Peregrine clocked at 320 MPH ?

[Bullet_Jesses]

8) Couple of years ago at a California meet in Bakersfield there was a guy there, who showed some footage of his peregrines and him skydiving in Florida. The birds were clocked at around 320-325 MPH. It was a fantastic video that he showed (lots of slow mo) He did say that the full version was being sold to either the BBC or National Geographic.
Anyone know if this full version of this video/dvd is now available? Would love to get my hands on it!
Cheers Jim.C

[EddieT]

Surely you mean kilometres per hour and not miles per hour?!

[Bullet_Jesses]

8) No Eddie ! I kid you not! (they don't use kilometres here)The bird(s) were taken to 18,000 feet, the guy then throws out the bird then sky dives,he then produces the lure and the f----in thing
follows him down, it even passes him! Incrediible as it may seem.I need to see this again!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[IAmTheWeasel]

Nope, it was in MPH. I have only heard of it being clocked at 242 mph via twin radar guns at a skytrials. I have heard the 320, but I don't know if they actually proved it. I have a friend who has the video tape of the jump with his bird and it is truly amazing to see. The bird actually has trouble keeping slow enough to hold place with the skydiver. When he produces the lure the bird comes past him like he was standing still. The skydiver was in a head first dive at the time.

[Kevin Massey]

it was 240 mph.......and it left him standing........

it was on national geograpic channel before xmas

kev

thats if it was "flying with falcons"(aint 100% on what it was called)....... did it have a falcon nesstled down on his pillow?

[LeighJauncey]

It was shown on one of the digital channels I think - I've got a video of it somewhere, it's called 'Terminal Velocity' - the fastest record was mentioned at the end of the programme - 242mph was what they said - great fun to watch - creche reared peregrines living in the bedroom, the falcon catching the lure and flying home - the guy happens to have an airfield in his garden!

[GriffMJ]

Errrrr I think you might have made a bit of an error.....?

The last video I saw clocked the PERE with sky diver at just over 200mph in straight free fall..... after 3 or 4 timed attempts with a ground crew with electronic gadgets and computers. That was in the US somewhere with ipmrint pere's. (I think it was the same one as Leigh Jauncy is on about)

320mph sounds a bit far fetched to me??? Have you got the name of the video and can u buy it online?

[Kevin Massey]

It was shown on one of the digital channels I think - I've got a video of it somewhere, it's called 'Terminal Velocity' - the fastest record was mentioned at the end of the programme - 242mph was what they said - great fun to watch - creche reared peregrines living in the bedroom, the falcon catching the lure and flying home - the guy happens to have an airfield in his garden!



im sure this is the same 1 i saw..........he clocked up a few runs at it..... and yes it didnt show the 242 mph stoop but mentioned it at the end of the programme.........

kev

[ColdZero]

either way...thats chuffing fast, still the fastest animal alive at the slowest 'top speed'
sounds like a good program...i will be looking out for terminal velocity and flying with falcons

[Bullet_Jesses]

8) I might be getting old ,but i'm not quite deaf! yet! LOL Unless the guy was BS'n.The skydiver who took part in this, was in fact the world champion at around 315 mph.Even if the peregrine passed him slowly it would be approaching the 320 mph barrier.There was a mention of some other guys who had attemted a similar project but with limited success. cheers Jim.C

[IAmTheWeasel]

Just a neat fact. The fastest free fall on record was made by a Captain Joseph Kittinger. He jumped from a balloon at 102,000 ft. He reached a speed of 614 mph in the thin atmosphere. As he gradually entered the breathable air he slowed to a normal terminal velocity.

[Hawkmaster]

The terminal velocity of an object falling towards the ground is the speed at which the gravitational force pulling it downwards is equal and opposite to the atmospheric drag (also called air resistance) pushing it upwards. At this speed, the object ceases to accelerate downwards and falls at constant speed.

For example, the terminal velocity of a skydiver in a normal free fall position with a closed parachute is about 195 km/h (120 Mi/h). This speed increases to about 320 km/h (200 Mi/h) if the skydiver pulls in his limbs - see also freeflying. This is also the terminal velocity of the Peregrine Falcon diving down on its prey.

The reason objects reach a terminal velocity is because the drag force depends on the speed. At low speeds the drag is much less than the gravitational force and so the object accelerates. As it speeds up the drag increases, until eventually it equals the weight. Drag also depends on the cross-sectional area. This is why things with a large surface area such as parachutes and feathers have a lower terminal velocity than small objects like bricks and cannon balls.

Mathematically, terminal velocity is described by the equation: AHHH NEVERMIND, unless you are interested :wink:

[LanczSpringer]

Bloody hell hawkmaster that takes me back to my A-level physics!!! ;-)

[IAmTheWeasel]

Ummm....Actually, the birds shape creates a low pressure area behind the bird which enables it to dive at a faster rate as the drag(wind eddies) is pushed back past the tail of the bird so it sits in "clean air" so to speak. If you watch a plane wing in an air tunnel, you can see the pattern the smoke will take across the wing. You will also note the massive area of unstable air at the trailing edge of the wing(smoke will create swirls. This unstable area creates a cavitation in the air pressure and this equates to drag on the object. The way a peregrine holds it's wings during a dive pushes this drag area out passed the point where it has any effect on the trailing edges...ie wing tips pointed straight back provides very little trailing edge to cavitate.

[Falcons7]

What I read about was that it had been clocked at 242 mph but the boffins had calculated that with the shape,weight ,power etc. it should be capeable of over 300 mph.They also showed that the prim hunting speed was 180mph,higher and they over shot and couldn't get back on terms with the pray.The falcon used was or so it read ,trained by Tom Cade.
With the use of a gadget on the falcon it showed that at the bottom of a stoop the throw up had a g-force of 25g, food for thought when putting this ,that and the other on a falcons legs

[Bullet_Jesses]

8) During the video, a close-up revealed that Peregrine had streamlined itself so much (metamorphosis) (if that's the right word?) that it resembled a cormorant hitting the water at high speed.
The only question I would have (and this I believe, could limit the speed of the flight) is how, it could safely inhale( I know there is supposed to be some kind of baffle within it’s Nair's)
without it’s lungs actually exploding ? Jim.C

[QuickDraw]

ken franklin skydiving with falcons is on the National Geographic Channel (sky) on Sun 12th June at 1730

[Jiff]

hi guy's,
don't know or can't remember much abbout phisics,but i'm sure some of the speeds claimed are way over the top,and i'm sure terminal velocity is governed by much more than wing shape,i think the mass of an object is more critical than the shape, anyway i don't want to debate it cos i just don' know,more to the point, if you put 'terminal velocity' into you're search 'amonite films' will be dissplayed with a few shots of the guy and his bird.

