Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Swiss Man Flies With Jet Powered Wing

Posted by timothy on from the no-passenger-airbags-no-hybrid-engine dept.

NotBornYesterday writes "After spending $190,000 and 'countless hours' building a set of jet-powered wings, a Swiss man has successfully demoed this ultimate mother-of-all-toys. After jumping from a plane like a skydiver, he then lit the four jet engines and proceeded to fly around a valley in the Alps at up to 186 miles per hour. His site is here, if you want to see shots of him in action. 'I still haven't used the full potential,' he said."

21 of 247 comments (clear)

  1. OFN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    This news is AT LEAST several months old!

    Here are some youtube clips of him:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-66AcTo9TU

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEXxkWXncuo

    1. Re:OFN? by vtscott · · Score: 4, Informative
      To be fair, the yahoo article is dated today. I'm guessing that this is "new news" because it was the first public demonstration:

      A Swiss pilot strapped on a jet-powered wing and leaped from a plane Wednesday for the first public demonstration of the homemade device, turning figure eights and soaring high above the Alps.
      Those videos likely came from private practice runs. Now it seems they're confident enough with the device that they'll do live public demos.
    2. Re:OFN? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 4, Informative

      A cruise missile costs $1m. JDAMs cost $40000. I don't know what SDBs cost, but it should be less than a JDAM.

      The plane to drop them costs much more ($137m for an F-22) and if it gets shot down the pilot can be effectively held hostage to try to influence public opinion back in the US. Seems like a light weight, semi disposable way to drop bombs on people would be cheap and would avoid hostage situations with POWs.

      In fact you could could lose a whole squadron for less than a cost of one F-22. They'd be quite stealthy due to their size and low altitude, but they don't need to be. Sheer numbers would overwhelm enemy air defenses.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    3. Re:OFN? by 4D6963 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The plane to drop them costs much more ($137m for an F-22) and if it gets shot down

      And when's the last time a F-22 got shot down? Matter of fact a F-22 is probably less visible on a radar than this jet-packish thing we're talking about. You know what's the difference between a missile and that thing? Missiles can be launched from an airplane from 25 miles away (I'm not even talking about ground-ground missiles which can have any range you may need), and they cruise at a speed usually between Mach 2 and 4 (iirc). That thing probably wouldn't reach 200 knots if it tried so you could shoot it down with any heat-seaking missile or even anti-aircraft gun.

      There's a reason why missiles cost the price they cost. Same for pretty much anything in the Air Force.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    4. Re:OFN? by bev_tech_rob · · Score: 2, Informative

      CNN has posted the video as well on their homepage...

      --
      You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
    5. Re:OFN? by mr_mischief · · Score: 2, Informative

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/7402016.stm (without the trailing slash) will work a little better.

  2. Re:Wait... what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's essentially an airplane, not a rocket. It can climb with less thrust than weight. That's what the wings are for.

  3. Re:Wait... what? by jshackney · · Score: 4, Informative

    The ability of an aerospace vehicle to climb is not purely a thrust-to-weight problem. An 18,300 pound Learjet climbs just dandy with a maximum combined thrust of 7,000 pounds.

    This is the guy with the wing device and turbines, right? The site is fully slash'd.

  4. Re:It is pretty old by jd · · Score: 2, Informative
    Parachutes and paragliders tend to be unpredictable and are not particularly safe, doubly so at speeds exceeding sound or at very low altitudes. It's unclear the designs can be improved much beyond current levels. A more rigid wing might be a viable option under circumstances where parachutes either shouldn't be used or can't be used. As such, they may well be a viable option for emergency transport.

    Yes, it's an old story, but it has been a very slow news day. Actually, it's been a very slow news month!

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  5. Re:Obligatory by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 2, Informative

    The guy was dropped from a plane. The car equivalent to that would be to be dropped from a plane to land on a runway as the Bell X-1 did.

  6. Re:Landing? by Deadstick · · Score: 2, Informative

    With a parachute.

    rj

  7. Re:Landing? by TekPolitik · · Score: 2, Informative

    how exactly does this guy land?

    He cuts the engines and opens a parachute. The more concerning issue is the major bane of jet powered flight - bird hits. At the speed they are talking about, a bird hitting this guy in the head, even with a helmet, stands a good chance of knocking him out. Then you're going to have a dead bird as well as a dead wing-rider.

  8. Re:Wait... what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Doesn't matter, it's NOT a website.

    It's a fucking lame full-page Flash crapshoot.

  9. Re:Well... by BlueStrat · · Score: 2, Informative

    Sorry to reply to my own post, but c'mon mods! a "-1 Troll" mod?? It wasn't even anti-Swiss fer cryin' out loud!

    It was funny *precisely* because everyone knows hows little the Swiss want to be "Overlords" of anything, except maybe neutrality! Oops, there I did it again!

    *Sigh*

    Oh well..I've got the karma...burn, baby, burn!

    Cheers!

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  10. Re:Landing? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Informative

    Well, they say that any landing you can walk away from is a good one. If you can re-use the aircraft, it's a great one.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  11. Re:Landing? by c6gunner · · Score: 5, Informative

    At the speed they are talking about, a bird hitting this guy in the head, even with a helmet, stands a good chance of knocking him out. Then you're going to have a dead bird as well as a dead wing-rider.


    Naw. You've got the same problem with motorcycles - a buddy of mine had TWO birds hit him almost simultaneously, while he was doing 200+ mph. One nailed him in the head, cracking the face-shield, while the other one turned itself into jello inside the bike's headlight. Not only did it not knock him out, but he even managed to retain control of the bike.

    Most birds don't have much weight, and modern helmets are built with some heavy-impact in mind (no pun intended). You'd have to hit a friggin condor to get knocked out.
  12. nozzle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    F16's are single-engined, thus only have one "nozzle".

  13. Re:Making Sense by SpinyNorman · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yep, and Google's your friend for conversions:

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=186+miles+per+hour+in+km%2Fhr&btnG=Search

  14. Re:Making Sense by rcw-home · · Score: 5, Informative

    I gather that this number makes some sense in metric.

    Good call - 300 kph = 186.411mph

  15. Cobra! by csoto · · Score: 2, Informative

    Cobra Commander had one almost exactly like that. The dude needs a shiny metallic facemask! Cobra always was much cooler than G.I. Joe (except possibly Snake Eyes).

    --
    There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
  16. Thrust vs mass by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 2, Informative

    Mass is measured in kg
    Thrust is measured in N (newtons)

    There wouldn't be such confusion if you USians used proper units.