Slashdot Mirror
Personal Jet Pack for X-mas!
teamhasnoi writes "This guy has spent mucho time and money building a ducted fan 'jet pack'. No faking for this guy, it looks like there is some real technology there. Now he just needs a sponsor."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Last time I heard of an attempt to build a real jet pack, it could only lift I think about 100 punds two feet off the ground. I hope this is more successful!
Esse quam vederi.
And I only have -1 hours to buy it to make it on time for Christmas this year....
Oh, it's just the Darwin Awards guys inscribing his name on the plaque
... a little late, don'tcha think? Oh well.
Blow leaves, snow, sand, water and even unwanted neighbors all the way out of the neighborhood!
Great gift idea for all the suburbanites in your family!
signatures are for fools with hands
Here's the Google cache link in case this gets /.'ed.
>Personal Jet Pack for X-mas!
>Posted by michael on Wednesday December 25.
oh man, you americans sure are strange.
here in europe we have x-mas on the 24:th...
http://www.dreamalitytechnologies.com/ultralight.h tm
My
Limekiller
what the subject sez.
Didn't we just do this with somebody elses rig? Didn't we already decide we didn't want these people falling out of the sky all over us?
Did I miss something somewhere along the (very short) line?
Neat looking rig though.
Is it fascism yet?
....but santa tested it and had an accident. Christmas will be laster west of Jefferon City' TN. I suppose killing my karma will make up for me killing Santa.
disclaimer:Santa isn't real! GASP
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
jeez, this was on slashdot 2 days ago.. way to go slashdot
now all we need is a boobies topic.
Wow, it's so nice to see a site before it's slashdotted... All the pictures are there... I even got to see the movie!!
He should probably leave this thing on the rack today.
"MOM! MOM!! I just saw Stanta fly by!!"
*THUD!
[child sobbing]
My
Limekiller
Now... why I get a feeling that Ford does not put this much into their quality assurance? maybe because the windshield wiper burns and explodes if it's set on high for more than 30 seconds (as *one* example)
My life in the land of the rising sun.
Any guesses? I'm thinking somewhere in the high six figures. That's a *lot* of work on that inlet/fan. It's a pity the exhaust eyelets are such Rube Goldberg contraptions. I'd be willing to bet that there's another seven figure to be spent before the first loon would be willing to take a ride in it. Depending on how well that money was spent, it could be me... :)
Regards,
Ross
You have no idea what you're getting yourself into!
Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
Looks like a death trap to me, after all the money those other guys spent and how slick theirs looked. But I wish them good luck.
And the one mobile cart thing was supposed to revolutinize the way we "walk" as it put it... that thing couldn't go up stairs, and it was dorkey, jet packs are cool, didn't you see the roceketeer? yeah, i thought you did, take that nazi-germany, we'll see if you ever take over the world...SUCKERS
--fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
Anyways, as interesting as it is to see this being developed (as an expensive stupid toy I'll never own), this thing is huge, even without the engine attached. I read through/skimmed fairly quickly and saw no reference to a weight. It must be pretty heavy (top-heavy at that) - will the pilot be able to stand independently before/after flight, and how would landings be handled? Also, what about the heat? It looks like the exhaust ports are close to the pilot. Would an insulated suit be required? Then there's vibration; will the vibration be tolerable? Will the vibration be enjoyable?
so I'm curious about:
weight
heat
vibration
Perhaps I missed something in the article, but I did look (quickly) for this info. Hypothesizing, conjecture, guesstimating, half-assed jokes and outright lying are welcomed and appreciated.
RTFM; please, I beg you.
At 120 kg (264lbs) you'll not be walking around with one of these. But I still would love one to drop waterballoons from.
"Beware the squirrels"
Didn't I read about this on Fark this morning? :-)
My sig is too lon
I'm pretty sure it would still be unsafe.
1 good fart and your still going to explode!
