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."

Comments

What's that noise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, it's just the Darwin Awards guys inscribing his name on the plaque

new at walmart!

[boog3r]

Your very own jetpack/leafblower combo!

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!

Faking It

[limekiller4]

Checking out the "faking it" site, we find:

http://www.dreamalitytechnologies.com/ultralight.h tm

...are those wings really necessary? =)

Please, Stop Working On It Today...

[limekiller4]

He should probably leave this thing on the rack today.

"MOM! MOM!! I just saw Stanta fly by!!"
*THUD!
[child sobbing]

This is why I buy german cars

[lingqi]

he had it tested at MTU (Motoren und Turbinen Union) to be sure it will stand the design speed of his engine (65krpm) and has got a sufficient safety margin. This wheel had been accelerated 2000 times up to 75krpm and will still have to be tested a few hundered times at 82krpm.

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)

Re:Cool

[mkweise]

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.)

Um, what?

[autopr0n]

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.

Working jetpacks are out there...

[Raetsel]

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!

Re:Working jetpacks are out there...

[limekiller4]

Raetsel writes:
"...and featured a helmet shaker that would get your attention when you were about to run out of fuel."

Later models included a helmet puncher, throat throttler or nut twister as a standard option.