Anderson mid air brake tap to save Sexton

PFitzG38
Posts
1370
Joined
11/6/2009
Location
Newport Beach, CA US
2/23/2022 7:54pm Edited Date/Time 2/23/2022 7:56pm
PFitzG38 wrote:
Cool story Bro. I extract hemp/cannabis and turn it into CBD/THC to pay for racing, this is actually really similar except it's not because I spin...
Cool story Bro. I extract hemp/cannabis and turn it into CBD/THC to pay for racing, this is actually really similar except it's not because I spin large bags of biomass and fractionally distill it so people can control their attitude up or down.

Anybody that has raced and actually done it will tell you brake tapping will LOWER your FRONT wheel - panic revving will LOWER your REAR wheel. Once you are in the air and past the apex, no matter what you do NOTHING will raise your bike. It's simple science. Can't cheat gravity. Now let's talk about how effective a seat bounce is and how to do them properly.
colintrax wrote:
Brake lowers the front and lifts the rear. Throttle lifts the front and lowers the rear. This is changing the angle of the bike. It's not...
Brake lowers the front and lifts the rear.
Throttle lifts the front and lowers the rear.

This is changing the angle of the bike. It's not lifting or lowering the bike as a whole. Your mass is continuing on its trajectory, something like momentum or whatever.

Just the same as you can just magically gain altitude, you can't magically lose altitude. Since you ride you know seat bouncing and scrubbing is done on the ground, the effect is seen in the air. Or lack of air.
With all due respect. Lots of people are talking, smart people with big brians and lots of brains - They're saying Gravity says otherwise. He's in the air, how in the hell is more throttle going to lift the front any more than more cowbell would without the opposing force of the ground with traction? basic physics and gravity say nothing is going up only down no matter how much throttle or brake you use - Gravity always wins. Both wheel tapping and panic revving have to do with losing and gaining centrifugal force - not leverage. Your thinking of a teetertotter - or a skateboard ollie. The only way Jason is going to raise his bike in the air is if he muscles it, and even that wouldn't work unless he did it from the ground with opposing force, like a bunny hop. Besides the OP wasn't really paying attention anyway Jason missed his rear brake, otherwise, the wheel would've stopped spinning.

i.e. Your front end low or about to endo. You panic rev to bring your rear down or to get your bike to match the attitude of the tranny. (ala Lil Hanny or BamBam) - Not bring your front end up.

Your front end high or about to loop out in the air. You wheel tap to bring your front end down. (ala Uncle Ronnie) - Not bring your rear end up.
4
PFitzG38
Posts
1370
Joined
11/6/2009
Location
Newport Beach, CA US
2/23/2022 7:58pm
Moto520 wrote:
I don’t think it was as close as it looked…..we will hear about it as the week goes on. I don’t think the brake tap raises...
I don’t think it was as close as it looked…..we will hear about it as the week goes on. I don’t think the brake tap raises the rear end…..it drops the front. I’m glad he didn’t get hit
stangkag wrote:
Hold a pencil in the middle by grasping it with your index and thumb. Push down on one end, what happens to the opposite end? Same...
Hold a pencil in the middle by grasping it with your index and thumb. Push down on one end, what happens to the opposite end? Same should apply here!
Ozy wrote:
No, the front end drops based on slowing the rear wheel. there is no invisible fulcrum in the middle of the bike that magically appears when...
No, the front end drops based on slowing the rear wheel. there is no invisible fulcrum in the middle of the bike that magically appears when you tap the rear brake
^^Yeah, I should've just went with that.
2
RaceFace58
Posts
833
Joined
2/6/2022
Location
Meriden, CT US
2/23/2022 8:18pm
gti wrote:
The rear wheel would stay in( or also become) the Axis position and the front will drop when the rear brake is applied.
Torque is applied at the CG. Superposition of torque is early statics
This is hilarious. Explain what is applying torque to the center of gravity. The torque is coming from a spinning rear wheel being stopped and that inertia forces the entire bike to pivot at the rear axle. Now for bonus points, who invented the brake tap?
1
6

The Shop

2/23/2022 8:58pm
Ya'll are hilarious. Neglecting half the transmission and clutch you are slowing ~20lb of rear wheel and chain assembly suddenly (Moment of Inertia) which will raise the rear axle assembly jump trajectory compared to it's original trajectory upon takeoff, and equally and oppositely (Newtons third law) influence the CG of bike and rider. This lowers the front end trajectory compared to the original trajectory. What you want to be arguing is if the rear wheel took a significantly different trajectory than it took prior to the brake tap. No matter what it was a very sharp move by Anderson. ✊️
4
PFitzG38
Posts
1370
Joined
11/6/2009
Location
Newport Beach, CA US
2/23/2022 9:01pm
Is it a torque or a linear force that’s being applied?
Come on.....There is no time in space - everybody knows that.
1
2/23/2022 9:02pm
Sunnyside wrote:
Ya'll are hilarious. Neglecting half the transmission and clutch you are slowing ~20lb of rear wheel and chain assembly suddenly (Moment of Inertia) which will raise...
Ya'll are hilarious. Neglecting half the transmission and clutch you are slowing ~20lb of rear wheel and chain assembly suddenly (Moment of Inertia) which will raise the rear axle assembly jump trajectory compared to it's original trajectory upon takeoff, and equally and oppositely (Newtons third law) influence the CG of bike and rider. This lowers the front end trajectory compared to the original trajectory. What you want to be arguing is if the rear wheel took a significantly different trajectory than it took prior to the brake tap. No matter what it was a very sharp move by Anderson. ✊️
Newton had it wrong, we got him sorted with this thread
1
Motoxdoc
Posts
2402
Joined
11/8/2009
Location
Steamboat Springs, CO US
2/23/2022 9:57pm
Tdc_worm wrote:
The notion that Jason brake tapped to clear Chase's head is preposterous. Jason jumped with a technique/trajectory to miss Chase's head. His bike and trajectory are...
The notion that Jason brake tapped to clear Chase's head is preposterous. Jason jumped with a technique/trajectory to miss Chase's head. His bike and trajectory are about 45* to gain the amplitude to miss Chase. That resulted in the bike having an attitude that needed to be corrected before landing. He corrected it with the brake tap.
Wait, which is it? “The notion that Jason brake tapped to clear Chase’s head is preposterous”...or “He corrected it with a brake tap” I’m confused…
Roczoff
Posts
195
Joined
1/23/2022
Location
Missoula, MT US
2/23/2022 10:27pm
People with knowledge don't stand a chance against people with feelings.

Sorry, physics.
6
Broseph
Posts
878
Joined
4/28/2018
Location
Stevenson, WA US
2/23/2022 11:36pm Edited Date/Time 2/23/2022 11:38pm
Bubba’s bike appears to rotate about it’s center of gravity. This brake tap even lifts the swingarm. But what does he know anyway?

1
Tdc_worm
Posts
30
Joined
9/19/2014
Location
Austin, TX US
2/24/2022 4:48am Edited Date/Time 2/24/2022 5:18am
the rotation around the CoG is based off of no other external forces being applied. braking and revving are both external forces. when those external forces are applied they interact with the kinematics of the suspension causing it to either compress (rear brake tap) or extend (panic rev). In mid air, there is no load on the suspension and there is no force on the front wheel. as such, when a rider taps the rear brake, the sudden deceleration tries to compress/squat the rear suspension. the swingarm presses on the shock, the shock presses on the chassis, the chassis presses on the front wheel, the front wheel drops because it is pressing on nothing. In the above video of JS, you can visibly see the suspension compresses when he taps the brake. you don't see the rear wheel extend from its compression, rather, the chassis lifts at the swingarm pivot, the front wheel then changes trajectory.

conversely, the sudden acceleration of the rear wheel and the chainline's interaction with the suspension extend/jack the swingarm. the chainline forces the rear wheel down, it reaches full extension, the bike rotates around the drive sprocket where the force is initiating. the suspension is designed with a certain amount of antisquat to keep the chain from completely compressing the rear shock when you twist the throttle.

if the bike rotated around some CoG, when tapping the brakes, then why is front brake tapping not a thing? you could completely eliminate accidentally stalling with a front brake tap. i dare you to try it, haha.

here is a video of the force a wheel places on a bike during a braking moment. different kinematics, same principles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY2j2gDiZQY&ab_channel=andrextr
3
Gworm
Posts
849
Joined
4/5/2017
Location
Monett, MO US
2/24/2022 7:11am
I’ve re-thought the whole issue…

It’s actually caused by the actual force of pushing down on the brake pedal, pushing the front wheel down. 🤦‍♂️
2
Broseph
Posts
878
Joined
4/28/2018
Location
Stevenson, WA US
2/24/2022 7:20am Edited Date/Time 2/24/2022 7:31am
Tdc_worm wrote:
the rotation around the CoG is based off of no other external forces being applied. braking and revving are both external forces. when those external forces...
the rotation around the CoG is based off of no other external forces being applied. braking and revving are both external forces. when those external forces are applied they interact with the kinematics of the suspension causing it to either compress (rear brake tap) or extend (panic rev). In mid air, there is no load on the suspension and there is no force on the front wheel. as such, when a rider taps the rear brake, the sudden deceleration tries to compress/squat the rear suspension. the swingarm presses on the shock, the shock presses on the chassis, the chassis presses on the front wheel, the front wheel drops because it is pressing on nothing. In the above video of JS, you can visibly see the suspension compresses when he taps the brake. you don't see the rear wheel extend from its compression, rather, the chassis lifts at the swingarm pivot, the front wheel then changes trajectory.

conversely, the sudden acceleration of the rear wheel and the chainline's interaction with the suspension extend/jack the swingarm. the chainline forces the rear wheel down, it reaches full extension, the bike rotates around the drive sprocket where the force is initiating. the suspension is designed with a certain amount of antisquat to keep the chain from completely compressing the rear shock when you twist the throttle.

if the bike rotated around some CoG, when tapping the brakes, then why is front brake tapping not a thing? you could completely eliminate accidentally stalling with a front brake tap. i dare you to try it, haha.

here is a video of the force a wheel places on a bike during a braking moment. different kinematics, same principles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY2j2gDiZQY&ab_channel=andrextr
Revving and braking are external forces while in the air? Where is the equal and opposite external reaction force coming from? Aliens?

In the Stewart gif, the brake is tapped and the rear wheel rises relative to the center of gravity of the bike. This causes the rear wheel to trace a higher trajectory than it otherwise would have.

And no one brake taps the front wheel because there is no way to get it spinning again before you hit the ground. If you’ve ever wheelied until the front wheel stopped, you’ll know why this isn’t desirable.


One more thing…Here’s a quote from Wikipedia about reaction wheels in spacecraft:
“Reaction wheels can rotate a spacecraft only around its center of mass”
Here’s the full article:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_wheel
4
Steve125
Posts
1288
Joined
11/24/2010
Location
CT US
2/24/2022 7:38am
I know from a Yamaha commercial that if you launch out of a sandy turn, brake tap right after you take off, then blip the throttle, dirt will shoot out of your tire in slow motion.
4
2/24/2022 7:39am
Tdc_worm wrote:
the rotation around the CoG is based off of no other external forces being applied. braking and revving are both external forces. when those external forces...
the rotation around the CoG is based off of no other external forces being applied. braking and revving are both external forces. when those external forces are applied they interact with the kinematics of the suspension causing it to either compress (rear brake tap) or extend (panic rev). In mid air, there is no load on the suspension and there is no force on the front wheel. as such, when a rider taps the rear brake, the sudden deceleration tries to compress/squat the rear suspension. the swingarm presses on the shock, the shock presses on the chassis, the chassis presses on the front wheel, the front wheel drops because it is pressing on nothing. In the above video of JS, you can visibly see the suspension compresses when he taps the brake. you don't see the rear wheel extend from its compression, rather, the chassis lifts at the swingarm pivot, the front wheel then changes trajectory.

conversely, the sudden acceleration of the rear wheel and the chainline's interaction with the suspension extend/jack the swingarm. the chainline forces the rear wheel down, it reaches full extension, the bike rotates around the drive sprocket where the force is initiating. the suspension is designed with a certain amount of antisquat to keep the chain from completely compressing the rear shock when you twist the throttle.

if the bike rotated around some CoG, when tapping the brakes, then why is front brake tapping not a thing? you could completely eliminate accidentally stalling with a front brake tap. i dare you to try it, haha.

here is a video of the force a wheel places on a bike during a braking moment. different kinematics, same principles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY2j2gDiZQY&ab_channel=andrextr
Broseph wrote:
Revving and braking are external forces while in the air? Where is the equal and opposite external reaction force coming from? Aliens? In the Stewart gif...
Revving and braking are external forces while in the air? Where is the equal and opposite external reaction force coming from? Aliens?

In the Stewart gif, the brake is tapped and the rear wheel rises relative to the center of gravity of the bike. This causes the rear wheel to trace a higher trajectory than it otherwise would have.

And no one brake taps the front wheel because there is no way to get it spinning again before you hit the ground. If you’ve ever wheelied until the front wheel stopped, you’ll know why this isn’t desirable.


One more thing…Here’s a quote from Wikipedia about reaction wheels in spacecraft:
“Reaction wheels can rotate a spacecraft only around its center of mass”
Here’s the full article:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_wheel
It’s pretty interesting watching vital tackle an introductory dynamics problem huh?
2
Tdc_worm
Posts
30
Joined
9/19/2014
Location
Austin, TX US
2/24/2022 7:51am
Tdc_worm wrote:
the rotation around the CoG is based off of no other external forces being applied. braking and revving are both external forces. when those external forces...
the rotation around the CoG is based off of no other external forces being applied. braking and revving are both external forces. when those external forces are applied they interact with the kinematics of the suspension causing it to either compress (rear brake tap) or extend (panic rev). In mid air, there is no load on the suspension and there is no force on the front wheel. as such, when a rider taps the rear brake, the sudden deceleration tries to compress/squat the rear suspension. the swingarm presses on the shock, the shock presses on the chassis, the chassis presses on the front wheel, the front wheel drops because it is pressing on nothing. In the above video of JS, you can visibly see the suspension compresses when he taps the brake. you don't see the rear wheel extend from its compression, rather, the chassis lifts at the swingarm pivot, the front wheel then changes trajectory.

conversely, the sudden acceleration of the rear wheel and the chainline's interaction with the suspension extend/jack the swingarm. the chainline forces the rear wheel down, it reaches full extension, the bike rotates around the drive sprocket where the force is initiating. the suspension is designed with a certain amount of antisquat to keep the chain from completely compressing the rear shock when you twist the throttle.

if the bike rotated around some CoG, when tapping the brakes, then why is front brake tapping not a thing? you could completely eliminate accidentally stalling with a front brake tap. i dare you to try it, haha.

here is a video of the force a wheel places on a bike during a braking moment. different kinematics, same principles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY2j2gDiZQY&ab_channel=andrextr
Broseph wrote:
Revving and braking are external forces while in the air? Where is the equal and opposite external reaction force coming from? Aliens? In the Stewart gif...
Revving and braking are external forces while in the air? Where is the equal and opposite external reaction force coming from? Aliens?

