Height of Hucks

**hoarhey** · 09-01-2005, 09:32 AM

Originally Posted by bad_roo

Whilst we're getting all mathematical, how about an index that calculates height of huck and angle of landing to illustrate the thump factor?

I'm gonna throw this out. I am sure there are others who might, but I am fearing an AKPM appearance with this one...

Height of huck = Length (est by tape) x sine of avg huck angle (inclinometer on tape).

That said, I'll probably never take the time to do it, or measure it. Like Shane, I'll probably "just do it," huck that is.

**runethechamp** · 09-01-2005, 09:54 AM

Originally Posted by bad_roo

Whilst we're getting all mathematical, how about an index that calculates height of huck and angle of landing to illustrate the thump factor?

Thump Factor = - Fun Factor

**Woodsy** · 09-01-2005, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by adam

All I know Is that it looks a hell of a lot bigger when your on top of it.

Adam, may you hear that frm a woman soon.

**tonghands** · 09-01-2005, 09:59 AM

How about we just throw a bunny off the cliff. If the bunny hops away with no injuries, no gnar points awarded.

**Obstruction** · 09-01-2005, 10:03 AM

I'm concerned about the potential for bungee-hucking if too short a rope is employed.

**Buzzworthy** · 09-01-2005, 10:04 AM

I can tell you my biggest huck this year already,I have ESPN, 1 foot.

And that is on accident.

**Pedro** · 09-01-2005, 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by bad_roo

If points are awarded for a shameless lack of commitment to landing on your feet, then yes, he's up to his nuts in points.

Its all about commitment....

**Tippster** · 09-01-2005, 11:07 AM

Lasers need to be employed. Sharks, however, are optional.

**K-Stormchaser** · 09-01-2005, 11:17 AM

Time the landing. Weight and time will give you height of fall based on acceleration of gravity. Forward motion is irrelevant in this case.

**subtle plague** · 09-01-2005, 11:22 AM

ive thought about this and im curious myself.
when you just "fall" or launch of a horizontal starting patch you can calculate the height by the fall time: S (distance/height) = 1/2 g(gravity..... ~10m/s²) t² (time²). when you have tape of it you have the time you need. (one frame = 1/25 second)
it gets complicated though if your launching pad faces downward or upward because only horizontal and vertical speed do not interact. if your starting direction when you catch air has a vertical component it gets pretty complicated solving the equasion(youd have to know speed and angle of the launching pad) ----> real nerds must now step in.

the nerds might even be able to calculate the shark influence too. im not much of a sharkologist.

edit: too slow.
k stormchaser was faster.
edit2: though weight is not relevant

**Beaver** · 09-01-2005, 11:30 AM

Girls will always huck farther than they think they did. They have been told thier entire adult life that "it's 8 inches."

**phatfreeheeler** · 09-01-2005, 11:52 AM

Why not just use photo's, You know how tall the person was(5 skiers high is ~30ft), and that's probably accurate enough for getting what you're looking for.

**rippah** · 09-01-2005, 12:06 PM

Leave the ropes at home (at least for measuring purposes).

What you need is a cool little gadget from Disto:

http://www.leica-geosystems.com/cpd/...r/lgs_5061.htm

FWIW: The majority of people will over-estimate height. Even those that can give you a relatively accurate guesstimate on level ground will be fucked up trying to guess height. Trust me on this because....

I'm a professional.

No. Really. I am.