[Bullet_Jesses]

8) Sorry Pal ! Newtons law states !The gravitational pull on all objects (irrespective of size) is 9.81 m/sec sq. A feather and a cannon ball dropped inside a vacuum would fall at the same speed(believe it or not).The resulting force on impact would be different(due to the greater mass of the cannon ball). Aerodynamics is the key to speed!!!!!!!!!!!! And yes! it is is physically possible for the peregrine to reach a speed of 320mph!

[Jiff]

i knew mass was mentioned somewhere...............but how does it reach 1 and a 1/2 times terminal velocity without artificial propulsion?

[Bullet_Jesses]

8) Jiff (Engineer at work) Let me explain something! The term “terminal velocity” from what I can gather, means the greatest speed that any object will max out at. Remember that someone falling from a plane (either intentionally or otherwise) would by most studies, max out at between 120mph and 130mph, that could be deemed to be the terminal velocity for that particular scenario. Take a professional skydiver with special clothing and with the ability to streamline himself, he could exceed 300mph.Given the shape of the Peregrine or most falcons for that matter, that are already by natures design streamlined so as to reduce the air friction enough to achieve what would otherwise be unachievable by any Pro-skydiver. There has to be a ceiling on it’s speed, who knows what that is ? I enjoy inventing things (remember bullet jesses) in my spare-time maybe I’ll make a mock-up of a Peregrine(feathers and all) in a stoop and drop it from 20,000 feet above the Mohave desert (where the space shuttle lands) here in California. 0 to 60 in what? LOL

[OutFlying]

what is your defination of terminal velocity, I understand it to be the point where the effect of gravity on a falling mass is counteracted by drag of the shape of the mass which is falling through the air - the shape causing resistance.

A peregrine starts the stoop by powering down with a wing beat, gaining speed, it then reduces its drag through the air by altering its wing profile. So its final speed is govern by the wing beat at the beginning, the resistance of the air and finally gravity.

OF.

ps don't know what this top speed is though.

[Bullet_Jesses]

8) Outfly ! My definition(I'm just a mech Eng remember not Aero Eng) of Terminal velocity is the same as yours ! The peregrine(s) in question did beat there wings to achieve a higher speed sooner.That means to say that even if they didn't flap vigourously at the beginning! they could still reach over 320mph it would just take longer to get to that speed. Air resistance(friction) is the key to final speed everything else is a constant. cheers jim.c

[OutFlying]

Jim,
When i started typing the reply your post wasn't present, agree with you

[Jiff]

in a vacume what would be the terminal velocity of a cannon ball

[OutFlying]

in a vacume what would be the terminal velocity of a cannon ball

that is a different question,

[OutFlying]

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/termv.html

[Bullet_Jesses]

8) Jiff ! In a vacuum both objects would have the same terminal velocity,since they would both reach the ground at the exact same time.Only the force on impact differs(mass x acceleration)What it boils down to, is shape versus air.This alone, creates a different speed for these 2 objects outside of a vacuum(reality). cheers Jim.C

[Jiff]

point i'm currious about is this, if in a vacume a perfectly cylindrical steel ball and a peregrin would have the same velocity no matter what,this is obviously due to no outside influences,then surely (to me anyway) without propulsion how can something drop as fast as a perfectly cylindrical steel ball whilst encountering all the outside influences of the atmosphere........seems odd to me :shock:

[OutFlying]

Jiff what would this velocity be, the figure of 9.81 m/s per second is an acceleration figure not the terminal velocity. Velocity is a constant speed, acceleration is the change in speed.

i.e after one second it would be travelling at a VELOCITY (speed) of 9.81 metres per second, after 2 seconds its velocity would be 19.62 meters a second.

In a vaccuum there is no resistance (air) thats why shape has no effect on speed.

[Kevin Massey]

ken franklin skydiving with falcons is on the National Geographic Channel (sky) on Sun 12th June at 1730

thanks for that bud !!!.....definatly heading for my hard drive !!!

kev

[Jiff]

ok.ok.ok. i just had a quick look at that link,i was under the impresion that terminal velocity was a maximum speed any object could ever reach in our atmosphere and i thought it was arround 200mph :roll: ,(without external assistance) so i'm more with it now, pure education this forum is...,,on anything from ferrets to phisics.

[OutFlying]

Jiff,
Cheers, my keyboard was wearing out :D with the replies.

[Bullet_Jesses]

8) Good link Outflying ! And Jiff !your right to ask questions ! That is what this forum is all about.If we all knew the right answers ? There would be no point being here. Just remember! our birds are the fastest creatures on the planet! Thats why we love them so much!!!!!! cheers Jim.C

[Kevin Massey]

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/airfri2.html


:lol:

[Bullet_Jesses]

8) Mass ! I already have this link on my desk top(forgot).I use it for thermal expansion of exhaust systems on the US navy ships i'm supposed to be working on, when I'm not BS'n on here! :lol: cheers Jim.c

[Jiff]

the faster a rabbit runs the harder my HH tries,,,must be a formula for that amongst u mathmatical boffins.

leg speed x the value of y - air drag = NAILED :lol:

[OutFlying]

y being the length of grass

[Kornie]

Bullet_jesses, maybe you can help me, I need to learn 48 individual formulas I.e. A=V-U all over t by tuesday? Any tips other then writing on my hand?

by the did you infact invent bullet jesses??

[Bullet_Jesses]

8) Dear Kornie can't help you right now ! but i've found a great website that can.
it's called www.suckmyhairyplumbs.com
And yes I did invent Bullet Jesses many years ago!

[Talon]

it was 240 mph.......and it left him standing........

it was on national geograpic channel before xmas

kev

thats if it was "flying with falcons"(aint 100% on what it was called)....... did it have a falcon nesstled down on his pillow?

this is what you mean kev

http://www3.nationalgeographic.com/animals/video/falcon_peregrine_velocity.html

[Barbary Boy]

SO! are we all agreed falcons are quite quick?

[Falconry Equipment International]

nah specially not in atail chase PMSL:yawinkle:

[Stu Bailey]

Errrrr I think you might have made a bit of an error.....?

The last video I saw clocked the PERE with sky diver at just over 200mph in straight free fall..... after 3 or 4 timed attempts with a ground crew with electronic gadgets and computers. That was in the US somewhere with ipmrint pere's. (I think it was the same one as Leigh Jauncy is on about)

320mph sounds a bit far fetched to me??? Have you got the name of the video and can u buy it online?

Agree,i think the best was204mph

[John Soulsby]

The "Flying with Falcons" guy was base jumping from cliffs in Italy about 3,000 feet straight down and he clocked 0mph - 210mph (ish) in about four seconds, the peregrines pulled about 6G more than enough to cause a human to black out. In slow motion you could see the falcons change shape as they accelerated.