In the Stewart gif, the brake is tapped and the rear wheel rises relative to the center of gravity of the bike. This causes the rear wheel to trace a higher trajectory than it otherwise would have.

And no one brake taps the front wheel because there is no way to get it spinning again before you hit the ground. If you’ve ever wheelied until the front wheel stopped, you’ll know why this isn’t desirable.


One more thing…Here’s a quote from Wikipedia about reaction wheels in spacecraft:
“Reaction wheels can rotate a spacecraft only around its center of mass”
Here’s the full article:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_wheel
perhaps "external" was a poor word. maybe "additional" would cause less heartburn. either way, they both have zero to do with the initial trajectory of the bike the instant it leaves the jump face. the both do affect the trajectory after being applied once airborne. the equal and opposite reaction comes the bike changing attitude, no matter if we agree on the point of rotation. the practial demonstration in the first video i shared illustrates it, without Aliens, or gremlins, or trolls.

re stewart: yes. and at the same time it compresses the rear suspension. in the GIF you do not see the suspension push the wheel back down. that means it has to be pushing chassis up, because of those equal and opposite forces you reference. trajectory is actually fixed by the velocity and angle of departure from the lip of the jump. braking and revving only changes the bikes attitude.

from the 29-42 minute marks of this video, the front wheel isn't spinning. wonder how he made it those 5km without the front wheel spinning? Let alone the front wheel wasn't spinning when he sat it back down at 30km.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfryxJ5BK0s&ab_channel=TASKMANAGER

tons of folks wheelie far enough for the front wheel to stall and manage to ride away just fine. tapping either brake creats a moment of leverage over the chassis. if it didn't, then there is no way the bike would compress the rear suspension mid air.
5
Tdc_worm
Posts
30
Joined
9/19/2014
Location
Austin, TX US
2/24/2022 7:52am Edited Date/Time 2/24/2022 8:10am
Tdc_worm wrote:
the rotation around the CoG is based off of no other external forces being applied. braking and revving are both external forces. when those external forces...
the rotation around the CoG is based off of no other external forces being applied. braking and revving are both external forces. when those external forces are applied they interact with the kinematics of the suspension causing it to either compress (rear brake tap) or extend (panic rev). In mid air, there is no load on the suspension and there is no force on the front wheel. as such, when a rider taps the rear brake, the sudden deceleration tries to compress/squat the rear suspension. the swingarm presses on the shock, the shock presses on the chassis, the chassis presses on the front wheel, the front wheel drops because it is pressing on nothing. In the above video of JS, you can visibly see the suspension compresses when he taps the brake. you don't see the rear wheel extend from its compression, rather, the chassis lifts at the swingarm pivot, the front wheel then changes trajectory.

conversely, the sudden acceleration of the rear wheel and the chainline's interaction with the suspension extend/jack the swingarm. the chainline forces the rear wheel down, it reaches full extension, the bike rotates around the drive sprocket where the force is initiating. the suspension is designed with a certain amount of antisquat to keep the chain from completely compressing the rear shock when you twist the throttle.

if the bike rotated around some CoG, when tapping the brakes, then why is front brake tapping not a thing? you could completely eliminate accidentally stalling with a front brake tap. i dare you to try it, haha.

here is a video of the force a wheel places on a bike during a braking moment. different kinematics, same principles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY2j2gDiZQY&ab_channel=andrextr
Broseph wrote:
Revving and braking are external forces while in the air? Where is the equal and opposite external reaction force coming from? Aliens? In the Stewart gif...
Revving and braking are external forces while in the air? Where is the equal and opposite external reaction force coming from? Aliens?

In the Stewart gif, the brake is tapped and the rear wheel rises relative to the center of gravity of the bike. This causes the rear wheel to trace a higher trajectory than it otherwise would have.

And no one brake taps the front wheel because there is no way to get it spinning again before you hit the ground. If you’ve ever wheelied until the front wheel stopped, you’ll know why this isn’t desirable.


One more thing…Here’s a quote from Wikipedia about reaction wheels in spacecraft:
“Reaction wheels can rotate a spacecraft only around its center of mass”
Here’s the full article:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_wheel
It’s pretty interesting watching vital tackle an introductory dynamics problem huh?
explain what compresses the rear suspension. for the record, i am not challenging your physics. in a vacuum, i am sure you are right. but when you start adding/removing forces then the theoretical vacuum is useless. there are many things that can change the CoG of the system. i am always open to learning new things.
3
Gworm
Posts
849
Joined
4/5/2017
Location
Monett, MO US
2/24/2022 8:25am
Tdc_worm wrote:
explain what compresses the rear suspension. for the record, i am not challenging your physics. in a vacuum, i am sure you are right. but when...
explain what compresses the rear suspension. for the record, i am not challenging your physics. in a vacuum, i am sure you are right. but when you start adding/removing forces then the theoretical vacuum is useless. there are many things that can change the CoG of the system. i am always open to learning new things.
It is the acceleration or deceleration of the spinning mass. Pop the hood on an old muscle car and have someone step on the gas and it will torque to the left. If it ran counterclockwise it would go to the right.

In a single engine airplane, you have to add right rudder to counter a strong left turning force as you add takeoff power. It’s called p factor. I won’t get into the FAAs definition of what causes it, but it’s from the acceleration of the spinning mass (crank and prop).


The suspension compressing is a reaction, not the driving force.
1
2/24/2022 8:52am Edited Date/Time 2/24/2022 9:01am
Tdc_worm wrote:
explain what compresses the rear suspension. for the record, i am not challenging your physics. in a vacuum, i am sure you are right. but when...
explain what compresses the rear suspension. for the record, i am not challenging your physics. in a vacuum, i am sure you are right. but when you start adding/removing forces then the theoretical vacuum is useless. there are many things that can change the CoG of the system. i am always open to learning new things.
As was mentioned above the reaction moment of the wheel stopping is being transferred through the swing arm, its applying an equal and opposite torque to the wheel. External and internal forces are a bit of a loaded word here because they have specific definitions. An external force actually adds momentum to the system, where in this situation you are trading momentum between the rear wheel and the motorcycle, wheel speeds up bike starts a rotation in the opposite direction, and vice versa, so these are all internal forces. If Stew has a set of thrusters in his swing arm for attitude control these would be external forces, although still forcing the vehicle to rotate about the CG with a torque that is equal to the force of the thruster x the distance of the thruster to the CG. The other difference is external forces can change the trajectory of the CG where internal forces won’t.
2
KurtJ99
Posts
1102
Joined
2/6/2017
Location
CA US
2/24/2022 9:12am
Once Jason takes off, regardless of seat bounce or scrub, the trajectory of the center of mass (CM) of him and his bike is set.
- Seat bounce and his trajectory will be steeper, scrub it will be less steep

Once in the air, angular momentum is conserved. If your rear wheel is spinning fast and you hit the brakes, the bike rotates around the CM. The rear wheel rises and the front end dips. The bike rotates more slowly because it has much more mass than just the rear wheel.

There is no net height increase because the CM is floating through the air.

Please see enclosed scientific paper.


2/24/2022 9:26am Edited Date/Time 2/24/2022 9:28am
KurtJ99 wrote:
Once Jason takes off, regardless of seat bounce or scrub, the trajectory of the center of mass (CM) of him and his bike is set. -...
Once Jason takes off, regardless of seat bounce or scrub, the trajectory of the center of mass (CM) of him and his bike is set.
- Seat bounce and his trajectory will be steeper, scrub it will be less steep

Once in the air, angular momentum is conserved. If your rear wheel is spinning fast and you hit the brakes, the bike rotates around the CM. The rear wheel rises and the front end dips. The bike rotates more slowly because it has much more mass than just the rear wheel.

