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."

35 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 zippthorne · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This guy's been jumping out of planes with jet-powered wings for *years*.. to the point that the big story over a year ago was that the army was considering developing one to give air-dropped troops more flexibility. Supposedly the wings can hold like 200 lbs worth of gear in addition to the "pilot."

      It'll be news again when he finally achieves his goal of taking off with just the wing. Not jumping out of a plane.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    3. Re:OFN? by Scrameustache · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This guy's been jumping out of planes with jet-powered wings for *years*.. to the point that the big story over a year ago was that the army was considering developing one to give air-dropped troops more flexibility. Supposedly the wings can hold like 200 lbs worth of gear in addition to the "pilot."

      It'll be news again when he finally achieves his goal of taking off with just the wing. Not jumping out of a plane. I'm thinking "SEAL-dropping UAVs", dropped from a bigger plane, flies a ways into enemy territory, drops the daring soldier, and flies back undetected (ideally).
      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    4. Re:OFN? by nbert · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Who the fuck keeps modding up these moronic "This is old news!!!" posts from AC's.
      Yes, they are boring, but someone has to state the obvious and there's nothing wrong about imforming everyone about prior coverage in the media.

      It might have been the first official flight, but I can recall at least 3 TV "infotainment" shows (non-US) covering this in recent years. Afterall it's just the economy of the mass media industry: Some major media agency publishes this and every news source copies it ad nauseam, because the journalists in charge haven't heard of it before or they simply are in need of content. Or they feel that not covering it will make their clientele think that they are not aware of an issue important to their particular target group*.

      Two anecdotes: I know someone in the healthcare industry who hired a pr agency to promote his product. They scheduled a press conference in spring. Maybe 5 journalists of unimportant newspapers showed up. However, the press-kit they send to every major news source really paid off: In the silly season (over here that's around July) many newspapers wrote a feature about said product. Some even copied the euphemistic phrases of the press kit: "Breakthrough in hip surgery", "Uncle John can finally walk again" and so on.
      On another occasion I wrote to a major energy supplier requesting material about their view on nuclear power. They send me many articles and 2 months later I read one of them again in my favorite newspaper word-by-word (it was about a new generation of nuclear plants somewhere in scandinavia). Both examples show that we have to pay attention to how we read news and who has interest in making it public. It also shows that journalists do not only cover interesting stories, but also copy material because of laziness or cost pressure.

      For those reasons I like it when someone shouts "old news" in such discussions. It's a kind reminder that the news isn't newsworthy. And if I haven't heard about it before I can still read on, but I'll take it with a grain of salt.


      *Not a problem as long as they mention that it has been covered before.
      --
      I don't read replies by ACs.
    5. Re:OFN? by at_slashdot · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's nothing, I'm pretty sure that I've seen Wile E. Coyote using such a product designed by Acme long time ago...

      --
      "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
    6. Re:OFN? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You know, if you replaced the pilot with remote control system, it could carry GBU-39s. Or even something smaller, like the size of RPG warheads. The idea is that you launch loads of these things from B52s and they would swarm over a combat zone killing tanks and sending video feeds back.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-39_Small_Diameter_Bomb

      --
      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;
    7. Re:OFN? by 4D6963 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh that gives me an idea! What about we give bombs small wings and jet engines so they could reach from like 20 miles away a target much faster than a plane!? I propose we call these new type of jet-powered bombs "missiles".

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    8. 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;
    9. Re:OFN? by MrMr · · Score: 4, Funny

      If I were considering dropping large mammals from a bigger plane I would not use a seal but I'd use a sperm whale.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsK6aRuSBIc

      or a bowl of petunias.

    10. 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!
    11. Re:OFN? by rarel · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh no, not again...

  2. Just don't get too close to the sun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    This ought to be fun. Might even turn into a sport or extreme recreational activity. But just remember what happened to the last person who got too close the sun ...

  3. Re:Well... by phyruxus · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hear the Brits developed this technology in the mid-80's, but abandoned it when they could not find a way to make it leak oil.

    With apologies to britons and MG lovers everywhere.

    --
    "A witty saying proves nothing." ~Voltaire
    "d'Oh!" ~Homer
  4. Jetpack! by vecctor · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is the one time where people could legitimately use the term "jetpack" and then the submitter and TFA choose not to!

    Looks very cool.

    --
    Why, yes I have been touched by His noodly appendage. And I plan to sue.
  5. I hate to give the wrong people any ideas, but... by StefanJ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder if these things show up on radar. And how easy they'd be to shoot down. Because they'd make dandy kamikaze weapons.

  6. Re:Wait... what? by jd · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, that depends on the exchange rate at the time.

    --
    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)
  7. Famous last words... by HydraSwitch · · Score: 5, Funny

    'I still haven't used the full potential,' he said.

    Feh.

    Definitely famous last words.

    1. Re:Famous last words... by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      'I still haven't used the full potential,' he said.

      Full Potential == Darwin Award

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  8. 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.

  9. misread it by B3ryllium · · Score: 4, Funny

    I initially misread it as "Jet Powered Wang".

    1. Re:misread it by geekoid · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'll take two.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  10. Making Sense by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 5, Funny

    at up to 186 miles per hour.

    I gather that this number makes some sense in metric.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. 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

  11. Re:Wait... what? by speculatrix · · Score: 4, Funny

    you really gotta stop using that old Intel Pentium for your math!

  12. Re:It is pretty old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Parachutes and paragliders tend to be unpredictable and are not particularly safe, doubly so at speeds exceeding sound
    Please mod up +1 informative. I had no idea that parachutes and paragliders were unsafe when flown at 770 mph.
  13. Re:Darwin awards by somersault · · Score: 4, Funny

    The problem being that the windchill permanently damaged his balls, so that scuppers that plan!

    Okay, okay, so I'm just kidding - I know not the actual condition of his balls.

    --
    which is totally what she said
  14. Re:Landing? by rrohbeck · · Score: 4, Funny

    With a parachute. Even though you'd think a pair of rollerblades should be sufficient.
    --
    thegodmovie.com - watch it
  15. Re:It is pretty old by binarybum · · Score: 4, Funny

    I do. Have you flown on commercial aircraft recently? I'd rather get tugged behind jet-man on a rope.

    --
    ôó
  16. Re:Wait... what? by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Funny

    You work for the RIAA/MPAA, right?

  17. Re:Landing? by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't know how, but he only does it once.

  18. Uh oh by Ihmhi · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hobgoblin in 3... 2...

    --
    Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
  19. 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.
  20. Re:Landing? by grassy_knoll · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wiley Coyote, is that you?

    --
    A Human Right
  21. ACME Jet Powered Wing Pack by catdevnull · · Score: 4, Funny

    Didn't I see Wyle E. Coyote with one of these?

    If the Swiss man flew this into a mountain side with a tunnel painted on it, I wouldn't be surprised at all.

    --

    I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...