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)
Oh, it's just the Darwin Awards guys inscribing his name on the plaque
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.
http://www.dreamalitytechnologies.com/ultralight.h tm
My
Limekiller
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.
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
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?
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.
could only lift I think about 100 punds two feet off the ground
Hell, that much jet propulsion can be achieved with the help of nothing but a generous portion of one of the less digestible varieties of beans. (Better hurry, thought, before they pass a law against personal greenhouse gas emissions.)
Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the War Room!
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.
Weight - they mentioned that it would be around 120 kg with everything attached (next to the 2nd picture). That would be around 275 lbs!!! They said it would probably need some sort of base wheels to deal with this (basically, something to support the whole device while you wear it, but aren't flying).
Vibration - not something I had considered, but it should be. I wonder what the engine he has would cause, especially combined with the carbon fiber of the housing.
Heat - this is something I was wondering about. I mean, you accelerate heat to the speed needed for a project like that, and you usually get a bunch of heat. That could be a bad thing. Just looking at how it is setup, I see leg burns just from the air exhaust, not to mention how hot the device itself would get, which would be right next to your head, face arms and torso.
I wish this guy luck, but all things considered, I don't know if he has totally put thought into the external effects of the device.
RonB
It is human nature to take shortcuts in thinking.
And one (or more) of the Super Bowls. Plus a Bond movie too (Thunderball I think).
Just from what I have seen, I think those were the Bell Rocket Belt that he was talking about (seen here).
I think his design has it's merits. But it also has flaws. If it will work - great, but I just am not sold.
RonB
It is human nature to take shortcuts in thinking.
First, it HAS been done before so its lame to say "I don't know if he has totally put thought into the external effects of the device.". So the idea CAN work, the question is whether or not the man will get the funding to finish it.
Second, the only real jetpack requires a special suit to protect your legs from this heat, and is just as noisy, so neither claim you made is correct.
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.
It seemed like from the design that the heat goes out the back, not down. The turbine is used to drive a fan. The turbine will fire out around the bottom perimeter of the fan, and the fan blows just air downward.
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.
...when you let mechanical engineers het bored! :)
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
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!!)
Sure, but at least on Fark we ended up turning it into a boobies discussion by drooling over Jennifer Connely in The Rocketeer.
-l
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
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.
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 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.
In Germany, the annual inspection that cars go through (TUV) is far more rigorous than in any other country. For example, all spare parts have to be type-approved ones - no third-party spares. They're also really strict about what bits you can take from scrapped cars.
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
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.
So, in Germany you can't buy 3rd-party parts for your car? Seems strange. Parts must cost a fortune.
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.
there are alternatives...
Blearf. Blearf, I say.
Seriously, it's cool, but you can tell the guy is German. Not a piece of duct tape in any of the photos.
I never claimed that it would or would not work. Overall, the design looks very feasable.
This all being said, it is radically different than the design of the working "Jet Pack" that is out there. I mean, he has 4 lower exhaust ports, that is where I point out that heat is an issue. Sure, wear a fire suit - no problem, maybe, but then again maybe not. The Bell Rocket Belt had jets far outside of the device, away from the pilot's body (not to mention they were small). This thing has the exhausts vents right on top of you. And they are huge.
Again, we are talking a radically different design from the BRB, I don't think comparisons to it are applicable. I stand by what I have said. Vibration (possibly) and heat are problems that could arise from this design.
RonB
It is human nature to take shortcuts in thinking.
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 :-)
Unless they had to manually engage the starter clutch like he did every time. ;)
Actually, does anyone know how that works. When he took it to MTU, how did they setup an automated testing system? Do they have a kind of 'meta' sequencer that would be inappropriate to use on the actual jetpack?
I'm just a coder, so sometimes I wanna know how the fuck people go round and play with huge turbines. Thats just cool.
"Old man yells at systemd"
Did the manufacturers have anything to do with the creation of this law? ;-)
- "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
Strangely enough, yes. Oh, and in reply to the grandparent post, yes. They do cost a fortune.
And I suppose you don't mind what this German companies did during the '30s and '40s? My mother, when she was a 11 to 14 years old girl, was working as a slave in VW factories (BMW and Mercedes-Benz wasn't any different), while her best friend from school was murdered in a gas chamber in Treblinka. Guess who built those gas chambers and giant ovens? I suppose you are OK with that, because thanks to slave workers and those death facories built for nazis, those companies could grow and as a result they can now make so great cars? Just like the USA and Nigerian slaves were OK, because without the slavery USA would not be so successful, right?
I will tell you something: The worst things Microsoft has ever done is nothing compared to your German car companies. I would rather buy million copies of Microsoft Windows than one smallest part manufactured by one of those German companies, or IBM for that matter, who sold machines to Hitler, thanks to which nazis could find Jewish ancestors of any given citizen up to five generations in the past and send this person to death camps, because having Jew as a great-great-great-grandfather was enough to send someone to death! Maybe you think that only Hitler was evil and every other German was good? I remind you that Hitler was chosen in a democratic election! If you compare Microsoft to BMW, Mercedes-Benz, VW or IBM than you simply don't know what you are saying.
And please don't tell me that there was no holocaust! My mother who is now 72 years old got money from Germans because she could prove to them that she was working as a slave when she was still a child. Do you know how much money has she got? 2000 DEM, which was about 1000 USD! Yes, a 1000 fucking bucks for four years working as a slave being a child without any contact with parents and sister! And she thanks God every day that she was not murdered by nazis, like many of her friends, when they were still children! So please, for the love of God, don't tell me that we can compare VW, Mercedes-Benz or BMW to Microsoft!
~Christopher Doopov