Good to see.

John

[SSL]

Ken Franklin - Frightful - 242mph :supz:

Thats with American Peregrines imagine what a pure Scottish Falcon could do :supz: :heart:

Lloyd Buck and the base jumpers - poor effort :goodman:

[HawkMom]

The speed was around 242 in the National Geographic special. Ken Franklin was the falconer skydiving. I call this 'Extreme Falconry'. I have an older nature book with an anecdotal story of a a WWII pilot having his mustang pegged out in a full dive (over 300mph) and he saw a peregrine pass him.

I do agree, the peregrine is capable of over 300 mph, probably around 340, but getting it actually documented will be a challenge.

The shape of the bird, the way it can 'roll' and adjust it's body to reduce drag is one reason why they are faster than 'theory'.

Just like whales and porpises are faster than 'theory'.

In 'theory' wasps and bees are not supposed to be able to fly, but they do.

[Brian Sullivan]

I grew up flying birds with Ken Franklin. I worked with Ken on both movies we did on falcons. The National Geo movie was done in late summer of 2001. The two intermewed falcons used were two Anatum Peregrines that I bred and gave to Ken. I was there when "Frightful" made the high speed stoop of 242 mph. We used a small device called a pro-track that Skydivers use to track their height, speed of free fall and deployment of the shute. We scaled it down to about double the size of an average transmitter. After the jump the information is down loaded into a computer. Most falconers never see a falcon really stooping well because it takes the falcon a lot of practice and high heights to go into the morph shape that Ken has coined ( the Mummy shape). I hope this clears up the facts about what happen.

[HawkMom]

Welcome Brian. I just discovered this wonderful forum in November. Been on it nearly every day ever since. It is great to share and hear ideas from falconers around the world. I really like how easy it is to use. I have a PC and a MAC. It works equally well on both platforms.

[Chabich]

The "Flying with Falcons" guy was base jumping from cliffs in Italy about 3,000 feet straight down and he clocked 0mph - 210mph (ish) in about four seconds, the peregrines pulled about 6G more than enough to cause a human to black out. In slow motion you could see the falcons change shape as they accelerated.

Good to see.

John

Look here:

http://www.offthefence.com/content/programme.php?ID=368

... the film you are looking for is called 'The Falcon that Flew with Man' from adventure filmer Leo Dickinson . It won lots of prices and can be ordered here:

http://www.adventurearchive.com/data/books_videos/order.asp

I have the DVD and it is amazing stuff.

Regards,

Christian

[Brian Sullivan]

Base jumping is OK but, try free falling from 8-16,000 feet and see what the falcon can really do. This is what Ken did with several falcons over a ten year period. He also had several Falcons over a 20 year time frame that he trained to follow him all over the Sky chasing a lure behind his ultralight. It put any balloon or Kite training to shame. He would fly by at 1000 feet and then produce the lure. The falcon would be unhooded and would take off climbing to intercept him. He would then increase speed and start a hard climb. He could (tow) the falcon all over the Sky. At the end he would bring the lure in and then release a lead weighted lure that the Falcon would stoop after. She would then catch it and then glide down with this heavy lure to the roof of his house and eat the reward. She then was called to the lure. Ken is an amazing falconer and a very abstract falconer that has shown what the Peregrine is really all about. The first Movie is called "Terminal Velocity" and is shown from time to time.

[Jack]

Physics. It is not possible for a falcon to even stoop at 200 mph. Can't be done. All this is not good scientific research and is terribly flawed. One has to just use one's own common sense to realize that this is all an illusion.

Jack

[OutHawkn]

Physics. It is not possible for a falcon to even stoop at 200 mph. Can't be done. All this is not good scientific research and is terribly flawed. One has to just use one's own common sense to realize that this is all an illusion.

Jack

Ok I'll bite. Explain to me using your physics, how this isnt possible? Please use math equations to illustrate. And how ,exactly is it flawed? Or is this just Jacks law?

[Brian Sullivan]

Sorry but if you have been doing any research on speeds obtained by Sky divers then you would know the facts. The bird man suit that Sky divers use can increase the normal falling speed by an average of double.

Here is another one for you. I watched the Falcon that was used for Skydiving follow the lead lure that had been released way ahead of the falcon so it was falling at termianl velocity. When the lure hit the ground the falcon was only several meters behind the lure. She was able to throw her wings open and stopped in mid air! What kind of G force do you think she pulled at that point? That might of have not been good science but, it was fun to watch!

I think a falcon is a little more streamlined then a man in a monkey suit!:rolleyes:

[Leo 1]

8) Couple of years ago at a California meet in Bakersfield there was a guy there, who showed some footage of his peregrines and him skydiving in Florida. The birds were clocked at around 320-325 MPH. It was a fantastic video that he showed (lots of slow mo) He did say that the full version was being sold to either the BBC or National Geographic.
Anyone know if this full version of this video/dvd is now available? Would love to get my hands on it!
Cheers Jim.C

ye i whont the vid/dvd to i have herd of it be for but carnt get a hold of it if any one nose whear i can get it plz pm me to let me no

[ScotFalconer]

it was called "flying with falcons" i have it recorded,excellent footage,it was on some sattelite channel.

[Jack]

Not being in a vacum, you are limited by air drag. You will fall faster until you reach that point to where wind resistance equals. That will vary, so numbers are not important here. Remember, we are not in a vacum. A falcon, or just about any bird for that matter, can actually change it's form by raising out feathers or drawing them in. It is sort of like pinching a watermellon seed. As the air rushes over the birds form it follows the conture and as it gets smaller and straighter toward the back of the bird it actually pushes the bird into the wind. But, that only works to a small extent as eventually the wind resistance equals the gravitational pull on the bird. A human can do sort of the same things to a much smaller extent, but wind restitance is always going to win out. On a high pressure day you will not fall quite as fast as a low pressure day. Make any sense. The terminal velocity of a falling man will vary little with a greater sized man simply because he has more planing surface to contend with.
While falling from the sky, the skydiver eventually reaches his own terminal velocity. It will not vary greatly from that of the falcon except that the falcon itself can alter it's form and achieve a little more drop speed. When the lure was released the diver broke his own speed and eventually opened the parachute. The lure only continued down at the same rate of speed actually. Probably just around 130 mph really. When you look at a falcons wings you will have to wonder about tensil strength. You can snap a falcons wing bones quite easily, so when you start talking about a lot of G forces you are talking broken wings. They actually do not pull that many G's. The entire body and wings are sliding on air. Sort of like sleding. The body of the falcon is in forward motion as it slided down the air. It will skid out when it gets too steep an arc. They cut a much wider angle than you realize, and if you watch real closely you will see that they use their wrists a lot while doing this. If the falcon should pop it's wings open suddenly the drag would injure the birds wings. Here is something I bet you didn't know. A birds tail is not used in guidance. It is strictly a planing surface. It serves as additional planing surface when soaring, when it is trying to gain air from the ground, and most especially when it brakes. All manuevering is done strictly with the wrists of the wings. If there is anything about a hawk or falcon you need to know, I would be happy to explain it to you.