... for the first bird that'll get sucked into that contraption by accident... ... but it won't keep me from laughing my ass off!
The only use I could really see for this is something in the military. Even then half of its affect would be psychological. Imagine you are holed in somewhere you think is safe from attack (for example, unapproachable by tank) and you hear the roar of 24 of these about a minute before 24 troups fly over the edge of the cliff about 20 yards away, the only angle you thought you would be totally safe from attack?
...it might a Personal Flying Suit or a kind of turbo powered two-person strap-in joystick controlled oral sex chair.
...or he probably could have gotten Disney interested in commercializing this toy.
Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the War Room!
I can say that even German cars have problems. For example, Porsche has had many problems with their Boxster line of cars, anywhere from leaking rear main seals to blown engines. Their other lines haven't gotten off the hook, either (it'll be interesting to see if response to problems with the upcoming Cayenne cause Porsche to change their ways -- sports car buyers are a completely different breed of person, willing to put up with a lot of problems that your average soccer mom SUV driver will not). BMW, Audi, Mercedes Benz, Volkswagen, etc have all had problems as well. Not that I'm complaining. My German-made car is still running just as well as the day it rolled off the factory line, but I don't have any illusions that having a German badge on it will keep it from having problems down the line.
Personally, I'd kill for a car of Italian design, German engineering, and Japanese manufacturing. Assuming they could all work well together, playing on their strengths to cover each other's weaknesses, that'd be a true super car. (With VAG/PAG owning Lamborghini, maybe we'll see at least two out of the three ...)
And to stay on topic ... damn. Them's some high RPMs!
I thought the whole point of the rocketeer was to keep the Jetpacks away from the Germans... Just Kidding :)
We as voters have given up essential liberty. We hoped to purchase a little temporary safety. We in fact deserve neither
Its much more entertaining than this gay rocket pack or 90% of the other "News for Nerds" that Malda annoys us with.
What else is there to say!?
And it's so compact, compared to the stand-up unit that was going to be produced by the company that whent up in smoke a few weeks ago (what was the name?)
By the way, anyone here any fluid-dynamics understanding, whats the reason for the strange, non-uniform shape of the compressor blade thing? I was looking at designs for automotive turbos, and I noticed the same thing (thoughs smaller, of course) and notice the same thing. Whats the deal with that?
By the way, how eficent are turbo engines? According to Airbus, their new super-sized plane is more fuel efficent then most cars. I was thinking it would be cool to build a sort of turbo-hybrid car. A large turbo engine that charges batteries, which run motors for the wheels. It could certanly be a lot more mechanicaly simple then an auto engine, I would think.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Is it just me, or do I seem to recall a guy on a jet pack during the opening ceremony?
It almost looks like the techno-trousers from The Wrong Trousers. Now all I need is a red rubber glove for a disguise and I'm all set to steal some diamonds.
Does it come with a hood?
You can't work outdoors in an airport without ear protection. I don't think ear plugs would even help with your head a foot away from a jet engine. Although I do think the power and speed of this thing would be impressive, even if its a disaster waiting to happen.
All he's doing is testing the engine, if I were building something pretty much unprecedented, and place my own life in it's hands, I'd make damn sure it was safe. I think almost anyone would, German or not.
That said, I'm sure ford does spend lots of time on safety features, although the engines they use aren't spinning nearly as fast (like 8-11krmp max) and are based on tried and true designs.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
So he chose to use a rotor of a large KKK brand turbocharger. Sorry. I just find that funny.
What was that old jetpack, with all the white smoke, that used to get dragged out at Super Bowls? The one you kind of sat in, had the handle bars, and it could only keep you aloft for about a minute? I can completely picture it from an episode of The Fall Guy, but can't find it online.
Dude, where's my packet?
Mod cousins left and mod Batman's ass to the floor!
---
Rock over London
Rock on Chicago
Wheaties: Breakfast of Champions
Suck a polar bear's funky ass!
