14 ms·

Man Supposedly Flies With Custom-Built Bird Wings

360 points by dym 15y ago

saturn 15y ago
This video is fake, that has been established beyond doubt. But CGI, even "prosumer" CGI like this, is really getting better. Even at this level, people are relying on "hints" that a CGI transition has taken place - camera looks away, is obscured, or the picture is blurry. Give it a couple of years and those distracting-from-transition tricks probably won't be necessary any more. Then what?
- moultano 15y ago
  "If the US could create Avatar, it could fake 9/11" http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/home/if-us-could-create-avatar-it-could-fake-911-attacks-mahathir/354031 http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/home/if-us-could-create-avata... Probably, we won't believe anything.
  - nsns 15y ago
    Could be great material for Mike Daisy's next show.
- jQueryIsAwesome 15y ago
  - How about broadcasting this image to the entire world? - There is not point in that, images don't have value as evidence anymore, it'd just end up as an entertaining image that came from an unknown source at an opportune time. (from "Ghost in the Shell")
- InclinedPlane 15y ago
  That's not the interesting part. Interesting is when you can do indistinguishable CGI replacement in real time. And then from there, when you can do it in the camera (or on a smartphone). Then what, indeed.
joelackner 15y ago
incredible. i never really thought how jarring and jerky flapping wings would be...
- mrhlee 15y ago
  i can't wait for the fine-tuning and improvements to the wing design and mechanical assistance system to reach flying finesse. with all respect though, he really looks like a giant bird taking off and then gliding. on another note, it'd be so cool to watch human flying sports to spawn from this à la track or polo.
jeremyrwelch 15y ago
to infinity and beyond
lopatin 15y ago
I would pay so much for one of these
epaik 15y ago
Wow. This makes me wonder what Leonardo da Vinci could've accomplished given some base robotics technology to work off of.
ookblah 15y ago
a lot of people in the wired comments are posting about how it's fake... huh?
jsprinkles 15y ago
I'm skeptical. Am I the only one that noticed what appeared to be the plethora of CGI in the video?
- sbarre 15y ago
  The internet has ruined us. :-) I also immediately though "fake" or some kind of viral video, but my desire to try those out makes me hopeful..
  - lisper 15y ago
    I'll also go on record here calling shenanigans. There are a lot of things that look mighty fishy about that video. I hate to rain on the parade, but I'll be surprised if it turns out to be legit.
  - jsprinkles 15y ago
    I'd hesitate to call myself "ruined" simply because I question everything presented as fact.
- e03179 15y ago
  I just can't figure out why they had the guy in the middle run straight toward the camera as he begins his "taxi".
  - marshray 15y ago
    Have you ever tried to video kids trying to launch a kite or a glider? They really do act just like that. The camera person stops to video and everybody runs in front of him. The camera person needs to change position quickly so you tape the grass whirling for a few seconds.
- andywood 15y ago
  You're not the only one. If this is real, they seem to have gone out of their way with editing to make it look like a fakery. I would have been far, far more convinced by simple, unedited HD footage. For what it's worth, a friend of mine who is a Boeing engineer saw it and cried "fake." I think I need more information.
e03179 15y ago
Where was the camera operator at 0:35?
- rflrob 15y ago
  At about 0:24, I can convince myself that I see someone in a black and white shirt on the very right hand side of the frame.
- IanDrake 15y ago
  Good thought, but there is actually someone standing in that vantage point. You can see him off to the right in the footage leading up to that. I'd be amazed if this is real, because it would be far easier to fake than to really pull off.
kromped 15y ago
Believe it or not.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
ad80 15y ago
my bets... 1. GoPro-camera viral ad... 20% 2. funny joke... 10% 3. this is real ... 70% damn... the track record of incredible, but fake videos in the recent past makes me feel skeptical, but I wish it was real btw 0:57 the tracks on the grass.. look suspicious ;)
- joshu 15y ago
  I'm going with #1.
- InclinedPlane 15y ago
  Ad: 90%, funny joke: 20%, real: 5% Why does it add up to 115%? Because apparently basic physics is bullshit so why not math?
avree 15y ago
Incredibly skeptical. Red flags: 1. He's received criticism about his videos before, but still insists on filming in random parks, only releasing to press after the event, and using blurry/shaky footage. 2. When he takes off, the camera shakes heavily. When he lands, someone steps in front to block the view. 3. At 0:35, his legs lift up so that his body is parallel to the ground (necessary for flight.) If he had been placing his legs on some sort of device for flight, why would the liftup be that smooth? This would be awesome if it were real, but... just seems fishy.
- angersock 15y ago
  Why don't you read his dev blog? http://www.humanbirdwings.net/project-timeline/ http://www.humanbirdwings.net/project-timeline/ It would seem that arguments about the system instead of the filming might, you know, be more productive.
  - achille 15y ago
    Went through a number of his videos. Fake. 100%. Once you know when the CGI switch happens, it's just painful to watch. In this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI#t=101s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI#t=101s The switch happens in a moment of blur at 1:53. Here's some damning evidence: http://i.imgur.com/LODDp.jpg http://i.imgur.com/LODDp.jpg Top screenshots: Before CGI switch. Below images are after CGI switch. When seeing a video they point the camera down, so you "forget" the exact details of the wing. But when you put them next to each other, it's a dead giveaway.
    - kwamenum86 15y ago
      I was looking at that video too and thinking it doesn't look or feel natural. It's a good trick and actually a good demo. I think the physics are kind of off in the final video though.
    - marshray 15y ago
      What are the damning parts specifically? The color saturation is a little different, but the camera is at a slightly different angle to the sun too. The black square is a bit suspicious.
jcampbell1 15y ago
Just to be clear, the power is coming from electric motors, and he is flapping his arms just because that is how the control system was designed, right?
MartinodF 15y ago
I believe this could be real, but the wings are powered by 4 electric motors. He uses an HTC Android phone and a WiiMote to read the movements of his arms, and that readings are used to control the wings. There are many more details on his blog http://www.humanbirdwings.net/project-timeline/ http://www.humanbirdwings.net/project-timeline/ Edit: JoeCortopassi raised some good points in his comment. I'm not so sure this is plausible, even with the 4 motors.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- jsprinkles 15y ago
  If it's written on a blog, it's certainly true, then?
  - veemjeem 15y ago
    why are you posting so many skeptical comments?
    - jsprinkles 15y ago
      Because I am skeptical that the video is real.
      - veemjeem 15y ago
        yes, we get that, but there's no need to reply to every comment about your skepticism.
        jsprinkles 15y ago
        There's no need for you to position yourself as a gatekeeper for HN comments, either, but you're doing it anyway. Who elected you to quota individual comments? When you went after me, I had left three comments on this entry. There were more than a dozen by the time you said something, and I had made my point and was willing to back out. If you've identified a noise problem in the signal -- the only possible reason to go directly after another commenter and expect that you're improving HN at all -- how does spamming yet more about the noise problem improve the situation for anybody? Thanks for reminding me why I don't contribute to HN, by the way. I'll show myself back out.
obilgic 15y ago
What is that trace we see on the grass?(1:00) Looks like they us some type of vehicle to pull the helmet-camera up
- marshray 15y ago
  I noticed that track too but didn't put that together. So maybe that was a 2nd take with the track left from the first take?
binarysolo 15y ago
Maybe the Internet has ruined me too, but this reminds me of that other viral ad campaign of guys running on water. http://gawker.com/5539222/how-not-to-fall-for-a-viral-marketing-scheme http://gawker.com/5539222/how-not-to-fall-for-a-viral-market... (Yes it's Gawker but they did have one of the better write-ups :/ ). A few minutes browsing the project homepage (http://www.humanbirdwings.net http://www.humanbirdwings.net) and WHOIS (http://whois.net/whois/humanbirdwings.net http://whois.net/whois/humanbirdwings.net) makes it look more legit though...