Jack

[OutHawkn]

Not being in a vacum, you are limited by air drag. You will fall faster until you reach that point to where wind resistance equals. That will vary, so numbers are not important here. Remember, we are not in a vacum. A falcon, or just about any bird for that matter, can actually change it's form by raising out feathers or drawing them in. It is sort of like pinching a watermellon seed. As the air rushes over the birds form it follows the conture and as it gets smaller and straighter toward the back of the bird it actually pushes the bird into the wind. But, that only works to a small extent as eventually the wind resistance equals the gravitational pull on the bird. A human can do sort of the same things to a much smaller extent, but wind restitance is always going to win out. On a high pressure day you will not fall quite as fast as a low pressure day. Make any sense. The terminal velocity of a falling man will vary little with a greater sized man simply because he has more planing surface to contend with.
While falling from the sky, the skydiver eventually reaches his own terminal velocity. It will not vary greatly from that of the falcon except that the falcon itself can alter it's form and achieve a little more drop speed. When the lure was released the diver broke his own speed and eventually opened the parachute. The lure only continued down at the same rate of speed actually. Probably just around 130 mph really. When you look at a falcons wings you will have to wonder about tensil strength. You can snap a falcons wing bones quite easily, so when you start talking about a lot of G forces you are talking broken wings. They actually do not pull that many G's. The entire body and wings are sliding on air. Sort of like sleding. The body of the falcon is in forward motion as it slided down the air. It will skid out when it gets too steep an arc. They cut a much wider angle than you realize, and if you watch real closely you will see that they use their wrists a lot while doing this. If the falcon should pop it's wings open suddenly the drag would injure the birds wings. Here is something I bet you didn't know. A birds tail is not used in guidance. It is strictly a planing surface. It serves as additional planing surface when soaring, when it is trying to gain air from the ground, and most especially when it brakes. All manuevering is done strictly with the wrists of the wings. If there is anything about a hawk or falcon you need to know, I would be happy to explain it to you.

Jack

Well.. I certainly feel better now. And to think I trusted National Geographic and science. When I could of just asked Jack. New reality show? The World According To JacK

[Brian Sullivan]

Now numbers are no longer important in your World. I suggest you do some real research instead of making it up as you go.

I am sorry to say many Falconers suffer from a disorder called "sincere delusion". These Falconers are very hard to communicate with when they live in a false reality and don't see the facts in front of them. In their World, Grey Gyrfalcons become black, A 200 ft. pitch becomes a 1000 feet, and Peregrines can't stoop very fast. It is kind of like the old fishing story of the big one that got away. After a while it just :grin: gets hard to listen to them.

[GregMik]

Now numbers are no longer important in your World. I suggest you do some real research instead of making it up as you go.

I am sorry to say many Falconers suffer from a disorder called "sincere delusion". These Falconers are very hard to communicate with when they live in a false reality and don't see the facts in front of them. In their World, Grey Gyrfalcons become black, A 200 ft. pitch becomes a 1000 feet, and Peregrines can't stoop very fast. It is kind of like the old fishing story of the big one that got away. After a while it just :grin: gets hard to listen to them.

Sorry...But in Jacks world a 1000ft pitch is 200ft....Get it right!

Greg

[Jack]

you said it, not me. The average falconer is unable to judge distance, especially straight up. I have seen my falcons fly as high as any falcon you have ever seen, and yet I am not disallusioned in believing they are 1200 feet up in the air. I am a realist. I know what 1200 feet looks like. And I know what 2000 feet looks like. And when you have a falcon barely pushing 600 feet it is easy to exagerate it into 1200 feet. I have no illusions about it and I do not live in some world of my own. I am just not foolish enough to give super abilities to mere birds. Striking an object while traveling at such speeds you present would kill the falcon. And 6 G forces would likely make them suffer wing fractures if not breaks. That is not a great deal as the bird only weighs something like 2 pounds, but that much weight on the wings could injure them. You have to stop and think about this stuff before you go talking it. Knocking me is not going to make it real either. Remember Karl? He thinks a peregrine can fly at 500 mph. Do you think they can fly that fast? As for the publications making it fact, you have to realize that they are writing nothing more than what some fool tells them. And that is not always the facts. None of those guys were trained scientists and none of this so called research was done in a scientific and controled manner. And I could not care any less what you might think of me, you are still wrong. The laws of physics are not forgiven for the peregrine. Sorry.

Jack

[GregMik]

Ok Jack......

Here is a good one for you.....

http://webzoom.freewebs.com/gregmik/IFF/kite.JPG

I know it is ruff....there is lengths....A, B, C, and D.....


If D is 1500ft minus 50ft....The length of D has a stretch of 10%

B is 118.....

So known lengths are D and B

"A" can be washed as the stretch counter-acts the curve for wind. And the bait is hanging 6 feet down.

So what is "C"?



I have taken the measurement of B about 15 times.....out of about 60 times so far. Am I doing something wrong? If I am point it out to me.


So now...Tell me I don't know what high a falcon looks. I know guys that do this for a couple months before they start hunting, and have for yrs. You are now going to tell them that they(and me) are wrong because you know how high the radio tower you look at is?

Can you even give me an answer for C? Math doesn't lie Jack.....

Greg

[Brian Sullivan]

No, you said it; I know the height of my falcon from experience! How do you really know this if you are not using a rangefinder and standing right below your falcon? I will explain to you a couple of ways you would really know what the height of your Falcon is. One is if you have a balloon up 1010 feet and you have a lure hanging at 10 feet below the balloon and there is no wind and your Falcon takes the lure then you would now what that hieght looks like. This is a very simple experiment. There is many factors when a person is making an observation about hieght or any other thing to do with falcons. (Some people claim they also see UFO's).
Another way to know very high hieghts with a falcon is to have a person like Ken flying his 172 and having his Peregrine chasing right behind him. At this point he radio's to me and tell's me his elavation. This happen many times. I was able to see his Peregrines on some day at 6-8000 feet following behind the plane and other days it was hard to see them straight up at 2,300. feet. This was done with instrutments that have very little margin of error. My falcons fly high but not even close to these extreme hieghts. It was a real eye opener to watch what he was doing with his Falcons.