If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
Thank you. That's the funniest thing I've read for a while.
now how do I *land*? The article mentions it's heavy enough and large enough that it would require some sort of support structure while it's on the ground. How do they intend to handle landings?
... Ground! ... I wonder if it'll be friends with me...)
Is the pilot supposed to expertly align the craft with the support structure while still airborne? Or is that just something they'll work out later? (What's this thing coming up to meet me very, very fast?
Furry cows moo and decompress.
I don't know why you're picking on Ford. I drive a 1992 Escort and have lived in Seattle for about 8 years, so the wipers have gotten LOTS of hours on them, and no failure yet!
:)
The only German car I've ever owned was a VW Rabbit, and I paid more in repairs for the car than I did for the car! And the morons are *still* using that idiotic seat-tilt knob instead of a lever like everyone else has figured out decades ago. Ugh.
Now, if you want to use Dodge as your crappy American car company example, I'll support you all the way.
Rocket packs can be hazardous to your health in more ways than the obvious.
Read on for a true story of kidnapping and murder all based around a rocket pack....when you let mechanical engineers het bored! :)
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
Being a mechanical engineer, I have to admit that this is some very impressive engineering. Knowing that there are people out there doing stuff like this on their spare time, makes me feel reassured that we will be ok after all.
I will probably get mod. redundant for this one..
Somebody should tell this retard that there was a reason that the U.S. Military chose rocket propulsion over jet. (Look at the size of the damn thing, not to mention the problems caused by the intake/reduced thrust of a jet.)
I mean, they might be interested in helping with and/or providing logic / software for control and stabilization based on attitude, in addition, possibly control based on shift of body attitude, like a hang-glider, but based on posi sensors or something. Possibly in return for sponsorship (big SegWay sticker on the back, or maybe DEKA gets first dibs on production or some such).
I'd love to see the plans for this released on the 'net. I'm no machinist, but I know some guys who are pretty capable. I'm sure the four of us could team up to build one of these... as long as we could scrape up the cash. If it's possible, that'd be very cool, even if they had to be purchased (just make it reasonable!).
I was thinking as well, the platform isn't very production-capable due to the suspension system. The person belts in like the Bell Rocket Belt did, suspended in a chest harness, and skydiving-style leg straps. That means, that controlling the machine relies on the ability of the user to keep himself on his elbows on the control bars, while the leg straps help suspend him. This isn't really a good way to make a widely-accessable vehicle. Besides the fact that the unavoidable high weight issues require some sort of feet, the system itself needs to carry the user, much as a car does. There should probably be a SMALL plate at the bottom, connected by a pair of rods (or a large single rear rod) to the chassis. This could also be the basis for the body-orientated direction control. I would think that in addition to this, the chest harness would be used, and in addition, making the joysticks adjustable for height and so on would be an option. Also, there could be a fold-down adjustable seat that the user could sit on as well. The feet could be deployable for landing, and there could be a collapsing-into-backpack capability (the footrest retracts, the seat/footrest folds backwards, the nozzles all fold in, the joysticks fold inwards and stow behind the user, and he walks around with a relatively heavy backpack (or possibly it could have wheels to roll around on).
This is just an outpouring of my stoned mind, please forgive anything that doesn't make sense.
Merry Christmas and all that jazz,
-cheezus_maximus (new nick coming soon!!)
I would have definitely gone with rocket propulsion for its advantage in "thrust" to "I am going to die" ratio. Not that I have never wanted to strap a P&W Jet engine to my back; it just seems better left to ultraman.
next time, do your research before masquarading a goatse link as google.
oh no!
I visited the Smithsonian Air & Space museum about 2 years ago, and noticed a cool device that was, I believe, based on an engine built by the Williams company.
(Williams makes some very small turbojet engines, famously for use in cruise missiles)
If I remember correctly, the Jetpack was a very Buck Rogers-looking device, with considerably greater endurance than the Bell Rocketbelt. Unlike the Rocketbelt with its' flight time of ~30 seconds (depending on which model you get your hands on); the Jetpack had a flight time of about 7 minutes, and featured a helmet shaker that would get your attention when you were about to run out of fuel.
(I want to say the Smithsonian display claimed a flight time of 30 minutes...)
So there's the problem... we can easily build an engine -- turbofan or rocket -- that'll lift itself, some fuel, and a person -- it just can't lift very much fuel, and these engines (or rockets) are thirsty!!
I can't seem to find much mention of the Jetpack on the Air & Space site, so here's what I can find:
- www.flying-contraptions.com
- "The WASP (Williams Aerial Survey Platform) had a jet engine on the bottom; a single occupant essentially stood on the fuel tank. Williams International, in Walled Lake, Michigan, makes little fanjet engines for cruise missiles, which were ideal for one-man jet belts. Bell worked with them on a jet belt with 7-minute endurance, which first flew on 7 April 1969. Later Williams developed the WASP, later renamed the "X-JET", which looked like a pilot standing in a garbage can. The 600-pound turbofan was mounted in front of the pilot, and the WASP could stay airborne for 30 minutes, reach speeds of 60 mph, and land in a four-square-foot area. It is unknown where the project stands today. It was a contract with the Army Tank Automotive Command. "
- Smithsonian Air & Space Museum page about the Bell Rocketbelt
- "However, despite the belt's apparent popularity, it turned out to be a commercial failure, mainly due to its limited use because of its short duration use. The Army's higher priority of missile development also contributed toward the loss of Army interest. The Army, and also Marine Corps which had considered the belt, did not adopt it and Bell no longer became sought its further development. In January, 1970, a license to sell and manufacture the Bell Jet Belt was granted by Bell Aerospace Textron to Williams International (formerly Williams Research Corp.) of Walled Lake, Michigan. Williams went onto to develop an improved, longer-duration jet-powered version of the belt."
- Page mostly about the Bell Rocketbelt, but attributes a turbojet-based belt to them as well
- This site seems to confirm my "30 minute flight time" recollection -- but the quote is "...an endurance of up to 26 minutes was anticipated", which would seem to say it was never achieved.
- Here's another (similar) picture, but the site it links to is a 404.
All that said, this thing looks interesting. High-bypass turbofan, ducting similar to an AV-8(A|B) Harrier, carbon fiber for light weight... I want to see video of it flying!"...America's great minds of today, teaching America's great minds of tomorrow. Poor bastards." -- A Beautiful Min
You mod up dumbass comments like you don't know what you are talking about. Wait a minute... If it doesn't involve C++, you don't know what you are talking about. Need proof? Try talking to a girl.
If you a whole minute to get ready, I don't think you'd really need to worry about it to much. Since the angle would go from the one you didn't think you could be attacked from to the one you know you're going to be attacked from.
And as another poster mentioned, you'd make a really easy target.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Being an Aerospace Engineer, I can't help but appreciate the efforts put forth by this brave individual. Having said that, I dare him to strap that thing on and spark it up. I would rather tie myself to the bottom of an F-18. Sure will be a great home video, though...
It wouldnt' add much to the weight, but it would make a lot of difference to safety of that unit.
OS Software is like love: The best way to make it grow is to give it away.
I would think that the exhaust off of that engine would be pretty damn hot! I don't see how it would even be bearable to ride on such a contraption!
Jeremy Cholfin and Chris Allen are retardely smart. Just ask them. IQ = Two million
I think he should get a webbie award for one of the most fundamentally flawed web sites I've ever seen!
I started to read it but got motion sick from all the horizontal scrolling. If he wants a sponsor, or even hits, he should consider redesigning his web pages so they don't suck!
Sorry to blow all my Karma Points on this one, but he won't get a sponsor if this is his presentation.
A gas turbine engine??
Jeez, just what we need, more pollutant-spewing transportation devices.
Why not modify the thing to use hydrogen fuel cells instead?
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
Heavens, what a monster! That's not a backpack device anymore! A custom turbine with such a diameter ought to have a considerable amount of weight, let alone combined with the engine. :-)
Since it will need supporting struts and something of a supportive landing gear (so the pilot doesn't break his legs) he might as well build a cabin-cockpit right away.
Maybe something like a bubble to crouch in. Guess that would also make some room for airflow and control improvement and solve the safety problem.
That aside, this shure is a cool gadget. Will my standard Euro-Drivers-License do?
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Personally, I'm more impressed that the server is still standing...
Most projects like this that get posted, with lots of pictures, die within minutes.
A Minesweeper clone that doesn't suck
umm, I don't think so. I've seen one or two exotics at an unnamed Hamvention, so here is my own Rule #16: don't strap yourself to a hundred pounds of pre-shrapnel. Strap in someone else. Science hurts.
Who in /. would like to be bolted to a noisy jet engine when the average person doesn't like the noisy fans or hard drives in his (or her ?) PC ?
Oh, you mean "in Soviet Russia, the jet packs you!"
;)
-T
Its not a rocket pack, but the military is helping to fund it, and it has flown. It uses an internal combustion engine to drive 2 shrouded fans above your shoulders. It does seem very loud, tho I'm sure with some refinement the noise could be lowered (using different blades on the fans and different shrouds). Still its a really neat idea. I wouldn't mind flying to work in one of those. Would make a 40mile trek much easier. Here is the link: http://www.solotrek.com/mjet/index1.html . and yes, I'm too lazy to figure out how to implement an inline.
"Hydrogen represents (Gibb's) available energy in a storable form"
To be accurate, I should have said:
Hydrogen in gaseous form is a medium for the storage of (Gibb's) available energy.
Note to self:
1) think
2) rant
But what the heck, this is Slashdot.
Being a pilot who owns my own airplane, and a firm believer that flying machines should get their lift from either a fairly sizeable airfoil, or a large container full of lighter-that-air gas... I can only say that while this machine is indeed a wonder of geekdom, it certainly looks like a lonely way to die.
It looks just like a giant...
there are alternatives...
Blearf. Blearf, I say.
As an owner of a German car, I think I have some valuable input. My car was released 3 years ago and was actually a slight modification plus different engine to a currently-existing car. My car has been recalled 5 or 6 times and it also made the top 10 list!
You have to remember that recalls meaning the car is being made better and that everyone has recalls.
Anyway, as far as I can tell, German Engineering means they make things 10X as complex as they need to be and thus prone to failure. My Saturn had fewer repairs in 8 years than my German car has in 3. A friend had a Benz 190 (not exciting, but well before the recent decontenting) and he pretty much showed me what German Engineering meant. His ignition key had 5 positions, not 3 (lock, stop/accessory, run and then two positions which light only the left or right hazard lights) and was made of pot metal. So, it was chock full of features but made no better or even worse than domestic parts.
no, if you want zillions of features with a lousy UI to control them (Audi being the only exception) and plenty of chance of going wrong, then get a German car. If you want reliability, get a Toyota Corolla. You'll die of boredom before the car breaks down.
Seriously, it's cool, but you can tell the guy is German. Not a piece of duct tape in any of the photos.
Being able to light only the left or right hazard lights is a necessary feature in Europe. There it is common to park your car in the road on narrow village streets. At night you want to light the left side of your car if you park on the right side of the street. I only really learned what "parking lights" are for once I lived in Europe for a few years. You use them so people can see your car when you park on the street at night. In America, we only use them when moving in twilight when we for some reason we don't want to use headlights.
Hmm, Mate a jet pack or this ducted fan with the gyro stabilizers from a Segway and then you have a stable platform that will move the direction you move avoiding all the problems from having to have a weighted bottom to keep it upright.