- petroica 15y ago
  How does the WHOIS info make it look more legit?
  - binarysolo 15y ago
    I guess I rather meant that it's subscribed through a GoDaddy-ish service instead of a marketing company that forgot to cover its tracks... :-/
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
JoeCortopassi 15y ago
Things that make this video implausible: 1) You have the engineering fortitude to come up with something that has never been done before, and you choose to attach it to your body with a consumer grade backback? And not even a full hiking one with multiple points of attachment? No rock-climbing harness? 2) Fabric is waaay too loose on the wings to be effective in any kind of aerodynamic sense. At best this is a kite 3) He would "only be able to come up with 5% of the power needed", so he used a bunch of Turnigy motors and some magical super-compact power supply to provide the necessary lift? Not to mention, motors aren't exactly built for rapid oscillation back and forth, and I see no complex mechanisms to turn rotations into a very strong/rapid oscillating force 4) There are ZERO control surfaces on those wings to be able to pull up for a landing like he does. No, that pillow case between his legs doesn't count. 5) An Android operated system, that dynamically reads two separate wii remotes, and converts that accelerometer input into wing movements would not be that responsive. 6) No continuous shot from take-off to landing 7) No shot of the gear used to accomplish this, whether it be the motors/batteries/wiring/pulleys
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- katovatzschyn 15y ago
  The disregard for the physics of the situation is actually quite insulting. The "demonstration" is so far from realistic its not even worth a debunking. Here is an example of what this man is claiming to have done, actually being done, by a team of engineers working for years: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E77j1imdhQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E77j1imdhQ
  - JoeCortopassi 15y ago
    Great video. Notice the difference in the motion of the wings? So much more fluid and natural than the flat and rigid motion of the video from the Wired article.
    - angersock 15y ago
mahmud 15y ago
Earlier attempt with same tech (ca 800s AD) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbas_Ibn_Firnas http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbas_Ibn_Firnas
steve-howard 15y ago
Hope he doesn't fly too high, lest they melt.
kenrikm 15y ago
I call fake, if you watch his previous test video you can see it's CG/Composited, they point the camera at the ground to swap clips with/without the real man/wings. This one seems to be much better however when he lifts his legs you can see it's too smooth.
savrajsingh 15y ago
Isn't it a little early for April fools?
ericb 15y ago
An April 1st reveal, anyone?
grannyg00se 15y ago
There is simply not enough air being moved by those airfoils to lift a 150+ lb object off the ground. He'd need much more speed than that. Or much more wing area. Or much faster articulation. And in any of those cases, the pathetic "wings" would deform horribly and ruin any aerodynamic properties they might possibly possess. *edit Now that I've actually watched the video, there's something I'd like to add to the list of red flags others have already pointed out: His landing trajectory. It's way too steep and forward. He'd have to enjoy a near 1:1 thrust ratio to land at that angle, and he'd have to have been pitched up and back to apply all of that thrust against gravity and his forward motion.
sj4nz 15y ago
So, no one noticed the crushed grass in the shape of tire tracks along the path of flight? Looks fake.
ilaksh 15y ago
I really wish this were real. The only part that really ruins it for me is, where is the battery powering the electric motors? I mean, since I am ignorant about aerodynamics and a bunch of stuff, I can suspend my disbelief about the wing actually providing enough lift, and suppose that there exist incredibly powerful motors that could operate in that way. I would even like to believe that there is an ultrapowerful battery that would be able to provide enough juice for these incredible motors. But where is it? Man I hope Mythbusters does this one!
- Too 15y ago
  He is just flying for 30 seconds, you don't need much battery for that. 500gram LiPo should have more than enough juice for that. Look at your laptop battery, they are around 50Wh which should be able to provide 2kW for almost 2 minutes, disregarding the maximum current it can pump out. This is what makes me doubt if it really is fake or not. "Why has nobody done this before"? Because light weight power storage and motors has not been available until now. But the videos smell CG so I'm still calling fake on this one.
morton_hu 15y ago
awesome！！
InclinedPlane 15y ago
I made this for a nested comment, I'll bring it up a level. Think this looks real? http://i.imgur.com/YtPMI.png http://i.imgur.com/YtPMI.png The grass in the second one (suspected CGI) isn't even the same color or saturation level.
- jQueryIsAwesome 15y ago
  My biggest issue is with a piece of the machine that suddenly appears 2 seconds latter: http://i.imgur.com/xZCAu.jpg http://i.imgur.com/xZCAu.jpg
  - chubot 15y ago
    That doesn't look off to me. There is a dark spot in the first frame -- it's just masked by the much larger shadow going across the whole wing. It seems fake to me, but I have yet to be convinced there's CGI. If it were CGI, within 2-3 hours someone will post a statistical analysis of the images. That would be extremely obvious, whereas most people in this thread are pointing out things that are ambiguous. I mean they if they got the trees, the shadows, and the grass right, then I have a hard time believing they forgot to remove a dot somewhere on the wing. Those aren't the kinds of mistakes you would expect if someone was trying to match CGI to real footage.
pitchups 15y ago
Since all the videos are numbered n of 14 - how did he know in advance that he would need exactly 14 videos for documenting his flight?
- Jach 15y ago
  You can edit video titles...
  - baddox 15y ago
    ... or wait and upload them all in a batch.
    - pitchups 15y ago
      They were not uploaded in a batch - the first of the 14 videos was uploaded on Aug 5, 2011 [1] So either a) he planned to make only 14 videos in advance - culminating in the flight video OR b) he went back and edited all of the titles. So I checked the cached version of the previous videos - and it does appear that it is (b) - he edited all the titles adding the 14 after the fact. [1] [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cocLpRzZnvk&feature=channel http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cocLpRzZnvk&feature=chann...]
khalidmbajwa 15y ago
Interesting that Jamie Hyneman of the MythBusters fame Doesn't think it was faked. According him to the science checks out ! http://www.tested.com/articles/43440-thoughts-on-the-mechanics-of-assisted-human-flight/ http://www.tested.com/articles/43440-thoughts-on-the-mechani...
- ilaksh 15y ago
  OK but where are the batteries that Jamie mentions? I didn't see any in the video or the videos that came before it in the series about how they made it.
  - marshray 15y ago
    In earlier videos a guy even walks in with a cardboard box full of batteries. I think they're zip-tied low on the backboard.
heeton 15y ago
Well, no, it's quite obviously fake... Does no-one else see that? (Not for any logical reasons, but the video just looks fake!)
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
uptown 15y ago
If this actually worked, wouldn't he have done it dozens of times, and have videos of each flight?
iandanforth 15y ago
Disclosure: I fell for this. That said here is another red flag: The guys reaction at the end of the video is not one of triumph and excitement. Here are some videos of what real reactions look like: First time skydiving: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nSuGJB7ZykI#t=228s http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v... Breaking a world record: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=vWde8sMxe1w#t=42s http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v... Winning: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOcf6oEiRT0&feature=player_detailpage#t=50s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOcf6oEiRT0&feature=playe... *Edit - Fixed last link
- link2009 15y ago
  Not to be a jerk, both those three videos you posted don't seem to encompass exactly what happened here. I'm not saying it's a real video but everyone's reaction is different towards any event. I don't think this can be counted as proof against the 'realness' of the video.
- joshmlewis 15y ago
