interviews with the purported scientist in Neuromechanics and Human Movement are quite interesting (if they are factual).

However, the naysayers rule it out, "period", to quote my friend the pilot, based on traditional aerodynamic theories and experience associated with their very specific professional life or sports pursuits. However, in my view, their arguments potentially fall short because they seem to have overlooked facts, such as the existence of an airfoil and the fabric skin being tensioned over the frame, somewhat like a hang glider, and yet, they neither claim to have any professional expertise in mechanical engineering or human mechanics which the guy's web site and research and development seems have taken into account. The arguments presented rely on outright dismissiveness or by simply saying "...To take the time to try to explain to you why this is so obvious to those of us who fly a nearly identical machine (that just doesn't flap) that this is a fake would possibly just be too involved...". Not a very powerful empirical argument if you want to disprove something, but useful merely in discrediting for the sake of their disbelief. Furthermore, I cannot see how you can near equate a traditional hang glider to a mechanical flapping winged device that relies on the flapping motion to supposedly generate lift.

This will certainly be interesting to follow as development continues.

Cheers

Andrew

[allardjd 1,853]

It would be a lot more convincing to me (but still maybe not conclusive) if the video were continuous, not broken between ground shots and helmet-cam shots. One continuous video of the whole flight from a ground camera would be harder to doubt than that discontinuous patchwork of video clips that may or may not all have been of the same flight and/or the same device.

Impartial witnesses would raise it yet another level.

The physiology of birds is custom engineered to support self-powered flight. Their body structure is incredibly light and most of the muscle mass is devoted to "arm" motion. We're put together a lot differently.

John

[Andrew Godden 943]

I must admit, I spent a lot of time studying and restudying the video and the tyre tracks in the grass, thinking a vehicle with a winch might be positioned ahead of him, but I could not come to any conclusion.

On reading more of the material on his web site, he is using a range of Wii and Android Smartphone technology to measure the flapping motion of the arms and to process arm acceleration and compute the corresponding motor output.

Whilst still not perfect in duplicating the physiology of birds, the technology seems to be providing a compensating factor.

This was his first real test flight after the bad European winter weather of January and February. In so doing, if he has proven his theories and device for himself and his team, one would expect a more thorough test flight, with independent witnesses, to follow during the spring and summer.

Otherwise, it was a beautiful dream and he looks to have at least given it a go.

Cheers

Andrew

[brett 2,315]

I'm willing to stick my neck out and say "Fake". All you need to do is watch an actual bird in flight and see the complex workings of their wings to know that the little flapping thats going on here is just not enough to create lift for a 100+ pound man. I will give them points for a darn good job of faking it though.

[allardjd 1,853]

Dutch filmmaker admits faking viral 'human bird wing' video

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/03/22/viral-human-bird-wings-video-fake-probably-ad-expert-says/?intcmp=features

"They admitted their hoax Thursday evening on the Dutch television show Wereld Draait Door."

John

[Andrew Godden 943]

Noooooo. My dream is shattered. Is there nothing in the world worth believing in anymore? First, the total disappointment, to then be quickly replaced by disillusionment, over the whole MS Flight fiasco and how they have abandoned and shunned me as part of the faithful followers, and now this.

I must keep telling myself..."never get out of FSX, never get out of FSX, just keep flying.". If I keep my head buried in my flying I will never be distracted by these mentally damaging incidents which will leave me scarred for life.

Next someone will tell me Scientology has been nothing more than a filthy, greedy, money sucking campaign and there is no actual basis to the teachings of Ron L, Hubbard.

I'm going flying.

[allardjd 1,853]

...and don't give another thought to global warming climate change.

John

[dodgy-alan 1,587]

Given that the flapping motion was completely unlike a birds rotating and flapping sequence, That a human being is far too heavy to achieve the same results as a bird and has nither the muscle structure or heart capacity to make it work it was obvious right from the start that this could not have been real. the other thing that gave it away was the "wing" If they had tried to flap that thing at anywhere near the required speed to achieve flight it would simply have broken up, (try flapping a sheet of cardboard up and down and see how much air resistence you get from it). The "altitude" shots were probably filmed from a cherry picker hence the trye tracks as it moved across the grass ! As he seemed to be approaching the tyre marks I believe the sequence was filmed in reverse to try and fool people. A lot of the tricks used were similar to what we did at Tony Bianchi's Personal Plane Services when I worked at Booker, supplying aircraft for stuff like Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade, The 39 Steps, the live action version of Wind In The Willows, Aces High, The Blue Max etc, :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

[Andrew Godden 943]

No, nooooooo!!! Stop tormenting me you callous, cruel, dream destroyers. I am near suicidal in despair.

[ddavid 149]

O.K. - this is what happens:

1. You invent something impossible...

2. You leak a grainy, out of focus, poorly edited video to YouTube and

3. Everyone (bar Andrew and me) says "FAKE!!".

4. You admit it - thereby losing all credibility, but...

5. You carry on with your development - in absolute secret - perfect your invention - and...

... Take Over The World! Yes.

Cheers - Dai.

[Tim_A 997]

You forgot to mention Dai, that all this needs to be done from a cavern in the middle of a volcano. preferably active (although a lava lamp in the background can be used as a substitute)

[brett 2,315]

Next someone will tell me Scientology has been nothing more than a filthy, greedy, money sucking campaign and there is no actual basis to the teachings of Ron L, Hubbard.

You mean the science "fiction" writer Ron L, Hubbard that created it. No, I'm sure there's a chance that this is a real religion. Not to worry Andrew.