I have thrown a variety of styles. Whichever way you look, pirouette can best utilize the power of the whole body.

i think the best length of sling for range depends on your body size, strength and throwing style like i throw with a sling that is 3.5 foot and that works for any throwing style and i can throw just about any distance id want to i throw farther with a 4 to 4.5 foot sling but it gets harder for me to hit smaller things

timpa wrote on Sep 15^th, 2017 at 1:17pm:


Your agreement (or mind) doesn't matter here: That 3,5 rps are faster than 2,5 rps is POOFED, respectively EVIDENT, and that the amount of "rps" of your pirouettes are not even 2,5 rps, we have seen in your video with the "queaks on ice" (and others). Also is evident, that the range depends on muzzle speed and the muzzel speed depends of rps and length of sling.

But all these simple facts are independet of your agreement or disagreement  . 

May be the human body (with outspread arms) can rotate even with 4 rps, but this would be much more difficult than to rotate only the sling over head or behind / besides the body (with the same rotation speed). 

A sling with lenght = 116 cm and a stone with about 110 g I can rotate 43 times in 10 seconds (= 4,3 rps - launch velocity = 31,34 m/s). Do you achieve the same "speed" with slings that are less or more long by performing pirouettes?

timpa wrote on Sep 15^th, 2017 at 4:38pm:


NO ... because the helicopter / sidearm consits of "launch velocity" (= speed of rotaion) + hand speed TOO. Do you take into account the "hand speed" (end of helicopter / side arm)?

I said, the LAUNCH VELOCITY (!) is 25 - 30 m/s - not the muzzle speed! Muzzle speed of Larrys record-throw was minimum 110 m/s ! His sling had the same length as yours on the frozen lake (1,3 m).

How do you explain this high speed ... ? ... and to whom or for what was I talking (the last 5 weeks) ???


Do you realy think only the pirouette owns a final "hand speed" x "acceleration factor"?


Why your ball was not flown for 437 m? Do you realy think, alone Larrys arm or waist had more power than your "best utilized whole body"?

timpa wrote on Sep 15^th, 2017 at 7:35pm:


Me too, because your "mind" is nothing else than theory! Forget your "hand speed" totally or SUBTRACT it from the rotation speed (because math is not sure / no prove).

Larry and Engvall (and others) have it proved in practice ... and YOU TOO. You proved, that the range of your pirouette is not so high as the throwing styles of Yurek, Engvall or Bray, ...!

And by the way: A non heard "queak on ice" also is no prove for passing the whole lake - right than, when math or "theories" can miss the reality of really flying aeroplanes. For sure you only know that there was no "squeak", but don't WHY there was no squeak. Your explanation or conclusion comes from nothing else than a theory. Maybe at some lokals of the lake the ice was very thin only (or the softer snow very thick ) - lokals in a distance of only 200 m. Neither the one nor the other would lead the sound of an "impact" untill the shore.

Who knows what else could be the cause for a missing squeak.

_______________________________________________________________

But right now I remember one of your videos, where you had worked with a sling and a "speedometer". Can you please poste here (once more) the link for that one?! Because I can't find it anymore. 

timpa wrote on Sep 16^th, 2017 at 3:26pm:


Okay - that's a good idea and a very exciting message, and I wish you some successful throws for more than 350 m, of course. But don't forget nevertheless, that a ball of steel (22 mm / 45 g) that was thrown for 300 -350 m still not is the same success as Brays stone (34 mm / 52 g) that was thrown for 437 m (same length of sling).

A stone generates much more drag than a steel ball. So for a "prove" or comparison (competition) better do not throw so small ball bearings (of steel or lead) again - or darts - but stones (or balls of aluminium or glass).

Do you believe / trust in math and physics of "density & drag correlation" at least? Because if not, then better throw some hollow balls of wood with diameter 220 mm and a mass of 450 g.   (sorry - could simply not resist that silly joke! Your plan for the next summer I find exciting and useful for real, and I hope some people believe in Google Maps).

timpa wrote on Sep 16^th, 2017 at 5:35pm:


Outch, my mistake! I read: "for this reason I will throw the lake again in the (next) summer".