The pilot's torso is directly in the path of the jet's output. Any solid objects sucked into the intake are likely to punch a hole through the output manifold and be blown through the pilot.
I apologize profusely for observing that such an event during an inaugural test flight would be a tragic blow to this astounding engineering effort, but would also make for one of the most totally cool and awesome video clips ever produced anywhere.
for a personal turbo engine. Military is the most relevant, the ability to make precision low-altitude attacks could replace alot of heavy infantry, construction, and competition racing.
Thanks, I had no idea that Rover ran a gas turbine car at LeMans. That's really neat.
With turboprops, the gas generator runs at a constant rpm, and the propeller pitch changes to absorb increased power with increased throttle, so that there is very little lag in response. The F404 in F-18s have a lag of about 4 sec (IIRC) from idle to full dry thrust which is considered to be very good. The early turbojets (such as on the B-47) had lags in the range of 8 to 10 sec and were something of a problem for pilots who were accustomed to the quick response of propeller driven aircraft. Aircraft of this period (particularly carrier aircraft) flew the landing approach with high drag flaps and/or airbrakes open so that they could keep the throttle at a high rpm setting to have quick response if they had to abort the landing and go around. I've never considered the effect of lag in automotive applications, however.
Well, I'm going to take my own advice. I'm off to Google to see if I can find out more about this LeMans stuff.
Mod parent insightful. I believe when Kamen first came out with the designs for Segway, the first peekers, admittedly according to rumor, saw a future version that hovered. Now that the traditionally problematic stablization has been addressed.
--Joey
I consider a rocket to be more of a "projectile" than a flying machine :-)
- "This really makes me wonder. If you were building a device that was designed to fly really fast, for a really short time, at the end of which it would be blown into lots of very small pieces, how much time would you spend making it durable?"
Quite a bit, actually.- Cruise missiles don't fly for minutes, they fly for (potentially) hours.
- They get launched (none too gently!) from ships, submarines, bombers, and whatever else we manage to bolt them onto.
- Before they're launched, they sit around for ages with little or no maintenance.
- Cruise missile engines are started with a pyrotechnic cartridge (a small rocket motor starts things spinning), so they have to withstand that abuse.
- (And they get only one chance to start.)
- Our military is famous for demanding things be over-built; they're paranoid about failure, and take some extreme steps to prevent unexpected outcomes. (Spending a lot of money on engines is one approach, they don't care -- it's not their money.)
The 26-minute figure is, in this case, absolutely related to fuel carrying capability, not engine reliability. Turbine engines are a rather nasty environment for moving parts -- hot particulate combustion products, lubrication problems, extreme rotational speeds -- as a result, engines really can't be built cheaply, and even the 'disposable' ones are going to last a lot longer than 26 minutes... or even an hour.Another important point is the fact that missile engines are operating closer to the limits of their design (running hot and fast) versus the stresses the same engine would be subject to in a different situation (a jetpack, for instance).
The gas-turbine-powered Indianapolis race car is an interesting example of bearing failure. It ran almost the entire race, only to fail about 3 laps from the finish due to a cheap bearing. They'd used a commercial engine (not cheap or designed for a short life by any stretch!), and it lasted almost the whole race -- but not quite.
(It was Parnelli Jones driving a Granatelli/Pratt & Whitney car in the 1967 Indy 500, if you're interested.)
"...America's great minds of today, teaching America's great minds of tomorrow. Poor bastards." -- A Beautiful Min
The day Microsoft creates a product that doesn't suck, it will be known as the Microsoft Vaccuum Cleaner!
No, the jet's output is out the back. The jet exhaust is used to power a fan (just a regular fan) that blows downward.
Uh... deity is a word, and diety isn't.
Or is it supposed to be one of those recursive acronyms? Diety Is
Excellent To You. Deity Eats Icecream That's Yellow. Diety Is
Eloping To Yokohama. I'll stop now.
-- Guy Maor
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...