  I haven't done anything ^ extreme or cool on that level, but I'm pretty introverted and don't necessarily get excited externally too much. It could be plausible that he's introverted as well and doesn't go crazy like some people. My parents often were upset with me because they didn't think I liked what they got me for my birthday, christmas, etc. but on the inside I really was happy/excited. So all that to say, everyone handles events differently and it's hard to have a set guideline for how people act.
- femto 15y ago
  My thoughts too. There does just doesn't seem to be enough adrenalin in his system. If it's real, he doesn't understand the risk he just exposed himself too. At those heights, any sort of malfunction would probably see him dead.
- andrewflnr 15y ago
  My impression from this thread was that he's (allegedly) done this a few times already, so some of the adrenalin has probably worn off.
tzm 15y ago
Other confirmed man powered flight tests: Snowbird ornithopter http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E77j1imdhQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E77j1imdhQ MIT Daedalus http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/Daedalus/HTML/ http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/Daedalus/HTML/
bennyfreshness 15y ago
This is absurd (and I can't believe its at the top of hacker news). The article insinuates this is human powered flight. Any realistic attempt at a solely human powered flying machine would utilize leg power, not arms which pale in comparison in terms of power output. Also seems a bit fishy a buzzing sound, much like that of an engine, starts the same time as the wing flapping. Interesting engineering feat but definitely not the holy grail of man powered flight. This is Turnigy powered flight, big deal. "The design is based on mechanics used in robotic prosthetics."
- peeters 15y ago
  Where does it "insinuate this is human powered flight"? The article is quite up-front about the fact that human power would fall 95% short and that in reality the arms were only being used as controls, not for power.
- sopooneo 15y ago
  I think you're barking up the wrong fake tree.
robertwithtea 15y ago
obviously faked ... but i hope i'm wrong!! at least thanks for the short moment before i started doubting :-)!
Steko 15y ago
I've thought about whether we'll start to see things like this soon with composites and nanofibers. I'd love to see the math taken apart, I assume we're still a ways away from it. The first person to really fly like this may well be a double amputee or other person generally thought of as "disabled". Someone like Bob Wieland would have an enormous advantage on paper over someone like the guy in the video.
angersock 15y ago
Hey, for all you people that are pulling things out from their collective asses, at least criticize from the damned website and press release: http://www.humanbirdwings.net/press/ http://www.humanbirdwings.net/press/ Closeup of backpack here: http://www.humanbirdwings.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/IMG_3954.jpg http://www.humanbirdwings.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/IMG...
- ilaksh 15y ago
  So maybe the white blocks wrapped in blue are batteries? But now I don't see any motors.
  - angersock 15y ago
    Just above the blue batteries you'll see two little walky-talkie looking things. Those are motor controllers (note the thick wires coming off of them). Those are mounted on a plate. The motors are farther up, under the plate.
    - ilaksh 15y ago
      OK.. great.. Now I have a new problem. Someone else mentioned this: watch how the leaves on the ground change at 1:50 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI
      - angersock 15y ago
        The thing you should also be complaining about is the sudden appearance of a black square on the wing. I think our friend may have damaged the wing, patched it, and the cut there is them trying to edit out a fuckup launch attempt.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
- codeonfire 15y ago
  No, on the chance that they are getting paid by the amount of traffic they/you generate.
6ren 15y ago
Conceptually plausible: the cyclic motion of articulated wings (flapping) seems understood in models e.g. http://www.ornithopter.de/english/clips.htm http://www.ornithopter.de/english/clips.htm Jarno's idea of a powered exoskeleton wing to provide x20 power is right in principle, but needs light batteries: Prof Otten http://www.humanbirdwings.net/about/interview-with-bert-otten/ http://www.humanbirdwings.net/about/interview-with-bert-otte... As comparison, a human-powered articulated wing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E77j1imdhQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E77j1imdhQ A non-articulated wing http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1638710914506519616 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1638710914506519616 (18km) And the famous Gossamer Albatross flew from England to France http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gossamer_Albatross http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gossamer_Albatross Also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ornithopter#Manned_flight http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ornithopter#Manned_flight To the downvoters: haters gonna hate, hackers gonna hack
marshray 15y ago
In the part 14 video, at 0:34 it cuts to another camera on the right much closer to the point of liftoff. It's not a long range shot because the angle seems to sweep up to 45 degrees quickly. A camera at this position should be visible in the shot before, but there's not one. Edit: OK at 0:23 you catch a glimpse of someone by the lake that might be in position for that shot.
chj 15y ago
Incredible! They should try another flight to address people's doubts.
cmfoster 15y ago
And when will this be on kickstarter so i can donate for a promised set in return?
KVFinn 15y ago
They could verify this easily. Just get a couple of news crews down there to film another trial. The fact that they haven't makes me think it's fake. I wish it were real though.
spoiledtechie 15y ago
Skeptical. Camera angles coming from the helmet are different in two shots and his head isn't moving at all. Stationary. You would think when flying, your head would be moving slightly, but his is not. I also see a bit of CGI in his legs when he is shown to be flapping in the air. Very Skeptical.
fjabre 15y ago
If it's fake then you have to admit this guy can act. That was quite the performance especially when he's describing how it felt to fly for the first time.
ck2 15y ago
This is obviously a spoof of art. I am sure since we are only 10 days away from April 1st, that will be the reveal. There is simply not enough surface area, not enough motor power and not enough battery power for it to be real.
Lazare 15y ago
Watch a bird take off. Start with some pigeons, then some sea gulls. If you can, watch an albatross - on YouTube if nothing else. As you get larger, you get heavier; as you get heavier you need more lifting force (ie, bigger wings, moving faster). Recall that weight is a function of volume and increases with the cube of your dimensions, while lifting force is a function of surface area and only increases with the square of your dimensions. Very very roughly if you're twice as big, you get four times the surface area but eight times the weight, meaning that as you get larger flying goes from being "difficult" to impossible. And a man is large, and the batteries and motors he was allegedly using just add weight. All of which is a long way of saying that he runs very slowly, his wings are very small, and they flap very slowly. The first couple seconds of him after take off our patently absurd; you need to be applying - somehow - hundreds of pounds of force to the air to push you off the ground. Yes, fine, he has a wonderful wing design and some amazing motors and (apparently) zero weight batteries. Fantastic! But none of the components in that video are producing hundreds of pounds of force. (A commenter at Wired estimates that the servo motors are theoretically applying enough force to pick up a two ton load, in fraction of a second. If we had this tech, we could fly, although that wing design probably couldn't. We could also make Iron Man-style powered armour. Unfortunately, we don't have this tech.) The whole thing is multiple orders of magnitude off from the realm of "remotely possible". There are just so many red flags. The bizarre edits, the poor filming, the ridiculous design of the wing, the secrecy, the way nobody in the video acts right, the way the wing magically changes designs in different shots, the fact that the wing is clearly not fully loaded, the weird clothing and gear choices, etc., etc., etc. Wired has been hoaxed hard.
- angersock 15y ago
  For the record, he's budgeting around 17 m^2 surface area for wing and 100 kg for pilot (http://www.humanbirdwings.net/about/working-on-the-wings/ http://www.humanbirdwings.net/about/working-on-the-wings/). That's about 5 kg/m^2 wing loading, well within range of something for a microlight(http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=1416&pagetype=90&pageid=8379 http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=1416&pagetype=90...) if a bit heavy for an unpowered glider. EDIT: The wing surface (that kite he mentions sacrificing) is from one of these ( http://ride.slingshotsports.com/2012-Fuel# http://ride.slingshotsports.com/2012-Fuel# ) which is intended for exactly this sort of thing--supporting a human in flight. Note that in the design blog the motors are being run through a 25:1 planetary gear. The family of motors in question can put out in excess of 2kw ( http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__17986__Turnigy_RotoMax_1_60_Brushless_Outrunner_Motor.html http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__17986__Turnigy_Ro... or http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/uh_viewItem.asp?idProduct=14427 http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/uh_viewItem.asp?idProdu... ). So, no, the power plant is quite capable.
morrow 15y ago
It's quite obviously fake -- given that we are 11 days from April Fools, it's probably either an April Fools joke discovered prematurely, or set-up for a bigger one. Maybe something similar to the tale of icarus.
XLcommerce 15y ago
painfully fake. i'm surprised that there is even any discussion as the whether it is fake. putting aside the breaking of the laws of physics the actual cgi shots are c-grade at best. Look a the linked wired video between 0:35 - 0:40 the cgi is laughable.
poppin3k 15y ago
this has got to be a thinkmodo campaign for the sail brand used for the wings in the ad.
joss82 15y ago
For me, the biggest red flag was "done in 8 months time". Nice CG though, and additional points for flying a RC plane with a camera on it on the path of the bird.
gregable 15y ago
Agreed with others that it's probably fake, but there I disagree that it's impossible. One of the slightly counter-intuitive things you learn when becoming a pilot is that you take off into the wind rather than with a tailwind. The wings don't care what your ground speed is when creating lift, they care about your airspeed. Given a big enough "kite" and a nice headwind and of course you can do this. Kitesurfers, kiteboarders, and hangliders do this all the time. The flapping may or may not assist, but it's certainly not doing the brunt of the work.
shaun_gulling 15y ago
Hey did you guys see the video of the guy flying on YouTube?
joeld42 15y ago
I've worked in the visual effects industry and I don't think this is CGI, at least not in the sense that most commenters mean, a digital rendering of the dude and the wings. If it is, there's a lot of small details that they got right. It could be, and the poor quality of the video makes it hard to tell for sure, but I think that's misdirection. My guess is that the wings are not mechanical at all beyond being flexible, and he's just pulling on them to flap, and they pulled the guy from an ATV or something. His motion looks like a kite, when he's flapping wildly the front of his chest stays pretty stable and looks like it's anchored. The wings look like they could be modified versions of those kite-surfing things people use. It's a hell of a lot easier to paint out a wire and a vehicle than it is to put in a synthetic flying dude. and that would get you the helmet-cam footage without having to do extra work. Also there's tire tracks on the ground from previous takes. edit: for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvD_0qZzhdo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvD_0qZzhdo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKlaRtCwIqk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKlaRtCwIqk It might not even be the wings providing the lift, he could have a whole chute behind it like in these videos.
- Lazare 15y ago
  Agreed. The editing and camera angles make it seem fake, but it doesn't look rendered. And, honestly...I think it's too bad to be rendered. The motion is just too artificial. My money is on this being done with wires and some basic rotoscoping, not CGI. Everything fits.
- andrewfelix 15y ago
  Here's a much rougher version (skip to 1.45) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI&feature=relmfu http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI&feature=relmf... Notice the camera pans down as it transitions to what is clearly an animation.
- marshray 15y ago
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH3fQbGlQlM#t=52s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH3fQbGlQlM#t=52s Look at the left tip on the mechanism as it moves slowly as the woman holds it. I know it's supposed to be light, but it appears to jitter as if it's massless. The lighting on the mecanism doesn't seem so right either. This looks a little like the early Star Wars' to me.
obilgic 15y ago
I am sorry if someone already pointed that out but i just realized how fake this is. Watch that video. http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI while guy is about to take off(1:49), everyone including cameraman runs for some reason and we can not see the guy with the wings for a second. Then when we see the guy again and there is a black squaure box next to big s logo this time. You can see that video is edited at 1:52
damian2000 15y ago
Has anyone pointed out that wind direction makes a hell of a lot of difference to this - if he was running into a strong headwind I'd say this is almost possible. Ever try holding onto a big kite like that in a strong wind?
simeonf 15y ago
I'm just a beginning hang glider pilot - but everybody at the largest national hang gliding site (http://hanggliding.org http://hanggliding.org) calls fake. The main clue from a hang glider's perspective is that the wings absolutely don't look loaded. Assuming power source, batteries, etc all were available there's no way those flapping trailing edges are actually bearing weight by pushing against the air. Yes the dream of human flight is alive - but it looks like this - http://vimeo.com/20775072 http://vimeo.com/20775072
damian2000 15y ago
Its real guys: Jamie Hyneman (Mythbusters) says so ... http://www.tested.com/articles/43440-thoughts-on-the-mechanics-of-assisted-human-flight/ http://www.tested.com/articles/43440-thoughts-on-the-mechani... ;-)
andrewfelix 15y ago
Here is a less polished version of the thing 'flying': http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI&feature=relmfu http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI&feature=relmf... Skip to 1.45 and tell me that is not CGI.
marshray 15y ago
So I did a little poking around: I can't find any reliable mention of Jarno Smeets on the web before May 2011. His blog, his domain, his Twitter and YouTube accounts all seem to have started about June of last year. His Linkedin lists some plausible employment for a mechanical engineer, but comparing his userid to mine, that account hasn't been around too long either. The Biomechanics professor he interviews in the video seems legit: http://www.kalons.nl/otten/ http://www.kalons.nl/otten/ http://www.rug.nl/corporate/nieuws/opinie/2011/opinie29_2011?lang=en http://www.rug.nl/corporate/nieuws/opinie/2011/opinie29_2011... But the professor only speaks in general terms about the requirements for flight and is never seen again in the building or the testing videos. Perhaps someone could check his Facebook. Does FB say when he signed up for that? None of this is completely incriminating of course but sadly it does fit the pattern of an ad agency project.
andrewfelix 15y ago
This is the beginning of an ad campaign. My old agency used to do these things all the time. Here's one we created to make Japan look more intimidating leading up to an A-League match, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9G89gGJayA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9G89gGJayA Hint: It's fake.
karussell 15y ago
Come on guys. Just believe it ;) it would be so superb ... I believe I can fly ...
lemonman 15y ago
I initially thought it was real but after all the negative posts I have looked at the video closely. The GoPro camera take of the landing is what gives it away. Note how low the camera goes next to the ground, while we see the pilot always standing as he lands it. The flight was probably filmed with an RC and that is why see the camera go so low as it lands. But whether this is fake or not, it's irrelevant. This is a great idea and with the proper brains behind it, one should be able to make it work.
lemonman 15y ago
I initially thought it was real but after all the negative posts I have looked at the video closely. The GoPro camera take of the landing is what gives it away. Note how low the camera goes next to the ground, while we see the pilot always standing as he lands it. The flight was probably filmed with an RC and that is why see the camera go so low as it lands. But whether this is fake or not, it's irrelevant. This is a great idea and with the proper brains behind it, one should be able to make it work.

360 points by dym 15y ago

This video is fake, that has been established beyond doubt. But CGI, even "prosumer" CGI like this, is really getting better. Even at this level, people are relying on "hints" that a CGI transition has taken place - camera looks away, is obscured, or the picture is blurry. Give it a couple of years and those distracting-from-transition tricks probably won't be necessary any more. Then what?

moultano 15y ago
"If the US could create Avatar, it could fake 9/11" http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/home/if-us-could-create-avatar-it-could-fake-911-attacks-mahathir/354031 http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/home/if-us-could-create-avata... Probably, we won't believe anything.
- nsns 15y ago
  Could be great material for Mike Daisy's next show.
jQueryIsAwesome 15y ago
- How about broadcasting this image to the entire world? - There is not point in that, images don't have value as evidence anymore, it'd just end up as an entertaining image that came from an unknown source at an opportune time. (from "Ghost in the Shell")
InclinedPlane 15y ago
That's not the interesting part. Interesting is when you can do indistinguishable CGI replacement in real time. And then from there, when you can do it in the camera (or on a smartphone). Then what, indeed.

joelackner 15y ago

incredible. i never really thought how jarring and jerky flapping wings would be...

mrhlee 15y ago
i can't wait for the fine-tuning and improvements to the wing design and mechanical assistance system to reach flying finesse. with all respect though, he really looks like a giant bird taking off and then gliding. on another note, it'd be so cool to watch human flying sports to spawn from this à la track or polo.

jeremyrwelch 15y ago

to infinity and beyond

lopatin 15y ago

I would pay so much for one of these

epaik 15y ago

Wow. This makes me wonder what Leonardo da Vinci could've accomplished given some base robotics technology to work off of.

ookblah 15y ago

a lot of people in the wired comments are posting about how it's fake... huh?

jsprinkles 15y ago

I'm skeptical. Am I the only one that noticed what appeared to be the plethora of CGI in the video?

sbarre 15y ago
The internet has ruined us. :-) I also immediately though "fake" or some kind of viral video, but my desire to try those out makes me hopeful..
- lisper 15y ago
  I'll also go on record here calling shenanigans. There are a lot of things that look mighty fishy about that video. I hate to rain on the parade, but I'll be surprised if it turns out to be legit.
- jsprinkles 15y ago
  I'd hesitate to call myself "ruined" simply because I question everything presented as fact.
e03179 15y ago
I just can't figure out why they had the guy in the middle run straight toward the camera as he begins his "taxi".
- marshray 15y ago
  Have you ever tried to video kids trying to launch a kite or a glider? They really do act just like that. The camera person stops to video and everybody runs in front of him. The camera person needs to change position quickly so you tape the grass whirling for a few seconds.
andywood 15y ago
You're not the only one. If this is real, they seem to have gone out of their way with editing to make it look like a fakery. I would have been far, far more convinced by simple, unedited HD footage. For what it's worth, a friend of mine who is a Boeing engineer saw it and cried "fake." I think I need more information.

e03179 15y ago

Where was the camera operator at 0:35?

rflrob 15y ago
At about 0:24, I can convince myself that I see someone in a black and white shirt on the very right hand side of the frame.
IanDrake 15y ago
Good thought, but there is actually someone standing in that vantage point. You can see him off to the right in the footage leading up to that. I'd be amazed if this is real, because it would be far easier to fake than to really pull off.

kromped 15y ago

Believe it or not.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

ad80 15y ago

my bets... 1. GoPro-camera viral ad... 20% 2. funny joke... 10% 3. this is real ... 70% damn... the track record of incredible, but fake videos in the recent past makes me feel skeptical, but I wish it was real btw 0:57 the tracks on the grass.. look suspicious ;)

joshu 15y ago
I'm going with #1.
InclinedPlane 15y ago
Ad: 90%, funny joke: 20%, real: 5% Why does it add up to 115%? Because apparently basic physics is bullshit so why not math?

avree 15y ago

Incredibly skeptical. Red flags: 1. He's received criticism about his videos before, but still insists on filming in random parks, only releasing to press after the event, and using blurry/shaky footage. 2. When he takes off, the camera shakes heavily. When he lands, someone steps in front to block the view. 3. At 0:35, his legs lift up so that his body is parallel to the ground (necessary for flight.) If he had been placing his legs on some sort of device for flight, why would the liftup be that smooth? This would be awesome if it were real, but... just seems fishy.

angersock 15y ago
Why don't you read his dev blog? http://www.humanbirdwings.net/project-timeline/ http://www.humanbirdwings.net/project-timeline/ It would seem that arguments about the system instead of the filming might, you know, be more productive.
- achille 15y ago
  Went through a number of his videos. Fake. 100%. Once you know when the CGI switch happens, it's just painful to watch. In this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI#t=101s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI#t=101s The switch happens in a moment of blur at 1:53. Here's some damning evidence: http://i.imgur.com/LODDp.jpg http://i.imgur.com/LODDp.jpg Top screenshots: Before CGI switch. Below images are after CGI switch. When seeing a video they point the camera down, so you "forget" the exact details of the wing. But when you put them next to each other, it's a dead giveaway.
  - kwamenum86 15y ago
    I was looking at that video too and thinking it doesn't look or feel natural. It's a good trick and actually a good demo. I think the physics are kind of off in the final video though.
  - marshray 15y ago
    What are the damning parts specifically? The color saturation is a little different, but the camera is at a slightly different angle to the sun too. The black square is a bit suspicious.

jcampbell1 15y ago

Just to be clear, the power is coming from electric motors, and he is flapping his arms just because that is how the control system was designed, right?

MartinodF 15y ago

I believe this could be real, but the wings are powered by 4 electric motors. He uses an HTC Android phone and a WiiMote to read the movements of his arms, and that readings are used to control the wings. There are many more details on his blog http://www.humanbirdwings.net/project-timeline/ http://www.humanbirdwings.net/project-timeline/ Edit: JoeCortopassi raised some good points in his comment. I'm not so sure this is plausible, even with the 4 motors.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
jsprinkles 15y ago
If it's written on a blog, it's certainly true, then?
- veemjeem 15y ago
  why are you posting so many skeptical comments?
  - jsprinkles 15y ago
    Because I am skeptical that the video is real.
    - veemjeem 15y ago
      yes, we get that, but there's no need to reply to every comment about your skepticism.
      - jsprinkles 15y ago
        There's no need for you to position yourself as a gatekeeper for HN comments, either, but you're doing it anyway. Who elected you to quota individual comments? When you went after me, I had left three comments on this entry. There were more than a dozen by the time you said something, and I had made my point and was willing to back out. If you've identified a noise problem in the signal -- the only possible reason to go directly after another commenter and expect that you're improving HN at all -- how does spamming yet more about the noise problem improve the situation for anybody? Thanks for reminding me why I don't contribute to HN, by the way. I'll show myself back out.

obilgic 15y ago

What is that trace we see on the grass?(1:00) Looks like they us some type of vehicle to pull the helmet-camera up

marshray 15y ago
I noticed that track too but didn't put that together. So maybe that was a 2nd take with the track left from the first take?

