New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

50 mph barrier - Page 3

post #61 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomB View Post

newfydog,

 

I really don't know how to answer your question. Here are some thoughts:

 

1) Typical normal accuracy (one-sigma) for well-designed civil GPS equipment under nominal operating conditions with SA off should be about 10 m horizontal and 13 m vertical. Think about this for a second. Although for positioning this is incredibly accurate, for speed measurements it could give some strange results, especially if conditions are not nominal and you get multipath effects and ionosphere effects, which are all too common. BTW, I also read that in a moving vehicle GPSs are more accurate. Not sure why this is the case.

 

2) But here is a much more compelling argument for me. With WC racers being on the edge of disaster at speeds of 100-130 km/hr in SG and DH events (and skis of 200+ cm), it is hard to understand how you or Ghost can manage such speeds with short, shaped skis with 13.5 m radius. I simply cannot imagine how you keep such a ski flat, in a straight line at near 130 km/hr. Just does not make sense to me. Maybe I am dead wrong (won't be the first time).

 

I don't know how Newfydog does it, but on my 13-m radius Fischer WC SCs, I alternate from edge to edge.   They are fine if the snow is hard or at least not much more than a few inches on top of the hardpack.  I have noticed though that if there is a significant amount of denser snow turning anything more than a slight amount can be very tricky; the ski will want to turn more than you can turn at that speed.  It's ok on hardpack, even skimming over small bumps (say 6 to 8 inches), as the grip won't be there, but if the snow is grippy, you can hook a tip and that isn't good.

 

Quick question for you Tom, have you ever straight-lined Little Devil or Spectacular at Blue Mountain Collingwood?  If so, on what skis, what snow condition and how fast do you think you were going?  (and how much air did you catch off the flat section before the second steep? edit: for those who don't know, there is a little hill at the top then flat where you decide to go to Little Devil or straight on to Spectacular, then it's steep, then not so steep, then steep again and eventually tapers off at the lift, nowhere is it really steep though)

 


Edited by Ghost - Tue, 03 Feb 09 01:48:26 GMT
post #62 of 71

Ghost,

 

No I never straightlined Spectacular or any of the runs on the "North Side". Then again, I have not skied at Blue in 5-6 years because I always have a pass at Mount St Louis-Moonstone. But remember that I don't profess to be a fast skier.

post #63 of 71

OK .  Mount St. Louis-Moonstone is a very nice hill, great snow, a variety of runs.  I always hit it early season.  It was my favourite place to take my kids to learn.

 

There's a difference explaining to someone who was skiing fast, but doesn't believe it and explaining to someone who hasn't been there.

 

What you have to consider is that the WC racers on the edge of control are not on the edge of control solely because of their speed.  I think there is a video somewhere of some speed skiers where they had a turn at the end of the course for that.  WC DH racers on on the edge of disaster because the course forces them to make particular turns, for example it sometimes sets them up to have to make a hard turn with the slope falling away right as they land from huge air coming off a roller.  It's a lot easier if you are just going down a wide slope with your choice of where to turn and when to turn and even if to turn or to go straight if you need a little time to recover.

 

Skis make a very big difference.  The difference between my Fischer WC SC and a Solomon Street Racer or even Equipe 10 SC is HUGE at very high speeds on very hard snow.   Ditto imho the difference between an atomic SX11 and SX10.  The difference might not be apparent at lower speeds or on snow that has a little give to it, but on hard icy snow it is huge. 

 

Hard snow that's been packed down, rained on and frozen is also a lot faster than that luxurious stuff you're used to at MSLMS.

 

EDITED to add: I'll be the first to admit that going super fast on a sl ski is not wise.  I really need to get those GS skis mounted up, but from what I hear from Arnold, they might not be the ticket for high speeds in crud either.


Edited by Ghost - Wed, 04 Feb 09 01:49:06 GMT
post #64 of 71

Interesting thread. I haven't posted here in awhile, so i thought i'd toss in my 2 cents.

 

i'm not skeptical of the speeds, just wonder why? at mtn. w/ steeps and straightlines off cliffs or out of chutes, good skiers top 50, then shut it down, having a very good idea where the spot to shut it down is. skier skiing below those cliffs know the deal.

 

one of my most regular ski partners feels like he's just cruising at 50 (his words), so much of it is perception. I feel like i'm maching at 50. of course my regular ski partner was the 1st man to go 150mph and held the world record for non motorized speed and skiing for a few years.

 

it's all perception and where your skiing, the skis you're on an how well you can control 'em.

 

cheers,

holiday

post #65 of 71

Interesting thread. I haven't posted here in awhile, so i thought i'd toss in my 2 cents.

 

i'm not skeptical of the speeds, just wonder why? at mtn. w/ steeps and straightlines off cliffs or out of chutes, good skiers top 50, then shut it down, having a very good idea where the spot to shut it down is. skiers skiing below those cliffs also have an idea of what's going on.

 

one of my most regular ski partners feels like he's just cruising at 50 (his words), so much of it is perception. I feel like i'm maching at 50. of course my regular ski partner was the 1st man to go 150mph and held the world record for non motorized speed and skiing for a few years.

 

it's all perception and where your skiing, the skis you're on an how well you can control 'em.

 

cheers,

holiday


Edited by Holiday - Wed, 04 Feb 09 02:19:06 GMT
post #66 of 71

I had a few instances of 58mph via GPS at Marquette Mountain in MI.

 

I'm a tad confused though, if you're going for pure speed, why would you carve?  All I do is point them and tuck.  This is on a groomed run with no traffic, and don't worry about me, crash (with other riders) free for 23 years and counting.

 

I'm being limited by slope and vertical, with plenty of room to safely go faster if I only had more hill.  My tuck position is feet at shoulder width and chest tucked to the knees, off the edges.  It is not inherently dangerous, 50mph isn't some "magic" physics number where things are suddenly more dangerous.

post #67 of 71

Ghost: I always hit it early season.  It was my favourite place to take my kids to learn.

 

Maybe I will catch you sometime at MSLM and then you can see how I ski. I am not exactly the slowest skier on the hill. Only the most skeptical.

post #68 of 71
Thread Starter 

111111111111111111


Edited by slider - 1/30/11 at 4:00pm
post #69 of 71

If you want to carve them as in pure-arc carving you will need a bigger radius ski.

 

Either you will be scarving bigger turns or you will slip out of the platform you carve due to too much centripetal pressure to hold the ski with pure banking, or more likely both will happen.

 

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/54381/angulation-vs-banking/90

 

post 104 and there abouts.


Edited by Ghost - Thu, 05 Feb 09 03:21:02 GMT
post #70 of 71
Thread Starter 

111111111111111111111111111


Edited by slider - 1/30/11 at 4:00pm
post #71 of 71

I once played with my GPS on the ski slopes. dead day no one around the best max speed the GPS hit was 77 mph. Skiing on 198cm p40 f1.

 

Was thinking about getting some real speed skis and hitting sun peaks for the velocity challenge in march. But it's looking like maybe next year.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching