
Andean condor can fly for 100 miles without flapping wings - rtsil
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/13/andean-condor-fly-without-flapping-wings-flight-bird
======
simple10
Paraglider and hang glider pilots can also soar for hundreds of miles without
power or flapping. Soaring birds like condors, turkey vultures, hawks, etc.
use the same technique of turning in tight circles in rising air to increase
altitude. Once cloud base is reached and the rising air stops, they glide
significant distances to the next hillside with rising air. Whenever you see
birds in the sky circling around the same spot together, it's because they're
in rising air and using it to stay aloft.

~~~
ajuc
There's thermals (a spot on the land that is warmer than the surroundings so
the air rises there), and there's topography that causes rising air (for
example when the wind blows at a face of a hill - the air has no choice but to
go up).

RC gliders can stay in air basically forever flying back and forth in rising
air along a hillside. It's called slope-soaring and it's great fun.

~~~
StavrosK
Here's an RC glider doing 545 mph with that technique:
[https://youtu.be/MoaWlKC3wIM](https://youtu.be/MoaWlKC3wIM)

I don't know how they manage to control it or measure the speed, but it looks
legit.

~~~
sails
That is dynamic soaring [1] which is I guess a subset of slope soaring, and is
pretty rare and nuts. It generally requires flying in the lee of a slope
rather than in front of it.

Regular slope soaring is relatively more sedate, fun and accessible if you
have the right slope.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_soaring](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_soaring)

> Dynamic soaring is sometimes confused with slope soaring which is a
> technique for achieving elevation.

------
justaguyhere
Owls can fly almost in total silence, peregrine falcons can hit close to 250
mph, eagles can spot a tiny mouse from tens of thousands of feet...

Mother nature is wonderful and terrifying at the same time. Suddenly I am
feeling sad for sitting in front of a screen for 8-10 hours a day instead of
being out and enjoying what nature has to offer :(

~~~
phonypc
I think it's equally wonderful and terrifying that nature produced humans,
capable of creating the screens we look at all day.

~~~
hanniabu
But think about the efficiencies and profits!

~~~
missedthecue
because without them, nature would be a constant foe rather than something we
can enjoy.

------
YeGoblynQueenne
Linked from the same article:

 _Fight of the condor: Peru bull fiestas threaten future of rare Andean bird_

 _At a raucous mountain festival high in the Peruvian Andes, a brass band and
booming loudspeaker herald the arrival of the most eagerly awaited spectacle._

 _With the wings of an angel and the horns of a devil, the tonne of life that
flaps and bucks and charges into the bullring at first resembles a strange
mythological beast._

 _Snorting and kicking up dust, the hybrid – a raging bull with a condor
strapped to its back – strikes awe in a watching crowd as it thunders into the
arena, then excitement as it repeatedly attempts to gore a matador. The closer
the enraged beast comes to a lethal connection, the louder the cheers of
"Olé!"_

[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/29/condor-peru-
bu...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/29/condor-peru-bull-fight-
andes)

Olé, indeed.

------
DannyB2
I remember a story from the early 1980's about Steve Jobs.

Steve asked, what is the most efficient animal in motion?

People would give many answers.

The correct answer was a condor in flight.

A common wrong answer was a human being.

Steve then pointed out that the human isn't even close. Not even in the
running as far as efficiency of some other animals.

But . . . if you give the human a bicycle, then the human absolutely cleans up
in terms of efficiency. Steve wanted personal computers to be "a bicycle for
the mind".

~~~
netcan
Isn't the condor still much more efficient. How many calories does a cyclist
need to travel 100 miles?

~~~
linuxftw
Humans in orbit for long periods seem like they'd be the most efficient.

------
nickik
I highly suggest people watch this amazing video by Al Bowers a NASA scientist
about how flight works for birds and planes.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-dk1NpVNNI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-dk1NpVNNI)

~~~
0xffff2
Calling Al Bowers "a NASA scientist" is like calling Jeff Bezos "some rich
guy". Al was (now retired) the Chief scientist at Armstrong Flight Research
Center, and has been a huge inspiration to hundreds (maybe thousands) of young
interns over the years.

~~~
nickik
I didn't remember his exact title, I don't think he would object to NASA
scientist.

~~~
0xffff2
I know him personally and he certainly wouldn't. He's one of the most humble
people I've ever met. I just wanted to emphasize that he's not just any NASA
scientist.

------
samvher
Bird physics are really interesting. There's an excellent (and accessible)
book called "The Simple Science of Flight" by Henk Tennekes (who is an expert
in the study of turbulence) which I really enjoyed reading, highly recommend
it.

~~~
tetris11
Related: Search Wikipedia for "boids"

------
starpilot
Wing flap frequency varies inverse logarithmically with wing span in flying
animals, see
[https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jeremy_Rayner2/publicat...](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jeremy_Rayner2/publication/13904663/figure/fig3/AS:667179653558283@1536079433659/Wingbeat-
frequency-versus-wing-length-For-comparison-the-slopes-of-two-predicted.png)

It's amazing how this carries over across species. Hummingbirds fly more like
insects than eagles.

------
clueless123
Some fun facts..

Andean Condors in Peru glide from 14'000 ft up in the andes of Pampa Galeras
all way the down to sea level at the Guano islands in the coast of Paracas.
All to get stuffed eating crushed sea lions babies carcases..