binarysolo 15y ago

Maybe the Internet has ruined me too, but this reminds me of that other viral ad campaign of guys running on water. http://gawker.com/5539222/how-not-to-fall-for-a-viral-marketing-scheme http://gawker.com/5539222/how-not-to-fall-for-a-viral-market... (Yes it's Gawker but they did have one of the better write-ups :/ ). A few minutes browsing the project homepage (http://www.humanbirdwings.net http://www.humanbirdwings.net) and WHOIS (http://whois.net/whois/humanbirdwings.net http://whois.net/whois/humanbirdwings.net) makes it look more legit though...

petroica 15y ago
How does the WHOIS info make it look more legit?
- binarysolo 15y ago
  I guess I rather meant that it's subscribed through a GoDaddy-ish service instead of a marketing company that forgot to cover its tracks... :-/

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

JoeCortopassi 15y ago

Things that make this video implausible: 1) You have the engineering fortitude to come up with something that has never been done before, and you choose to attach it to your body with a consumer grade backback? And not even a full hiking one with multiple points of attachment? No rock-climbing harness? 2) Fabric is waaay too loose on the wings to be effective in any kind of aerodynamic sense. At best this is a kite 3) He would "only be able to come up with 5% of the power needed", so he used a bunch of Turnigy motors and some magical super-compact power supply to provide the necessary lift? Not to mention, motors aren't exactly built for rapid oscillation back and forth, and I see no complex mechanisms to turn rotations into a very strong/rapid oscillating force 4) There are ZERO control surfaces on those wings to be able to pull up for a landing like he does. No, that pillow case between his legs doesn't count. 5) An Android operated system, that dynamically reads two separate wii remotes, and converts that accelerometer input into wing movements would not be that responsive. 6) No continuous shot from take-off to landing 7) No shot of the gear used to accomplish this, whether it be the motors/batteries/wiring/pulleys

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
katovatzschyn 15y ago
The disregard for the physics of the situation is actually quite insulting. The "demonstration" is so far from realistic its not even worth a debunking. Here is an example of what this man is claiming to have done, actually being done, by a team of engineers working for years: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E77j1imdhQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E77j1imdhQ
- JoeCortopassi 15y ago
  Great video. Notice the difference in the motion of the wings? So much more fluid and natural than the flat and rigid motion of the video from the Wired article.
  - angersock 15y ago

mahmud 15y ago

Earlier attempt with same tech (ca 800s AD) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbas_Ibn_Firnas http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbas_Ibn_Firnas

steve-howard 15y ago

Hope he doesn't fly too high, lest they melt.

kenrikm 15y ago

I call fake, if you watch his previous test video you can see it's CG/Composited, they point the camera at the ground to swap clips with/without the real man/wings. This one seems to be much better however when he lifts his legs you can see it's too smooth.

savrajsingh 15y ago

Isn't it a little early for April fools?

ericb 15y ago

An April 1st reveal, anyone?

grannyg00se 15y ago

There is simply not enough air being moved by those airfoils to lift a 150+ lb object off the ground. He'd need much more speed than that. Or much more wing area. Or much faster articulation. And in any of those cases, the pathetic "wings" would deform horribly and ruin any aerodynamic properties they might possibly possess. *edit Now that I've actually watched the video, there's something I'd like to add to the list of red flags others have already pointed out: His landing trajectory. It's way too steep and forward. He'd have to enjoy a near 1:1 thrust ratio to land at that angle, and he'd have to have been pitched up and back to apply all of that thrust against gravity and his forward motion.

sj4nz 15y ago

So, no one noticed the crushed grass in the shape of tire tracks along the path of flight? Looks fake.

ilaksh 15y ago

I really wish this were real. The only part that really ruins it for me is, where is the battery powering the electric motors? I mean, since I am ignorant about aerodynamics and a bunch of stuff, I can suspend my disbelief about the wing actually providing enough lift, and suppose that there exist incredibly powerful motors that could operate in that way. I would even like to believe that there is an ultrapowerful battery that would be able to provide enough juice for these incredible motors. But where is it? Man I hope Mythbusters does this one!

Too 15y ago
He is just flying for 30 seconds, you don't need much battery for that. 500gram LiPo should have more than enough juice for that. Look at your laptop battery, they are around 50Wh which should be able to provide 2kW for almost 2 minutes, disregarding the maximum current it can pump out. This is what makes me doubt if it really is fake or not. "Why has nobody done this before"? Because light weight power storage and motors has not been available until now. But the videos smell CG so I'm still calling fake on this one.

morton_hu 15y ago

awesome！！

InclinedPlane 15y ago

I made this for a nested comment, I'll bring it up a level. Think this looks real? http://i.imgur.com/YtPMI.png http://i.imgur.com/YtPMI.png The grass in the second one (suspected CGI) isn't even the same color or saturation level.

jQueryIsAwesome 15y ago
My biggest issue is with a piece of the machine that suddenly appears 2 seconds latter: http://i.imgur.com/xZCAu.jpg http://i.imgur.com/xZCAu.jpg
- chubot 15y ago
  That doesn't look off to me. There is a dark spot in the first frame -- it's just masked by the much larger shadow going across the whole wing. It seems fake to me, but I have yet to be convinced there's CGI. If it were CGI, within 2-3 hours someone will post a statistical analysis of the images. That would be extremely obvious, whereas most people in this thread are pointing out things that are ambiguous. I mean they if they got the trees, the shadows, and the grass right, then I have a hard time believing they forgot to remove a dot somewhere on the wing. Those aren't the kinds of mistakes you would expect if someone was trying to match CGI to real footage.

pitchups 15y ago

Since all the videos are numbered n of 14 - how did he know in advance that he would need exactly 14 videos for documenting his flight?

Jach 15y ago
You can edit video titles...
- baddox 15y ago
  ... or wait and upload them all in a batch.
  - pitchups 15y ago
    They were not uploaded in a batch - the first of the 14 videos was uploaded on Aug 5, 2011 [1] So either a) he planned to make only 14 videos in advance - culminating in the flight video OR b) he went back and edited all of the titles. So I checked the cached version of the previous videos - and it does appear that it is (b) - he edited all the titles adding the 14 after the fact. [1] [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cocLpRzZnvk&feature=channel http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cocLpRzZnvk&feature=chann...]

khalidmbajwa 15y ago

Interesting that Jamie Hyneman of the MythBusters fame Doesn't think it was faked. According him to the science checks out ! http://www.tested.com/articles/43440-thoughts-on-the-mechanics-of-assisted-human-flight/ http://www.tested.com/articles/43440-thoughts-on-the-mechani...

ilaksh 15y ago
OK but where are the batteries that Jamie mentions? I didn't see any in the video or the videos that came before it in the series about how they made it.
- marshray 15y ago
  In earlier videos a guy even walks in with a cardboard box full of batteries. I think they're zip-tied low on the backboard.

heeton 15y ago

Well, no, it's quite obviously fake... Does no-one else see that? (Not for any logical reasons, but the video just looks fake!)

