The Freakonomics blog has an entertaining Q & A with Craig Glenday, editor of the Guinness Book of World Records.
Q: Of the records for which you still accept entries, which in your opinion is the most dangerous to attempt? Of the records for which you no longer accept entries, which is the most dangerous?
A: By far the most dangerous record category, in my opinion, is the Banzai Skydive. This involves taking an aircraft to a given height (3,000 meters, so just short of 10,000 feet), throwing your parachute out of the door, then waiting as long as possible before jumping after it. The aim, then, is clear: free fall towards the parachute, catch it, strap it on, and deploy before hitting the ground. The longest wait yet is, incredibly, 50 seconds by Yasuhiro Kubo of Japan.
A banzai skydiver, I think, exemplifies the word “motivated.”
The question that might be going through many a mind is: why do we accept this yet not allow claims such as fastest drive across America, or longest journey on horseback? This is how we make the distinction, really: if you put your life at risk, then fine; if you put someone else’s life at risk, not fine.
So put down your scalpels, kiddie doctors — they no longer accept records for the youngest person to perform surgery.
6 responses so far ↓
susan // June 2, 2008 at 2:42 pm
One thing I remember from physics class is that regardless of mass, objects fall at the same speed (unless its structure causes drag, like an OPEN parachute). And of course, if you jump out of the plane after you tossed out the chute, you’d be separated from the point of departure of the chute by the distance the plane has travelled in the record-setting interim.
So even if it were physically possible to catch up with your parachute in midair, you’d still be far far away from it.
It’s a joke, right?
Don // June 2, 2008 at 4:55 pm
Shouldnt that read the longest successful wait is 55 seconds?
Susan, humans can ‘direct’ their fall whereas inanimate objects cannot. Mass is a key element in the rate of descent as the greater the mass of an object the greater the effect of gravity (pull) on that object. Drag also plays a role but gravity is the big boss.
Meg // June 2, 2008 at 6:22 pm
I think it’s fully possible, given drag, air resistance, friction, and the ability of a human skydiver to shape the speed and direction of his fall through the atmosphere. Don… don’t think mass affects acceleration. (See: the gravitational constant, and remember Galileo’s experiment with a feather and a brick falling in a vacuum?)
Susan, for more evidence, check out the Wikipedia page on “banzai skydive.”
Dan // June 2, 2008 at 9:23 pm
I recently saw an episode of “Mythbusters” where they tried to de-bunk some movie myths.
One myth that they re-created was from the (mediocre) movie “Point Break”. I believe the film starred Patrick Swayze and Keanu Reeves.
In the film a bank robber jumps out of an airplane with the last remaining parachute, leaving the police detective without one. Instead of letting the robber escape, the detective jumps from the plane without a parachute and grabs him - midair - then deploys the bank robber’s chute to land them both safely.
The Mythbusters, with the aid of two professional parachute jumpers and cameraman, re-created the stunt, minus the midair grab. The point of the excercise, I believe, was to see if the second jumper could indeed catch up to the first jumper. For safety reasons, the second jumper was wearing a parachute.
While the first parachute jumper performed the jump normally (with arms and legs splayed), the second jumper held his arms and legs close to his body to reduce drag. The time lapse beween jumpers was (I think) 30 seconds.
The second parachute jumper did indeed catch up to the first jumper and the Mythbusters deemed this one plausible.
susan // June 3, 2008 at 1:47 am
Wow….
Still, I’m not going near that kind of record.
Don // June 3, 2008 at 8:39 pm
Sorry Meg, I dont buy what the scientists tell us as clearly a heavy thing falls more quickly than a light thing, its just common sense, lol! By the way, did Galileo use a Dyson?
Leave a Comment