You should not be jealous of what Ken was able to do with his Falcons. We are just Earth bound humans trying to fly like a hummingbirds which they are also just birds but, seem to be very complex in thier flight ablities.:o

[Sokoly]

8) Jiff (Engineer at work) Let me explain something! The term “terminal velocity” from what I can gather, means the greatest speed that any object will max out at. Remember that someone falling from a plane (either intentionally or otherwise) would by most studies, max out at between 120mph and 130mph, that could be deemed to be the terminal velocity for that particular scenario. Take a professional skydiver with special clothing and with the ability to streamline himself, he could exceed 300mph.Given the shape of the Peregrine or most falcons for that matter, that are already by natures design streamlined so as to reduce the air friction enough to achieve what would otherwise be unachievable by any Pro-skydiver. There has to be a ceiling on it’s speed, who knows what that is ? I enjoy inventing things (remember bullet jesses) in my spare-time maybe I’ll make a mock-up of a Peregrine(feathers and all) in a stoop and drop it from 20,000 feet above the Mohave desert (where the space shuttle lands) here in California. 0 to 60 in what? LOL


If anybody folling from a plane would reach the max of 120mph, than the hole storry of female faster then tiercel (because of the weight) go's down the drain).

[Falconry Equipment International]

Please excuse me , I have not read this thread through and only just noticed the title and couldn't help thinking 320 in KPH is very close to 200 mph ? just wondered:yawinkle: :rolleyes:

[BestBeagler]

Can I ask why everyone thinks this is so interesting? When you lonwingers are in the field and after witnessing a stoop do you argue back and forth wondering how fast it was? Or, do you say "man that was cool." It must be that the molt is on, that would explain a lot. I witness this time and time again on all forums and group’s discussions start to get frivolous. You don't see dirt hawkers arguing how many MPH their broadwings are flying do you? I wonder why :lol: ? My opinion on the subject is who cares. They fast enough to get the job done. As I have said before there are a lot of variables to deal with here. Isaac

[OutHawkn]

Jack

Endulge me for a moment please. Assuming your are correct how could it be proven one way or another? We cant use the common sense theory because we disagree. Physics calculations are out. So discribe to me if you would be so kind, as to exactly what kind of experiment would solve it to your satisfaction?I'm a big enough person to admit when I'm wrong and I trust you are the same. So lets put an end to. What do you say?

[OutHawkn]

Can I ask why everyone thinks this is so interesting? When you lonwingers are in the field and after witnessing a stoop do you argue back and forth wondering how fast it was? Or, do you say "man that was cool." It must be that the molt is on, that would explain a lot. I witness this time and time again on all forums and group’s discussions start to get frivolous. You don't see dirt hawkers arguing how many MPH their broadwings are flying do you? I wonder why :lol: ? My opinion on the subject is who cares. They fast enough to get the job done. As I have said before there are a lot of variables to deal with here. Isaac

Sure you can ask. "Its a matter of principal." And you are most certainly intitled to your opinion. But if I come on here and tell you that you are full of sh**.I presume it would offend you. This is whats happening here. Its not just this thread. Its an accumulation of several. The straw that broke the camels back so to say.You have to look at all posts to get the picture.
Let me ask you BestBeagler: Does a Raptor in flight use its tail as a means to control direction? (like a rudder)

[BestBeagler]

Sure you can ask. "Its a matter of principal." And you are most certainly intitled to your opinion. But if I come on here and tell you that you are full of sh**.I presume it would offend you. This is whats happening here. Its not just this thread. Its an accumulation of several. The straw that broke the camels back so to say.You have to look at all posts to get the picture. Let me ask you BestBeagler: Does a Raptor in flight use its tail as a means to control direction? (like a rudder)

Yes, a raptor uses its tail as a means to control direction. Accipiters have a long tail, which aids in maneuverability during pursuit flights through woods. I have a feeling I am being set up :lol: . It was too easy of a question. Now if you say "no" and say "they only use it for stopping." I would find it hard to believe. Isaac

[OutHawkn]

Yes, a raptor uses its tail as a means to control direction. Accipiters have a long tail, which aids in maneuverability during pursuit flights through woods. I have a feeling I am being set up :lol: . It was too easy of a question. Now if you say "no" and say "they only use it for stopping." I would find it hard to believe. Isaac


What if I tell you that you are wrong. A raptor doesnt use his tail for "steering" and that you sir are a fool for having believed this? It simply isnt true. And frankly you need to come up to my level of expertise. I will teach you whats true.

[BestBeagler]

What if I tell you that you are wrong. A raptor doesnt use his tail for "steering" and that you sir are a fool for having believed this? It simply isnt true. And frankly you need to come up to my level of expertise. I will teach you whats true.

:axe: :rip: :ctf: I think you get my point. No I am just kidding. I would not care. As I know I am right and that you are actually full of sh**. Which I don't believe you are. So all is good, but do what you feel like you have to do. It is not my place to tell anyone to shut up. If I was a moderator though, I think I would delete all these "how fast does a peregrine stoop" threads, and that is why I will never be a moderator :D . Isaac

[OutHawkn]

:axe: :rip: :ctf: I think you get my point. No I am just kidding. I would not care. As I know I am right and that you are actually full of sh**. Which I don't believe you are. So all is good, but do what you feel like you have to do. It is not my place to tell anyone to shut up. If I was a moderator though, I think I would delete all these "how fast does a peregrine stoop" threads, and that is why I will never be a moderator :D . Isaac

Isaac.. I sincerely apologize for ruffling your feathers. You were asking why its so aggrevating to us longwingers about the speed of a peregrine. But when I challenged your knowlegde and experience on a shortwing, it seemed to get your goat. Actually Jack made that statement about hawks not using their tail feathers for steering, and that he knows more about physics or common sense than any of us. He also has flown more passage birds than anyone else living or dead. So if you want to know the truth, ask him.

Some of these comments were made in other threads, and other places.

So again I appologize for ticking you off, but all those things Jack wrote. And your right I'll now leave this subject alone.

[Chabich]

enough to give super abilities to mere birds. Striking an object while traveling at such speeds you present would kill the falcon. And 6 G forces would likely make them suffer wing fractures if not breaks. That is not a great deal as the bird only weighs something like 2 pounds, but that much weight on the wings

Jack


... they fit a G-Meter on the peregrine in the Leo Dickinson documentary. The G-Meter showed G forces in excess of 5 or 6 Gs after the stoops.
So either the G meter or you have the truth....

:-)

+chh

[GregMik]

Ok Jack......

Here is a good one for you.....

http://webzoom.freewebs.com/gregmik/IFF/kite.JPG

I know it is ruff....there is lengths....A, B, C, and D.....