There is no net height increase because the CM is floating through the air.

Please see enclosed scientific paper.


That diagram is spectacular.
In the diagram I can’t tell if he is concussed and should he be allowed to race this weekend though.
5
LungButter
Posts
3858
Joined
1/9/2016
Location
Yellow Pine, ID US
2/24/2022 10:40am
Thumbs down this post if you've never taken a Physics class but still have an opinion about how Physics works.
1
5
Berni
Posts
547
Joined
4/11/2010
Location
ES
2/24/2022 11:19am
Skuzzy29 wrote:
This clears everything.... but if you go to the physics.. Energy is not created or destroyed, it just changes....

The bike in the air has a certain amount of potential energy due to height, and Kinetic energy due to speed (linear speed plus rotational parts).... Lets isolate the gravity for a moment because what is lost in potential energy due to the height and gravity, is gained in kinetick due to the vertical speed lost/gained..

Now if you push the brake, since energy does not dissapears, the kinetic energy due to rotation of the real wheel shoud be converted to potential energy (the bike gains height as a whole), being the rear goin up, and the front going down arround its center of gravity.... but as a whole it actually gains height....

This is not enterely true because the fact that you push the brake, generates heat... an other type of energy so no all kinetic energy lost went to raise the bike as a whole as some of this energy went to thermal energy.

So depending how much energy became thermal, it depends hoy much height was gained, and since the bike in the air can only rotate around it center of gravity..... happens what you see in the video... the rear goes upwards.

Great move by Anderson!!!


(English is not my first language so sorry if my explanation is a bit confuse)
2
1
thundergoat
Posts
80
Joined
1/28/2022
Location
Beverly Hills, CA US
2/24/2022 11:25am
I was sitting right where this happened. I couldn't believe Anderson went for it. From my view it looked like he had plenty of time to see chase on the ground and not go for the jump, and then it took forever to get the red cross flag out.
1
Broseph
Posts
878
Joined
4/28/2018
Location
Stevenson, WA US
2/24/2022 11:31am
KurtJ99 wrote:
Once Jason takes off, regardless of seat bounce or scrub, the trajectory of the center of mass (CM) of him and his bike is set. -...
Once Jason takes off, regardless of seat bounce or scrub, the trajectory of the center of mass (CM) of him and his bike is set.
- Seat bounce and his trajectory will be steeper, scrub it will be less steep

Once in the air, angular momentum is conserved. If your rear wheel is spinning fast and you hit the brakes, the bike rotates around the CM. The rear wheel rises and the front end dips. The bike rotates more slowly because it has much more mass than just the rear wheel.

There is no net height increase because the CM is floating through the air.

Please see enclosed scientific paper.


I reviewed your paper and have concluded that it meets Vital’s stringent requirements for adherence to the scientific method. Well done sir.

The real question is:
Is that jump a single since there’s no longer a valid landing in the middle due to Chase and his bike?
2
Tank_Slapper
Posts
271
Joined
2/22/2022
Location
Central, TX US
2/24/2022 11:46am
I was sitting right where this happened. I couldn't believe Anderson went for it. From my view it looked like he had plenty of time to...
I was sitting right where this happened. I couldn't believe Anderson went for it. From my view it looked like he had plenty of time to see chase on the ground and not go for the jump, and then it took forever to get the red cross flag out.
On TV it looked like late flagging, maybe no one in the corner ?, he was laying there for a bit before being jumped over
1
1
Gworm
Posts
849
Joined
4/5/2017
Location
Monett, MO US
2/24/2022 11:47am
After watching the video again, I conclude that JA would have landed about 2 1/4 inches away from his feet (towards the camera) and this whole thread is a waste ( or waist, since it’s on Vital).

Don’t ask me how many centimeters it is, my brain hurts.
1
4

Post a reply to: Anderson mid air brake tap to save Sexton

The Latest

The Latest