Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
BATMAN WOULD NEED a parachute to land safely in real life, say physicists who recommend a cape redesign if the masked superhero is to pursue his exploits outside the pages of comic books or celluloid.
On the big screen, the crime-fighter is able to glide from tall buildings using a cape spread out like wings – similar to the method used by base jumpers who leap from bridges, buildings and cliffs wearing winged suits.
But unlike these real-life daredevils, Batman does not have a parachute.
Given his current cape design, Batman could glide to a distance of about 350 metres if he were to jump from a building about 150 metres high, a group of four University of Leicester physics students found.
“The problem with the glide lies in his velocity as he reaches ground level,” they wrote in the university’s Journal of Special Physics Topics.
“The velocity rises rapidly to a maximum of a little over 110 kilometres per hour,” they wrote in the paper entitled “Trajectory of a falling Batman”.
“At these high speeds any impact would likely be fatal if not severely damaging” – the equivalent of being hit by a car at 80 kph.
Batman’s wingspan, at 4.7 metres, is about half that of a hang glider. The cape, which resembles a bat’s wings, allows him to glide over the streets and rooftops in his home city Gotham looking for bad guys.
The scientists conclude that the crusader get a bigger cape, pack a parachute, or use propulsion jets to keep himself aloft.
“Clearly gliding using a batcape is not a safe way to travel,” the group conclude, “unless a method to rapidly show down is used such as a parachute.”
They also suggest that “he could follow the method of Gary Connery, who recently became the first person to glide to the ground from a helicopter using only a wingsuit, although he only made it down safely using a large number of cardboard boxes” to crash into.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Practical solution? How about Russia withdraws back where they came from?
The Russians are desperate for any tiny victory and are getting more and more reckless and dangerous to grasp it.
@Tom Quinn: it takes them 2 months to capture a village we are gonna see them do worse things as this drags on
@Seán Ó Briain: Sean, instead of throwing a tantrum and going with the usual and predictable fake account, Russian bot BS because things aren’t going your way, how about looking at some cold hard facts?
Satellite images showing the position of the Russian forces, video of the attack and its aftermath. Note that they are approx 50 metres from a whole hell of a lot of nuclear waste. If you are comfortable with Ukraine dropping explosives that flaming close to a shed load of nuclear waste that’s fine by me but I doubt the rest of the world would agree with you.
It is a cold, hard fact that Ukraine fired explosives within an incredibly close distance of spent nuclear fuel and no amount of spin can get away from that. There was another strike there last night with the local officials saying that one of the missiles struck within 10 metres of the spent fuel. Although seeing as how the official is part of the occupational government I’d take his report with some reservation. In this case, I would wait until satellite imagery is available to confirm it.
The thing is that the only party so far to actually confirm that they have attacked the area is the Ukrainians themselves. While a drone strike would do little damage to the reactor, a hit on the spent fuel would be a disaster of their own making.
@Digital Marketing Growth with Jarvis.ai-Free Trial: But it is unavoidably Russias fault. They shouldn’t bloody be there in the first place, and no amount of half baked essays on ‘duh facts’ can cover that.
@TheJournal Here’s a link to your own comments policy because you obviously need a refresher. (thejournal.ie/comments-policy)
Is journal. ie censorship a thing. 16 comments yet only 9 on display.
My comment from earlier GONE
@Gerry Dornan: it certainly is Gerry and apparently on the rise. Plenty of lively and interesting threads deleted for no apparent reason.
Heard recently that the Russian plan is to survive till winter. When its gets bitterly cold in Europe and then they stop all gas supplies to Europe. Will Europe see electricity blackouts and rationing of energy. Europe is very much dependent on Russian energy and what will happen without it. Will we see industry forced to stop. Factories shut down. Germany is heavily dependent on Russian gas for electricity.
It’s all about Geopolitics…. a big game playing out in front of millions. The ruble vs the petrodollar!!!
@Diarmuid O’Braonáin: Russian gas exports are down overall but because of the price being so high they are actually making more for less. Add to that the fact that China, India and other countries taking up the slack from the EU and Russia is doing OK for themselves so far.
In the meantime the EU and especially Germany are screwed, we are paying over the odds for fossil fuels and all because of a knee-jerk reaction by our EU overlords. You can be guaranteed that the people who thought out (or didn’t as the case may be) these sanctions won’t be freezing this winter. No planning for future energy security and kowtowing to the US means that the whole of the EU is in a bad way.
Putin’s forces will dig into the areas that it has captured and slowly advance from there. In the meantime, people in the EU will start suffering blackouts and will have to watch their TVs while wrapped up in blankets and sleeping bags. It’s all very fine now but comes the winter it will be interesting to see what public sentiment is.
Russia has plenty of energy supplies to keep its population warm and its economy going something that the EU won’t have. When sanctions really start to bite and its people in the EU feel the worst effects I expect that people mightn’t be so harsh to criticise people like Sabina Higgins calling for ceasefire and negotiations.
@Digital Marketing Growth with Jarvis.ai-Free Trial:
what should the EU have done after the invasion happened?
Don’t tell us what they ‘shouldn’t have done’ we’ve got that from your comments already.
Tell us what they ‘should have’ done after February 23rd.
have your say