If D is 1500ft minus 50ft....The length of D has a stretch of 10%

B is 118.....

So known lengths are D and B

"A" can be washed as the stretch counter-acts the curve for wind. And the bait is hanging 6 feet down.

So what is "C"?



I have taken the measurement of B about 15 times.....out of about 60 times so far. Am I doing something wrong? If I am point it out to me.


So now...Tell me I don't know what high a falcon looks. I know guys that do this for a couple months before they start hunting, and have for yrs. You are now going to tell them that they(and me) are wrong because you know how high the radio tower you look at is?

Can you even give me an answer for C? Math doesn't lie Jack.....

Greg

So Jack....Are you gonna answer?

Greg

[Jack]

Firstly, let me say that a great deal of the bragging I am doing is just to get the sissies going. Getting their panties in a wad. And some of them are so easy I am almost losing interest. Now, as to your question Greg. Yes, you are doing something wrong. To start with let me say that we are dealing with variables here and nothing can be chipped into stone. Your drawing is way out of line. When doing this sort of stuff you need paper that is gridded and a compass and protractor. A good line guage is also a must. No one flys a kite at 1500 feet and only 180 feet off dead vertical. No one. Most people rig their kites differently to begin with. And most people are not expert in flying them. I play with kites and love them. Have for many years. Not for this sort of thing, but simply for fun. Now, if you take a kite with 1500 feet of 50 lb nylon line on it, you do not get a full 10% of stretch. Twisted line will give you about 2%, and braided will give you about 3%. I have tested this several times and got these amounts of stretch on a 200 feet line before it broke. In both kinds of line. So you can only add about 30 feet to this figure of 1500 feet. If we could fly a kite dead vertical we could get 1500 feet with no stretch, but that is not going to happen, and most likely we will get flight at about between 1 and 2 oclock. The line is never level straight either. You will have arc in the line, depending on the way the kite is rigged and the amount of wind blowing. Say you use the recommended angle to rig the kite and the wind is blowing about 6 to 8 mph. You will have a rather large arc which is going to tie up 15 to 20 % if your 1530 feet of line. And that is really stretching it. Now, at 1 oclock you can hope for around 1300 feet if the line could hold level, and at 2 oclock you will see around 1125 feet. Factor in the arc and that changes quickly. A straight line would only give you about 850 feet, and with the arc factor you would only see around 700 feet. And at 1 oclock, the kite will be over 600 feet down wind of dead vertical. That is a great deal to consider.
And Brian, this will also apply to a balloon. Now if the wind is dead the balloon can rise vertical. I have only seen maybe 2 days like this in my entire life though. Now, as to towers of known height, we have one that is 539 feet from ground to tip of the little antenna on top, and when you see a RT soaring out there a few hundred feet off the tower you can get some pretty good prospectives concerning pitch. It is just a matter of common sense. I am not saying you guys don't have any, just saying you should use it now and then.
Now, about the birds tail. The only muscles attached to the tail are at the sides and bottom. The bird can flex downward to help hold it stable, and it can pull side to side to open it wide. The long tail of an accipiter is to make up for lack of wing surface. Short wings you know. This is why most eagles and vultures have short tails. They already have enough wing. It is a matter of having sufficient planing surface. They can use the tail to give added surface in order to gain needed lift. once in flight they fold it tight to prevent drag. To stop they will flare it with the wings in a braking fashion. It can also be used as a planing surface with turning. They are actually sledding on the air you know. But all maneuveing is strictly done by the use of the birds wrists. They can use them like Flaps or ailerons. However you spell that.
Guys, when you see something that is wrong what do you do. Let it go, or do someone a favor and explain that they are wrong? There is no polite way of telling some one that they are on the wrong trail. No need to get tight about it.
Oh, and the little G meter thingy. It actually registered a full 25 G forces. That should throw up red flags instantly, but rather than make people question it, they took it and ran with it. Do you realize just how fast you would have to travel to be able to pull 25 G's? And just how much stress that would put on the peregrines wings? The thing was attached to the bird foot. On striking at the lure at aproximately 65 or 70 mph the meter was sort of slung so to speak and that registered the G's. You can tie it on the end of a piece of string and swing it around your head and without moving from that spot you could max it out. Hey, Nolen Ryan's curve ball didn't pull that many G's. Tie one on someones wrist and start a fist fight with him and see how many G's he can put on it. OK, class is over. For now. I am sure someone is going to come up with what they feel is a good arguement. So lets hear it.


Jack

[GyrXPeales]

Ok Jack, you've conveniently ignored the altimeter readings from the ultralight aircraft, as well as field observations from Brian Sullivan for goodness sake Jack. Look wind conditions are far different for the west coast boys than they are for you and me here in Texas and Oklahoma. I only know Brian by reputation but it's a fine one. A lot of the theories we use for kiting in my part of the country were taken from another west coast boy, Dave Cherry. If you've never been to a place like Winchester California and watched a bird fly to a balloon, you need to. You'll find ideal ballooning conditions exist a bit more that 2 days in a lifetime.
I'll sure admit that some people exaggerate when it comes to how high their birds fly no doubt about it. But Jack, I fly with a good bunch of grouse hawkers up here in NE Oklahoma. They'll usually run out 2000'-2500' of line when kiting. I would think if the wind were blowing with enough force to put a bow in the line that would bring it down to 600' the spar on the kite would have broken long before it came down that far.
As far as altitude while gamehawking, I've flown with these same guys since the 60's, if I had a dollar for every time I had to pull out the 10X's and look straight frickin up to see a bird I'd have a pretty good bankroll. How high is that, I really don't know, but if it takes binoculars to see them they are damn well high enough, and certainly more than 600'.
Nobody doubts your experience, a lot of what you say especially about flying shortwings in the south is spot on and you deserve credit for that.
I think where the rub comes is that I have never once heard you give credit to anyone else for their ideas or experiences. There are people on this thread that have more experience with longwings than you will ever have, they deserve credit for that Jack, they've paid their dues just like you over many long years, and they deserve to be heard.
I've said it before, you need to make some room for other peoples ideas and experiences, they are just a valid as yours, and hey you might learn something in the bargin.
Best Regards,
Jeff

[Brian Sullivan]

Your question if I think Peregrines can go 500mph. We'll I would never think that unless I had done multiable testing and found that to be true. We really did not know what speeds they were traveling until Ken started Skydiving with them. He was able to get some evidence of their capable stooping speeds. Just like if you asked me how high my Peregrine flew today I would reply if you want me to guess I could give you a rough idea.