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

uptown 15y ago

If this actually worked, wouldn't he have done it dozens of times, and have videos of each flight?

iandanforth 15y ago

Disclosure: I fell for this. That said here is another red flag: The guys reaction at the end of the video is not one of triumph and excitement. Here are some videos of what real reactions look like: First time skydiving: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nSuGJB7ZykI#t=228s http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v... Breaking a world record: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=vWde8sMxe1w#t=42s http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v... Winning: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOcf6oEiRT0&feature=player_detailpage#t=50s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOcf6oEiRT0&feature=playe... *Edit - Fixed last link

link2009 15y ago
Not to be a jerk, both those three videos you posted don't seem to encompass exactly what happened here. I'm not saying it's a real video but everyone's reaction is different towards any event. I don't think this can be counted as proof against the 'realness' of the video.
joshmlewis 15y ago
I haven't done anything ^ extreme or cool on that level, but I'm pretty introverted and don't necessarily get excited externally too much. It could be plausible that he's introverted as well and doesn't go crazy like some people. My parents often were upset with me because they didn't think I liked what they got me for my birthday, christmas, etc. but on the inside I really was happy/excited. So all that to say, everyone handles events differently and it's hard to have a set guideline for how people act.
femto 15y ago
My thoughts too. There does just doesn't seem to be enough adrenalin in his system. If it's real, he doesn't understand the risk he just exposed himself too. At those heights, any sort of malfunction would probably see him dead.
andrewflnr 15y ago
My impression from this thread was that he's (allegedly) done this a few times already, so some of the adrenalin has probably worn off.

tzm 15y ago

Other confirmed man powered flight tests: Snowbird ornithopter http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E77j1imdhQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E77j1imdhQ MIT Daedalus http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/Daedalus/HTML/ http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/Daedalus/HTML/

bennyfreshness 15y ago

This is absurd (and I can't believe its at the top of hacker news). The article insinuates this is human powered flight. Any realistic attempt at a solely human powered flying machine would utilize leg power, not arms which pale in comparison in terms of power output. Also seems a bit fishy a buzzing sound, much like that of an engine, starts the same time as the wing flapping. Interesting engineering feat but definitely not the holy grail of man powered flight. This is Turnigy powered flight, big deal. "The design is based on mechanics used in robotic prosthetics."

peeters 15y ago
Where does it "insinuate this is human powered flight"? The article is quite up-front about the fact that human power would fall 95% short and that in reality the arms were only being used as controls, not for power.
sopooneo 15y ago
I think you're barking up the wrong fake tree.

robertwithtea 15y ago

obviously faked ... but i hope i'm wrong!! at least thanks for the short moment before i started doubting :-)!

Steko 15y ago

I've thought about whether we'll start to see things like this soon with composites and nanofibers. I'd love to see the math taken apart, I assume we're still a ways away from it. The first person to really fly like this may well be a double amputee or other person generally thought of as "disabled". Someone like Bob Wieland would have an enormous advantage on paper over someone like the guy in the video.

angersock 15y ago

Hey, for all you people that are pulling things out from their collective asses, at least criticize from the damned website and press release: http://www.humanbirdwings.net/press/ http://www.humanbirdwings.net/press/ Closeup of backpack here: http://www.humanbirdwings.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/IMG_3954.jpg http://www.humanbirdwings.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/IMG...

ilaksh 15y ago
So maybe the white blocks wrapped in blue are batteries? But now I don't see any motors.
- angersock 15y ago
  Just above the blue batteries you'll see two little walky-talkie looking things. Those are motor controllers (note the thick wires coming off of them). Those are mounted on a plate. The motors are farther up, under the plate.
  - ilaksh 15y ago
    OK.. great.. Now I have a new problem. Someone else mentioned this: watch how the leaves on the ground change at 1:50 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI
    - angersock 15y ago
      The thing you should also be complaining about is the sudden appearance of a black square on the wing. I think our friend may have damaged the wing, patched it, and the cut there is them trying to edit out a fuckup launch attempt.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
codeonfire 15y ago
No, on the chance that they are getting paid by the amount of traffic they/you generate.

6ren 15y ago

Conceptually plausible: the cyclic motion of articulated wings (flapping) seems understood in models e.g. http://www.ornithopter.de/english/clips.htm http://www.ornithopter.de/english/clips.htm Jarno's idea of a powered exoskeleton wing to provide x20 power is right in principle, but needs light batteries: Prof Otten http://www.humanbirdwings.net/about/interview-with-bert-otten/ http://www.humanbirdwings.net/about/interview-with-bert-otte... As comparison, a human-powered articulated wing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E77j1imdhQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E77j1imdhQ A non-articulated wing http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1638710914506519616 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1638710914506519616 (18km) And the famous Gossamer Albatross flew from England to France http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gossamer_Albatross http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gossamer_Albatross Also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ornithopter#Manned_flight http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ornithopter#Manned_flight To the downvoters: haters gonna hate, hackers gonna hack

marshray 15y ago

In the part 14 video, at 0:34 it cuts to another camera on the right much closer to the point of liftoff. It's not a long range shot because the angle seems to sweep up to 45 degrees quickly. A camera at this position should be visible in the shot before, but there's not one. Edit: OK at 0:23 you catch a glimpse of someone by the lake that might be in position for that shot.

chj 15y ago

Incredible! They should try another flight to address people's doubts.

cmfoster 15y ago

And when will this be on kickstarter so i can donate for a promised set in return?

KVFinn 15y ago

They could verify this easily. Just get a couple of news crews down there to film another trial. The fact that they haven't makes me think it's fake. I wish it were real though.

spoiledtechie 15y ago

Skeptical. Camera angles coming from the helmet are different in two shots and his head isn't moving at all. Stationary. You would think when flying, your head would be moving slightly, but his is not. I also see a bit of CGI in his legs when he is shown to be flapping in the air. Very Skeptical.

fjabre 15y ago

If it's fake then you have to admit this guy can act. That was quite the performance especially when he's describing how it felt to fly for the first time.

ck2 15y ago

This is obviously a spoof of art. I am sure since we are only 10 days away from April 1st, that will be the reveal. There is simply not enough surface area, not enough motor power and not enough battery power for it to be real.

Lazare 15y ago

Watch a bird take off. Start with some pigeons, then some sea gulls. If you can, watch an albatross - on YouTube if nothing else. As you get larger, you get heavier; as you get heavier you need more lifting force (ie, bigger wings, moving faster). Recall that weight is a function of volume and increases with the cube of your dimensions, while lifting force is a function of surface area and only increases with the square of your dimensions. Very very roughly if you're twice as big, you get four times the surface area but eight times the weight, meaning that as you get larger flying goes from being "difficult" to impossible. And a man is large, and the batteries and motors he was allegedly using just add weight. All of which is a long way of saying that he runs very slowly, his wings are very small, and they flap very slowly. The first couple seconds of him after take off our patently absurd; you need to be applying - somehow - hundreds of pounds of force to the air to push you off the ground. Yes, fine, he has a wonderful wing design and some amazing motors and (apparently) zero weight batteries. Fantastic! But none of the components in that video are producing hundreds of pounds of force. (A commenter at Wired estimates that the servo motors are theoretically applying enough force to pick up a two ton load, in fraction of a second. If we had this tech, we could fly, although that wing design probably couldn't. We could also make Iron Man-style powered armour. Unfortunately, we don't have this tech.) The whole thing is multiple orders of magnitude off from the realm of "remotely possible". There are just so many red flags. The bizarre edits, the poor filming, the ridiculous design of the wing, the secrecy, the way nobody in the video acts right, the way the wing magically changes designs in different shots, the fact that the wing is clearly not fully loaded, the weird clothing and gear choices, etc., etc., etc. Wired has been hoaxed hard.

