Aside from all the physics mumbo jumbo, why would you want to subject yourself to a 10ft drop to flat?
The faster, the smoother the landing?
- Thread starter adr3naline fix
- Start date
Jeremy is correct. Drops to Flat at the mall are no longer in the same realm as normal physics. Allow me to elaborate on the "Ghey Theorem". We can extrapolate from the described maneuver thatJeremy R said:
a.) The rider is dropping to flat, an action that, under scrutiny, clearly requires little skill or finesse to execute. This is something our younger generation may refer to as "lame" or "gay".
b.) The rider is performing this action at "The Mall", a location that is a high traffic area rich with bystanders whose untrained eyes may not be able to understand the simplicity of the drop to flat action and thereby may be impressed by it. This is clearly a poser move, something that could also be referred to by our younger generation as "gay"
Now, each one of these actions, if viewed separately can be dismissed as accidental or isolated acts of gayness, something that could accidently happen to even the straightest of dudes from time to time. However, when viewed together it becomes clear that there may be something more going on. What we have here is a rider who is "gay" and anyone who has seen a 200+ lb gay man walking down the street can already see where I am going with this.
Our rider is so Light In The Loafers that any force of gravity is instantly canceled out and the rider lands perfectly with no stress whatsoever placed on his bike.
This is also why you may see many "gay" riders on "gay" bikes. The structural integrity of the frame no longer matters since there is no stress placed on the frame doing such drops.
yes, I AM bored in class.
Extra points if the steep rocky landing is an UPHILL one.dhbuilder said:
Acceleration due to gravity is a constant. The earth pulls everything toward its center with the same force.
The only way to get around this is to carry enough horizontal velocity so the curvature of the earth drops away at the same rate you're falling toward the center of it - then you're in orbit.
The only way to get around this is to carry enough horizontal velocity so the curvature of the earth drops away at the same rate you're falling toward the center of it - then you're in orbit.
Nope, I build reverse transitions on all my drops. Down slopes are for sissies.dhbuilder said:
no. simple physics sez 10 feet = 10 feet. ture you are coming in at a shallower angle, but split your speed into forward and downward components. the downward determines how hard the landing is, and the downward velocity that you gain dropping 10 is the same as what you gain dropping 10 feet, regardless of you forward speed.Changleen said:
wow, such poor physics in here.
1) vertical velocity will be the same, regardless of horizontal velocity.
2) the ground will always exert a normal force that's perpendicular to its surface, that is, straight up if a flat landing.
3) from 1 and 2 we can see that the force the rider will feel upon landing will be THE SAME, independent of horizontal velocity.
1) vertical velocity will be the same, regardless of horizontal velocity.
2) the ground will always exert a normal force that's perpendicular to its surface, that is, straight up if a flat landing.
3) from 1 and 2 we can see that the force the rider will feel upon landing will be THE SAME, independent of horizontal velocity.
What?!?! no! gravity doesn't care if you're going 5 mph or 60.Changleen said:
no, bmx bikes just have anti-gravity devices...Changleen said:
i know this might suprise some of ya'll, but on a drop to flat you'll also spend the same amount of time in the air regardless of how fast you hit it.
1-800-dial-a-physics-teacher?
any one?
Yeah, and this way it's easier to land 180sPolandspring88 said:
true, the proportion of the total momentum is less, but the amount of downward momentum is the same. i'm not trying to flame, i'm trying to teach.Changleen said:
sry, i just realized how much i just went off. wow. i'm gona take a break for a while now.
This guy was hauling a** and it didn't seem to smooth out his landing...
http://www.break.com/index/bikehill25.html
http://www.break.com/index/bikehill25.html
yikes.... this is page one stuff....(ok maybe page two or three)
Jeremy R said:
Damn that is funny.
Faster is better but I would rather do a 10ft drop to flat at the mall than try to explain why.
10ft to flat drops at your local mall ARE gay but I really wanted to provide an example we all can picture. LOL
I like the example with the bullet. If you shoot one straight out and drop another one right next to the gun, they will both hit the ground at the same time, so its not like when you drop striaght off the ledge and land two feet away your saving your legs because you think your jump took less time to execute.
I like the example with the bullet. If you shoot one straight out and drop another one right next to the gun, they will both hit the ground at the same time, so its not like when you drop striaght off the ledge and land two feet away your saving your legs because you think your jump took less time to execute.
Toshi said:
The vertical component is the same. The force of shed by the the bike and rider is the same. No argument.
However the question relates to smoothness, and this isn't a simple problem like a rock thrown from a cliff.
In the case of the faster bike: The bike and rider have horizontal more momentum at landing, which means in a collision with another object (random rocks in the LZ) they'll be less affected by the collision, up to the point it overwhelms the suspension, (I.E. smoother less bumpy). Since the wheel is spinning at a relatively rapid rate, the forces of the landing will be spread over a much greater arc of the wheel, allowing the wheel to flex and absorb some of the force of landing without destroying it, which will reduce the the hit the rider feels to some fairly minor extent.
In the case of the slower bike: The bike and rider will have less momentum, be more affected by the random bumps and rocks in the LZ. Since the wheel is spinning slower, the force from the landing will be spread over a smaller arc of the wheel. This in turn increases the chance the wheel will break.
The same rider will generally experience a "smoother" landing going faster.
However, a bike is a very complex system with multiple components affecting the amount of force on the bike and rider. Tires, wheels, suspension, muscles and joints all absorb force independently during a landing. A poor rider can generate five times as much peak force on a landing as a smooth rider. The effect from riding style and technique are much greater than any made by speed. Cedric Gracia probably will land smother of a 10 ft drop to flat at zero speed than I will on a five foot drop at 20 mph.
All of you realize that you are oversimplifying the situation. All of the physics courses that are referred to are the absolute basics. You do realize that at speed your contact patch is spread out and the impact is not a square wave as much as before. Heres a better test than the bullet (since that does not happen in real life, only in make believe physics land), drop a bowling ball on cement straight down, then do the same height with a forward velocity of 25mph. If you were to place a patch of piezo material and take an impact load measurement, the entirely vertical drop would definitely be a higher load. The vertical component still remains but is translated into a longer time period and mitigated quite a bit (especially with a deformable tire).
The question is, how much does this make a difference? Well probably not much, but enough to make a clear winner that does not take into effect the debatable concept of "stability."
The question is, how much does this make a difference? Well probably not much, but enough to make a clear winner that does not take into effect the debatable concept of "stability."