This will be my last reply to you. I really don't know you Jack but, I'll bet you are one of those guys thats been doing Falconry; lets say for about 40+ years and you keep making the same mistsakes over and over again. These guys THINK they know it all because they had one good bird years ago. I hate to tell you the truth, it was the bird. You guys keep flying ducks year after year over the same little stock ponds and think they are seeing all. The only bird you can get to go up is a male and if doesn't it is the birds fault. I've seen it over and over. Your Falconry just suffers from your "Sincere delusion" a common American Falconer disorder and if anybody suggest anything you take it personal and always in a negative way.

Guys like you just let their ego's get in the way and you won't improve on anything. I know your types so well. As far as your Kite and balloon theories you should keep your balloons for parties and kites for the beach. Have you ever thought about Golf? After all they are just mere birds. Do yourself a favor and just once try to think outside of the Box. It will be OK and you might just learn something positive.

You remind me one of the College Professors I had when he was lecturing he would often state that "things were highly variable" he did this when he lost his train of thought. Everybody knew at that point to quit taking notes. You might get some respect around here if you gave us good hard facts and real knowledge instead of strange theories and delusion.

[MitchellBrad]

Your question if I think Peregrines can go 500mph. We'll I would never think that unless I had done multiable testing and found that to be true. We really did not know what speeds they were traveling until Ken started Skydiving with them. He was able to get some evidence of their capable stooping speeds. Just like if you asked me how high my Peregrine flew today I would reply if you want me to guess I could give you a rough idea.

This will be my last reply to you. I really don't know you Jack but, I'll bet you are one of those guys thats been doing Falconry; lets say for about 40+ years and you keep making the same mistsakes over and over again. These guys THINK they know it all because they had one good bird years ago. I hate to tell you the truth, it was the bird. You guys keep flying ducks year after year over the same little stock ponds and think they are seeing all. The only bird you can get to go up is a male and if doesn't it is the birds fault. I've seen it over and over. Your Falconry just suffers from your "Sincere delusion" a common American Falconer disorder and if anybody suggest anything you take it personal and always in a negative way.

Guys like you just let their ego's get in the way and you won't improve on anything. I know your types so well. As far as your Kite and balloon theories you should keep your balloons for parties and kites for the beach. Have you ever thought about Golf? After all they are just mere birds. Do yourself a favor and just once try to think outside of the Box. It will be OK and you might just learn something positive.

You remind me one of the College Professors I had when he was lecturing he would often state that "things were highly variable" he did this when he lost his train of thought. Everybody knew at that point to quit taking notes. You might get some respect around here if you gave us good hard facts and real knowledge instead of strange theories and delusion.

Clancy,

Your doing fine. No one should argue with you nor your falconry. Well, maybe one or two but they don't count. Keep pumping out the posts. I enjoy reading them. Also if anyone here questions Clancy's bird I must say I've had one and not only was she a great gamehawk she was a great breeder. The best grousehawk I've had was her daughter. Killed 50% of the sharptails she put a foot on. The bird that was 4th in the sky trials this year was a granddaughter. That speaks a lot for your birds.

Brad

[Ostringer]

what a compleat load d of rubbish must be an april fools joke if it came down at that kind of speed woulnd have a feather on its body yeah the impact would kill its target but the falcon would be dead too

[Falconry Equipment International]

Your question if I think Peregrines can go 500mph. We'll I would never think that unless I had done multiable testing and found that to be true. We really did not know what speeds they were traveling until Ken started Skydiving with them. He was able to get some evidence of their capable stooping speeds. Just like if you asked me how high my Peregrine flew today I would reply if you want me to guess I could give you a rough idea.

This will be my last reply to you. I really don't know you Jack but, I'll bet you are one of those guys thats been doing Falconry; lets say for about 40+ years and you keep making the same mistsakes over and over again. These guys THINK they know it all because they had one good bird years ago. I hate to tell you the truth, it was the bird. You guys keep flying ducks year after year over the same little stock ponds and think they are seeing all. The only bird you can get to go up is a male and if doesn't it is the birds fault. I've seen it over and over. Your Falconry just suffers from your "Sincere delusion" a common American Falconer disorder and if anybody suggest anything you take it personal and always in a negative way.

Guys like you just let their ego's get in the way and you won't improve on anything. I know your types so well. As far as your Kite and balloon theories you should keep your balloons for parties and kites for the beach. Have you ever thought about Golf? After all they are just mere birds. Do yourself a favor and just once try to think outside of the Box. It will be OK and you might just learn something positive.

You remind me one of the College Professors I had when he was lecturing he would often state that "things were highly variable" he did this when he lost his train of thought. Everybody knew at that point to quit taking notes. You might get some respect around here if you gave us good hard facts and real knowledge instead of strange theories and delusion.

Brian . I am embarrased to say I do not know you, and have not heard of your name. I found the intial comment that you made re 500mph ( I think this may be possible in thisn air 15,000' + but will a falcon cope with such altitude? asking a question here, not your expertise) fanciful to say the least , but on continuing to read... so many sentiments that I salute, . I Like waht you say ( I use the kite and am fairly well known for it on the european side ofthe pond) but to me what is vital ( and yes I am obsessed with pitch , clippy wing beats , ie having a falcon mounting like a tiercel, making what I have called eye wrenching pitches and then either /and/or vertical ore ever chancellering ~ known in the US as Corkscrew Stoops:roll: :lol:) Biran like you I am passionate,most of us can see idiots or posseurs. one last thing and sorry to go x threads, my goodness what a fine dark falcon that is , did you fly her in a waiting on flight ? if so what weight?? alll the very best

[OutHawkn]

Brian . I am embarrased to say I do not know you, and have not heard of your name. I found the intial comment that you made re 500mph ( I think this may be possible in thisn air 15,000' + but will a falcon cope with such altitude? asking a question here, not your expertise) fanciful to say the least , but on continuing to read... so many sentiments that I salute, . I Like waht you say ( I use the kite and am fairly well known for it on the european side ofthe pond) but to me what is vital ( and yes I am obsessed with pitch , clippy wing beats , ie having a falcon mounting like a tiercel, making what I have called eye wrenching pitches and then either /and/or vertical ore ever chancellering ~ known in the US as Corkscrew Stoops:roll: :lol:) Biran like you I am passionate,most of us can see idiots or posseurs. one last thing and sorry to go x threads, my goodness what a fine dark falcon that is , did you fly her in a waiting on flight ? if so what weight?? alll the very best

I dont know Brian either except I have spoke to him on the telephone a time or two. But here in the USA he is considered by most to be a fine falconer and falcon breeder. I would not question his experience or judgement unless i was prepared to prove it. ( other than talk) His website is Sullivan Mews. Hope you dont mind Brian. As for Jack I've never heard "of" Jack except "from" Jack.

