Between take-off and stable flight position, distance is decided: measured joint angles, lift acting during take-off and why even elites scatter here.
Distance is not created in stable flight but in the transition into it — in the first tenths of a second after the table edge. And the decisive insight of this phase is uncomfortable: aerodynamic forces already act while the take-off movement is still running. Wind tunnel measurements over a force plate show that lift shortens take-off time by around 11.3 to 14.4 percent [1] — so the jumper has less time for his force impulse than statics would suggest.
The remarkable part: this shortened force time is compensated by lift, so that in the end a higher vertical velocity results than a pure impulse calculation would predict [1]. The take-off is therefore not a purely muscular event. It is an aerodynamic one.
Kinematically the phase is precisely measured: from take-off into the early flight position, jumpers extend the hip to 86 to 109 degrees and the knee to 136 to 171 degrees, incline the trunk from 49 to 41 degrees and angle the skis from 20 to 51 degrees [2]. These numbers are not prescriptions — they are the bandwidth within which world class happens.
Analytical section. It describes the biomechanics and aerodynamics of the transition phase — it is explicitly not execution instruction.
It starts at the trigger point of the take-off movement and ends when the flight position carries. The take-off is the most important movement phase because it sets all four initial conditions of the flight, and the force window is fractions of a second long; take-off velocity perpendicular to the ramp sits at roughly 2 to 3 metres per second in elites [3].
Hip 86 to 109 degrees, knee 136 to 171 degrees, trunk from 49 to 41 degrees, skis from 20 to 51 degrees [2]. Translated: the body opens, tips forward at the same time and lays the skis flat into the air — one movement, not a two-beat rhythm. And: vertical velocity at take-off strongly influences flight height [2].
This is where most athletes go wrong. Lift shortens take-off time by around 11 to 14 percent and at the same time compensates that loss through a higher vertical velocity [1]. Planning the take-off as a pure force impulse plans past reality — the correct use of the acting aerodynamic forces before and during take-off is a precondition for a good flight position [1].
Lift and drag values of the initial take-off position vary strongly even between elite jumpers and, according to simulation, decisively influence distance [1]. Meaning: two take-offs that look technically clean can be far apart aerodynamically. Optics prove nothing here.
The transition does not end in "some" position but in a system that carries: the V-style turns jumper and skis into a wider lifting surface [4]. In the early phase the order is first reduce drag, later maximise lift [5] — efficiency first, lifting surface after.
The transition inherits what the in-run delivers: around 90 km/h at take-off, a ramp of roughly 35 degrees and a table already pointing around 10.5 degrees downwards [6]. A sloppy crouch costs entry speed — and with it every downstream quantity in the calculation.
This phase is the limit range of the sport, and that is exactly why a hard boundary stands here: this guide explains and motivates, it never replaces supervised training in a club or at the hill. It deliberately contains no execution instruction — no timing cue, no flight correction, no landing command.
Separate understanding from execution. Understanding the transition makes nobody hill-ready. Anyone working on this phase does so with a coaching team, video diagnostics and the hill sizes they are cleared for — never experimentally and never alone.
And one point suggested by the data: because the aerodynamic effect of a take-off position is not directly visible [1], self-experiments in this phase are especially risky. What feels right can be aerodynamically expensive — and the other way round.
Treat the take-off diagnostically as an initial-conditions problem, not a strength problem. Four quantities leave the table simultaneously: flight speed, flight angle, angular momentum and body position [3]. Adjusting only one shifts the other three. Practically that means: never assess a take-off in isolation, always against the flight position that emerges two tenths of a second later — and across series, not single jumps, because otherwise aerodynamic scatter gets misread as technical error [1].
The body opens and tips at the same time: hip to 86 to 109 degrees, knee to 136 to 171 degrees, trunk inclination from 49 to 41 degrees, ski angle from 20 to 51 degrees [2]. In parallel, aerodynamic forces already act and shorten take-off time by around 11 to 14 percent [1]. It is one movement, not a two-beat rhythm.
Because the take-off sets all initial conditions of the flight — flight speed, early flight angle, angular momentum and body position [3] — and because vertical velocity strongly influences flight height [2]. Everything that happens later in flight works with what these tenths of a second delivered.
Because the aerodynamic properties of the initial take-off position scatter strongly even within the world's best and, according to simulation, decisively influence distance [1]. Two visually similar take-offs can therefore have very different lift and drag values — optics alone are no measure of quality.
No, the order is the opposite: in the early flight phase, reducing drag comes before maximising lift, which takes effect later [5]. The target state remains the carrying V position, worth up to around 10 percent more distance and roughly 28 percent more lift than the parallel style [4].
Elite-Level Flight Optimisation: Angle of Attack, Body Position and the Wind