6 ms·

He fell in an ocean. I wonder, if you happen by some extraordinary feat of skill or luck to fall feet-down in a perfectly straight body formation, would the imp

He fell in an ocean. I wonder, if you happen by some extraordinary feat of skill or luck to fall feet-down in a perfectly straight body formation, would the impact be too small to have any injury?

Deestan 9y ago
Judging by his injuries (smashed ankles and broken hip), I guess that is exactly how he fell.
- nathancahill 9y ago
  From cliff jumping 13 meters and nearing ripping my hip out of it's socket by having my feet ever so _slighty_ apart, I can't imagine the amount of injury from 15,000 feet.
  - fgonzag 9y ago
    Fun fact, there is no difference between 2000 feet (about 600 meters) and 15,000 feet, because of terminal velocity. It also means that in a free fall spreading your body out horizontally to increase the drag forces, then re positioning just before landing would be the optimal choice. Not that you think of that in a free fall, but the physics are there.
    - clamprecht 9y ago
      I wonder if there's some way you can actually do the opposite: First, gain all the speed you can (speed is energy). Then before you hit the ground, do a kind of "flare", where you make your body into a wing, and decrease your downward energy. Do this right to the point of stall (as close as you can get) to reduce kinetic energy when you hit. I know it'd be basically impossible for a human to actually do this perfectly. But I wonder, in theory, how much one could reduce the impact energy. Maybe you could hit at 50mph instead of 120mph.
      - cat199 9y ago
        not an aviation/physics buff, but I think having a point of 'stall' implies there is some 'lift' to begin with..
tempestn 9y ago
You can't reduce your surface area to zero. So survival free-falling into water is very unlikely, even if you land perfectly. Uninjured is definitely impossible. It sounds like his pilot chute and un-deployed main chute slowed him down just enough, and he landed well enough, that his body was able to take it. Lack of spleen helps too.
goodcanadian 9y ago
Due to surface tension, hitting water at speed is actually worse than hitting concrete. As a sibling comment stated, from his injuries, he almost certainly landed feet first. His shattered feet and hips absorbed enough of the impact that he was able to survive. The unopened chute would also have slowed him down somewhat [EDIT: and presumably served to orient him "properly" for landing].
lwansbrough 9y ago
Water is likely worse because if you get knocked out you’re gonna drown. You want to maximize your surface area and protect your head. Let your body absorb as much of the impact as possible: Land almost horizontally, with your feet hitting first and your head hitting last. This way, you might only break every bone in your body instead of dying.

He fell in an ocean. I wonder, if you happen by some extraordinary feat of skill or luck to fall feet-down in a perfectly straight body formation, would the impact be too small to have any injury?

Deestan 9y ago

Judging by his injuries (smashed ankles and broken hip), I guess that is exactly how he fell.

nathancahill 9y ago
From cliff jumping 13 meters and nearing ripping my hip out of it's socket by having my feet ever so _slighty_ apart, I can't imagine the amount of injury from 15,000 feet.
- fgonzag 9y ago
  Fun fact, there is no difference between 2000 feet (about 600 meters) and 15,000 feet, because of terminal velocity. It also means that in a free fall spreading your body out horizontally to increase the drag forces, then re positioning just before landing would be the optimal choice. Not that you think of that in a free fall, but the physics are there.
  - clamprecht 9y ago
    I wonder if there's some way you can actually do the opposite: First, gain all the speed you can (speed is energy). Then before you hit the ground, do a kind of "flare", where you make your body into a wing, and decrease your downward energy. Do this right to the point of stall (as close as you can get) to reduce kinetic energy when you hit. I know it'd be basically impossible for a human to actually do this perfectly. But I wonder, in theory, how much one could reduce the impact energy. Maybe you could hit at 50mph instead of 120mph.
    - cat199 9y ago
      not an aviation/physics buff, but I think having a point of 'stall' implies there is some 'lift' to begin with..

tempestn 9y ago

You can't reduce your surface area to zero. So survival free-falling into water is very unlikely, even if you land perfectly. Uninjured is definitely impossible. It sounds like his pilot chute and un-deployed main chute slowed him down just enough, and he landed well enough, that his body was able to take it. Lack of spleen helps too.

goodcanadian 9y ago

Due to surface tension, hitting water at speed is actually worse than hitting concrete. As a sibling comment stated, from his injuries, he almost certainly landed feet first. His shattered feet and hips absorbed enough of the impact that he was able to survive. The unopened chute would also have slowed him down somewhat [EDIT: and presumably served to orient him "properly" for landing].

lwansbrough 9y ago

Water is likely worse because if you get knocked out you’re gonna drown. You want to maximize your surface area and protect your head. Let your body absorb as much of the impact as possible: Land almost horizontally, with your feet hitting first and your head hitting last. This way, you might only break every bone in your body instead of dying.