Deluxe Ski Jump Forum

KN i would say that,it's the point of planica,go down and then wind can raise you up and up

SuperAdo111 wrote:KN i would say that,it's the point of planica,go down and then wind can raise you up and up

Then the difference is the flying style, not the profile of the hill.

This is the core reason why historical/fictional hills are needed too, wink wink Jussi

Jussi Koskela wrote:

SuperAdo111 wrote:KN i would say that,it's the point of planica,go down and then wind can raise you up and up

Then the difference is the flying style, not the profile of the hill.

It kinda is, yes. But still the flying curve is too high in my opinion since sometimes you fall down from 10m high and just cant land. Even at 180-200m where the hill should be very steep so it should be a problem to land even if you fall down sudenly from few meters. I've jumped the whole day yesterday just Planica. And i must say that the 225+ meters the landing is pretty real. The only thing I dont like is that you cant (at least i couldnt) jump 220+ with a lower flying curve and being a bit faster.
And another thing. If you look at planica.. it got lines above its HS as well. So the HS ( 215m) isnt the last line but its 225-230 ( not sure).

I can definitely jump 220-230m with relatively low flying curve if i really try to make it low.

Zmaster wrote:I can definitely jump 220-230m with relatively low flying curve if i really try to make it low.

Also, the key for standing long jumps in Kulm is to do a bad jump with good wind (=low flying curve)

Zmaster wrote:I can definitely jump 220-230m with relatively low flying curve if i really try to make it low.

Of course you can. But its really hard. You need the optimal balance of speed and how high you are. My longest jump with low flying curve was 225,5m but i had to do many tries to get there since it was very hard for me ( a lot harder then with higher curve). And since im speaking how it is for me i know everyone wont agree with me.

kamelficker wrote:

Jussi Koskela wrote:

SuperAdo111 wrote: And another thing. If you look at planica.. it got lines above its HS as well. So the HS ( 215m) isnt the last line but its 225-230 ( not sure).

i very much agree with that!

kamelficker wrote:If you look at planica.. it got lines above its HS as well. So the HS ( 215m) isnt the last line but its 225-230 ( not sure).

Oh yes,we forgot,Jussi should make it

The reason of this discussion about the Planica HS215 is:
Planica was refurbished in 2010, and most of people still are used to old Planica where jumpers could flying long on so low curve. No it is no longer possible. Planica's curve was changed (but not enlarged)

SuperAdo111 wrote:a part when u takeoff (jumper too high) and part when u pass 150-60 meters (too high too) but i think u should make a hill (not inrun) longer but a player flying lower,near the ground..That's my thinking,do not know for you
edit* i say this because i want a game more real,do not want to be hater or something like that..

The flying curve in Planica is perfect. It is the exact same in real life. The Planica HS 215 was built in 1969. Older ski jumping hills are much more high flyers. I am a real ski jumper and I jump out of Calgary, Alberta, Canada and the hills there are a bit older and are much more high flyers. Look at the Vikersund HS 225 for example, it is a much newer hill and it is a much lower flyer. So I believe the flying curve in the Planica HS 215 in the game is very realistic to the Planica HS 215 in real life. I know in the real Planica HS 215 they changed the flying curve a bit in 2010, but they are getting ready to make it a K 250 for 2013. They want to make it so you can go over 300 on that hill.