After eating , Condors can't take of from the ground by flapping.. they got to
"hop" up a hill to be able to launch into the incoming air to get some
altitude.

Then they fly back up to 14'000ft by a combination of dynamic lift, thermals
and wave induced lift when available.

A few years ago, a group of top paraglider pilots tried to recreate their
journey up the mountains, but it ended with both pilots pretty badly injured
after encountering nasty turbulent winds on the mountain canyons.

------
speedgoose
~161km.

~~~
iso1631
The article says more than 100 miles, that's 1 significant figure, and likely
somewhere in the 100-120 mile range. More than 160km is the appropriate
conversion, and indeed what the article says, it's likely 160-200km.

If I say it's 50km to somewhere, an appropriate conversion would be 30 miles,
not 31.07 miles.

~~~
speedgoose
Pardon my French, but on encule un peu les mouches là.

[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/enculer_les_mouches](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/enculer_les_mouches)

------
loudmax
Youtube channel Moth Light Media did a video on the largest flying birds:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bXov-Z2_9U](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bXov-Z2_9U)

Fossil evidence shows records of some truly enormous flying beasts. One of the
topics of the video is how their existing relatives, the condors, make use of
updrafts and air currents to avoid spending the energy to flap their wings.
We're all familiar with the trope of vultures circling above a dying animal,
but the circling may also be riding an updraft to maintain altitude without
expending additional energy.

------
jcun4128
The low aspect ratio wings paired with the wing tip feathers to reduce wing
tip vortices for birds of prey is pretty cool compared to the super high
aspect ratio wings of Albatrosses.

------
glaberficken
>"The difference can be likened to pedalling a bicycle uphill versus coasting
downhill, said Bret Tobalske, a bird flight expert"

More like - coasting uphill!

~~~
throwaway0a5e
Any land based analogies (that don't involve a geological time scale) are
going to be bad because the land doesn't move whereas the air does and
efficiently harnessing that movement to get gravitational potential energy
which can be converted into motive power is how gliding things stay airborne

------
kirillzubovsky
The article doesn't link to the original study, but I would be curious to know
how long was the next longest flap-less flight. If the first one is 5 hours,
and the next is 4.5, awesome, but if the next longest bird was not flapping
for only 35 minutes, I would attribute this to equipment malfunction rather
than some awesome paragliding bird. Science is fascinating.

------
jmartrican
The equivalent for a programmer I guess would be 100 hours without a single
LOC. Whole still getting code to production.

~~~
exikyut
Hmm, who is more efficient: the programmer who writes 100 lines then deletes
them after finding them all unnecessary, or the programmer who (as implied)
doesn't need to write the lines in the first place?

------
tempire
I first read this as "Andorian condor" and was intrigued, but a regular terran
condor isn't quite as interesting.

------
econcon
Once you go up in air, larger wings means less air drag from wing tip
turbulence.

------
Edward9
Fly? Isn't it basically gliding?

~~~
WJW
Except for rockets, everything in the air is gliding. Some things are also
powered, but that does not makes them glide less, just more.

~~~
ajuc
Ballons aren't gliding.

Helicopters and quadcopters also aren't gliding.

~~~
WJW
Helicopters and quadcopters provide lift through rotary wings, thereby
gliding. Fair point about balloons though.

~~~
ajuc
That's like saying cars are moving by turning (because their wheels do that).

~~~
meheleventyone
Cars are moved by turning though. From the pistons driving the engine, through
the gearbox and drivetrain to the wheels.

------
paul_milovanov
Laden or unladen?

------
blatchcorn
Surely everyone knows this by now

~~~
maest
The relevant xkcd: [https://xkcd.com/1053/](https://xkcd.com/1053/)

~~~
bergstromm466
Wow such a great one, thanks for posting this.

The relevant soundtrack:
[https://youtube.com/watch?v=3GwjfUFyY6M](https://youtube.com/watch?v=3GwjfUFyY6M)

------
HenryKissinger
> The Andean condor has a 3-metre (10ft) wingspan and weighs up to 15kg
> (33lbs), making it the world’s heaviest soaring bird.

With a wingspan this large and a weight this low, the Andean corridor must
generate enough lift by itself.

Tl;dr It's a biological aircraft.

~~~
StavrosK
Aren't aircraft mechanical birds, though?

~~~
iso1631
I don't know any aircraft that propel themselves by moving wings.

~~~
samvher
Check out [http://www.delfly.nl/](http://www.delfly.nl/)

It's pretty small, but a very cool concept nonetheless.

~~~
kitd
Wow! never seen that before. That's incredible.

------
burfog
I wonder how much it really saves.

Unless there is some sort of bone oddity in the joint, the wings are not
locked in place. The bird must still self-support via muscles.

Try it. The relatively bird-like way is like a gymnast on a pair of rings,
arms horizontal. Doing things upside-down, consider standing with outreached
arms holding heavy objects. It'd be half your body weight at the arm
midpoints, which due to leverage is roughly like a quarter of body weight in
each hand.

Even without any flapping, that is going to consume lots of energy.

~~~
breakfastduck
That's not a fair comparison at all.

The gymnast example is fighting against gravity with absolutely no external
factor other than personal strength, but the warm air / wind resistance
pushing against the wings that allows the condor to fly for so long without
flapping is contributing immensely to their ability to hold the wings in
place.

~~~
StavrosK
It would be more like having your arms and legs (by body weight) hanging in
sheets (so the entire length), rather than rings at the end of them.