angersock 15y ago
For the record, he's budgeting around 17 m^2 surface area for wing and 100 kg for pilot (http://www.humanbirdwings.net/about/working-on-the-wings/ http://www.humanbirdwings.net/about/working-on-the-wings/). That's about 5 kg/m^2 wing loading, well within range of something for a microlight(http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=1416&pagetype=90&pageid=8379 http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=1416&pagetype=90...) if a bit heavy for an unpowered glider. EDIT: The wing surface (that kite he mentions sacrificing) is from one of these ( http://ride.slingshotsports.com/2012-Fuel# http://ride.slingshotsports.com/2012-Fuel# ) which is intended for exactly this sort of thing--supporting a human in flight. Note that in the design blog the motors are being run through a 25:1 planetary gear. The family of motors in question can put out in excess of 2kw ( http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__17986__Turnigy_RotoMax_1_60_Brushless_Outrunner_Motor.html http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__17986__Turnigy_Ro... or http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/uh_viewItem.asp?idProduct=14427 http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/uh_viewItem.asp?idProdu... ). So, no, the power plant is quite capable.

morrow 15y ago

It's quite obviously fake -- given that we are 11 days from April Fools, it's probably either an April Fools joke discovered prematurely, or set-up for a bigger one. Maybe something similar to the tale of icarus.

XLcommerce 15y ago

painfully fake. i'm surprised that there is even any discussion as the whether it is fake. putting aside the breaking of the laws of physics the actual cgi shots are c-grade at best. Look a the linked wired video between 0:35 - 0:40 the cgi is laughable.

poppin3k 15y ago

this has got to be a thinkmodo campaign for the sail brand used for the wings in the ad.

joss82 15y ago

For me, the biggest red flag was "done in 8 months time". Nice CG though, and additional points for flying a RC plane with a camera on it on the path of the bird.

gregable 15y ago

Agreed with others that it's probably fake, but there I disagree that it's impossible. One of the slightly counter-intuitive things you learn when becoming a pilot is that you take off into the wind rather than with a tailwind. The wings don't care what your ground speed is when creating lift, they care about your airspeed. Given a big enough "kite" and a nice headwind and of course you can do this. Kitesurfers, kiteboarders, and hangliders do this all the time. The flapping may or may not assist, but it's certainly not doing the brunt of the work.

shaun_gulling 15y ago

Hey did you guys see the video of the guy flying on YouTube?

joeld42 15y ago

I've worked in the visual effects industry and I don't think this is CGI, at least not in the sense that most commenters mean, a digital rendering of the dude and the wings. If it is, there's a lot of small details that they got right. It could be, and the poor quality of the video makes it hard to tell for sure, but I think that's misdirection. My guess is that the wings are not mechanical at all beyond being flexible, and he's just pulling on them to flap, and they pulled the guy from an ATV or something. His motion looks like a kite, when he's flapping wildly the front of his chest stays pretty stable and looks like it's anchored. The wings look like they could be modified versions of those kite-surfing things people use. It's a hell of a lot easier to paint out a wire and a vehicle than it is to put in a synthetic flying dude. and that would get you the helmet-cam footage without having to do extra work. Also there's tire tracks on the ground from previous takes. edit: for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvD_0qZzhdo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvD_0qZzhdo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKlaRtCwIqk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKlaRtCwIqk It might not even be the wings providing the lift, he could have a whole chute behind it like in these videos.

Lazare 15y ago
Agreed. The editing and camera angles make it seem fake, but it doesn't look rendered. And, honestly...I think it's too bad to be rendered. The motion is just too artificial. My money is on this being done with wires and some basic rotoscoping, not CGI. Everything fits.
andrewfelix 15y ago
Here's a much rougher version (skip to 1.45) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI&feature=relmfu http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI&feature=relmf... Notice the camera pans down as it transitions to what is clearly an animation.
marshray 15y ago
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH3fQbGlQlM#t=52s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH3fQbGlQlM#t=52s Look at the left tip on the mechanism as it moves slowly as the woman holds it. I know it's supposed to be light, but it appears to jitter as if it's massless. The lighting on the mecanism doesn't seem so right either. This looks a little like the early Star Wars' to me.

obilgic 15y ago

I am sorry if someone already pointed that out but i just realized how fake this is. Watch that video. http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI while guy is about to take off(1:49), everyone including cameraman runs for some reason and we can not see the guy with the wings for a second. Then when we see the guy again and there is a black squaure box next to big s logo this time. You can see that video is edited at 1:52

damian2000 15y ago

Has anyone pointed out that wind direction makes a hell of a lot of difference to this - if he was running into a strong headwind I'd say this is almost possible. Ever try holding onto a big kite like that in a strong wind?

simeonf 15y ago

I'm just a beginning hang glider pilot - but everybody at the largest national hang gliding site (http://hanggliding.org http://hanggliding.org) calls fake. The main clue from a hang glider's perspective is that the wings absolutely don't look loaded. Assuming power source, batteries, etc all were available there's no way those flapping trailing edges are actually bearing weight by pushing against the air. Yes the dream of human flight is alive - but it looks like this - http://vimeo.com/20775072 http://vimeo.com/20775072

damian2000 15y ago

Its real guys: Jamie Hyneman (Mythbusters) says so ... http://www.tested.com/articles/43440-thoughts-on-the-mechanics-of-assisted-human-flight/ http://www.tested.com/articles/43440-thoughts-on-the-mechani... ;-)

andrewfelix 15y ago

Here is a less polished version of the thing 'flying': http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI&feature=relmfu http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0tKFOcHyrI&feature=relmf... Skip to 1.45 and tell me that is not CGI.

marshray 15y ago

So I did a little poking around: I can't find any reliable mention of Jarno Smeets on the web before May 2011. His blog, his domain, his Twitter and YouTube accounts all seem to have started about June of last year. His Linkedin lists some plausible employment for a mechanical engineer, but comparing his userid to mine, that account hasn't been around too long either. The Biomechanics professor he interviews in the video seems legit: http://www.kalons.nl/otten/ http://www.kalons.nl/otten/ http://www.rug.nl/corporate/nieuws/opinie/2011/opinie29_2011?lang=en http://www.rug.nl/corporate/nieuws/opinie/2011/opinie29_2011... But the professor only speaks in general terms about the requirements for flight and is never seen again in the building or the testing videos. Perhaps someone could check his Facebook. Does FB say when he signed up for that? None of this is completely incriminating of course but sadly it does fit the pattern of an ad agency project.

andrewfelix 15y ago

This is the beginning of an ad campaign. My old agency used to do these things all the time. Here's one we created to make Japan look more intimidating leading up to an A-League match, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9G89gGJayA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9G89gGJayA Hint: It's fake.

karussell 15y ago

Come on guys. Just believe it ;) it would be so superb ... I believe I can fly ...

lemonman 15y ago

I initially thought it was real but after all the negative posts I have looked at the video closely. The GoPro camera take of the landing is what gives it away. Note how low the camera goes next to the ground, while we see the pilot always standing as he lands it. The flight was probably filmed with an RC and that is why see the camera go so low as it lands. But whether this is fake or not, it's irrelevant. This is a great idea and with the proper brains behind it, one should be able to make it work.

lemonman 15y ago