[Falconry Equipment International]

I dont know Brian either except I have spoke to him on the telephone a time or two. But here in the USA he is considered by most to be a fine falconer and falcon breeder. I would not question his experience or judgement unless i was prepared to prove it. ( other than talk) His website is Sullivan Mews. Hope you dont mind Brian. As for Jack I've never heard "of" Jack except "from" Jack.

Hi OutHawkn/ Bill , You only have to speak to brad to find out what sort of a person or wool I am :roll: :lol: , & if Brad respects the chap tehn that is fine byt me :D , hwoever I refuse to comment re Jack:roll: .... HTH

[BestBeagler]

But all maneuveing is strictly done by the use of the birds wrists.

Jack:
Now this I have hard time believing. I am not prepared to argue with you why but I have a hard time believing it all the same. So how many MPH are you guys arguing about? I have not followed this thread as closely as I should have. Isaac

[BestBeagler]

Never mind I answered my own question. One side says 320mph the other side says not even 200mph. I don't know enough to know the answer. But I must say both sides produce a very sound argument. I believe it was Jack that said that if a bird was traveling 200mph plus and it hit the quarry that it would indeed hurt the falcon rather badly. This is very convincing to me any way. If I stuck my hand out of a car window that was traveling 200 mph and hit a bird with my hand I would indeed think that I would hurt my hand rather badly. Then again I don't know what to believe on the subject of how hard a bird hits its quarry. So, I leave it to the experts. Isaac

[Jack]

Issac, yes, it is true that birds use their wrists in changing directions. Flight in birds is a great deal different from that of airplanes. The bird can use it's entire body to fly with. It can actually change shapes to force itself faster than what would be it's terminal volocity.

As for this thread, I am done. I have given my best logic, but when I start getting childish banter in return, I am out of here. Don't feel bad that you don't know me. I have never heard of most of you either. With the exception of Greg, and I have known him since well before he trapped his very first hawk. He may not want to admit it here, but he drew on my experience back in those days, and now he feels that he needs to correct me. That is ok though. It will not hare lip me. You guys can talk all the bull you want to, but we have some of the best falconry in the world right here in Texas. BTW, did anyone even take the time to read my last post?

Jack

[GregMik]

Issac, yes, it is true that birds use their wrists in changing directions. Flight in birds is a great deal different from that of airplanes. The bird can use it's entire body to fly with. It can actually change shapes to force itself faster than what would be it's terminal volocity.

As for this thread, I am done. I have given my best logic, but when I start getting childish banter in return, I am out of here. Don't feel bad that you don't know me. I have never heard of most of you either. With the exception of Greg, and I have known him since well before he trapped his very first hawk. He may not want to admit it here, but he drew on my experience back in those days, and now he feels that he needs to correct me. That is ok though. It will not hare lip me. You guys can talk all the bull you want to, but we have some of the best falconry in the world right here in Texas. BTW, did anyone even take the time to read my last post?

Jack

Yes Jack, I used to take your advice. 10 yrs ago you were not nearly so arrogant or pig headed. Your ideas on speed height and bird anatomy do not stand up to logic or common sense. Not only will you not step back from your position you pigheaded plow on no matter what anybody tries to tell you. All the evidence in the world would never change your mind.:rolleyes:

That is why ppl attack you all the time. Some of the advice you give, especially on weight when you give specific weights over the net without ever seeing a bird is not common sense, and you cannot even see that. Your arrogance has gotten the best of you Jack....

Greg

[CloudBase1664]

what a compleat load d of rubbish must be an april fools joke if it came down at that kind of speed woulnd have a feather on its body yeah the impact would kill its target but the falcon would be dead too

Sorry but we are not talking about at what speed they hit their 'target'? but what speed they are capable of.Perhaps you agree with Jack their top speed is 150 ft per 5 second,as someone pointed out, slightly slower than a decent 100 meter runner .
Dave

[MitchellBrad]

Sorry but we are not talking about at what speed they hit their 'target'? but what speed they are capable of.Perhaps you agree with Jack their top speed is 150 ft per 5 second,as someone pointed out, slightly slower than a decent 100 meter runner .
Dave

Right on Dave. I think this thread has gotten a little goofy with some of the comments. Yours, hopefully, brought it back into prospective.

[DirtHawker]

All manuevering is done strictly with the wrists of the wings.

Really? Let's test this theory. Next season you should cut off your goshawk's tail and see how well it maneuvers.

[Chabich]

Oh, and the little G meter thingy. It actually registered a full 25 G forces. That should throw up red flags instantly, but rather than make people question it, they took it and ran with it. Do you realize just how fast you would have to travel to be able to pull 25 G's? And just how much stress that would put on the peregrines wings? The thing was attached to the bird foot. On striking at the lure at aproximately 65 or 70 mph the meter was sort of slung so to speak and that registered the G's. You can tie it on the end of a piece of string and swing it around your head and without moving from that spot you could max it out. Hey, Nolen Ryan's curve ball didn't pull that many G's. Tie one on someones wrist and start a fist fight with him and see how many G's he can put on it. OK, class is over. For now. I am sure someone is going to come up with what they feel is a good arguement. So lets hear it.
Jack

... sorry Sir, I would normally not answer to this increasingly pathetic thread, but since I brought up the G-Meter here, I feel I have to point out to the facts:

I had a quick look at the Leo Dickinson film again and the G-Meter was first tested by being attached onto a motorbike whose driver pulled off some 0.9 G's which equals a 0-60mph acceleration in roughly 3 seconds. The same (i.e. identical) G-Meter was then attached to the peregrine via _backmount_. The falcon later pulled off an acceleration of 6Gs (not 25 as you mentioned), which accounted for an acceleration of 0-200mph in about 2 seconds. Since the film speed is a know value (frame per seconds) and the distance between bird-release point and lure-hit point are also known (being a rather static cliff in the Dolomites), it was also quite easy to counterproof the G-Meter reading in the studio afterwards.

So whether you like it or not (or accept it or not), the 6Gs and the 200mph are objectively and scientifically provable and no myth or opinion.

On a more personal note, you could probably revert part of your face loss, if you would at least admit to the facts, rather than sinking yourself deeper into a ridiculous pond of unqualified statements.

Regards,

Christian


PS: You don't have Dolomites in Texas as far as I know, so just for your information, they are a mountain range in the Southern Alps.

[Brian Sullivan]

OK, check it out at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ukf2vntU44 and see the real story. The guy drinking the beer in the white tee is me.:supz:

[Talon]

i carnt find it .???

[Ninja-Jon]

The video you have requested is not available.

If you have recently uploaded this video, you may need to wait a few minutes for the video to process. This is the message i get....

[Brian Sullivan]

Sorry,:oops: try this I think I posted it wrong? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ukf2vntU44

[OutFlying]

Stunning footage of a stoop.