Slashdot Mirror


Jet Pack Runs For Hours On Water

Ponca City, We love you writes "Jet packs have been around for half a century, but there's always been one problem: they run out of fuel in around 30 seconds. Now a German company has taken the standard jet pack design, run a fat yellow hose out the back, and connected it to a small unmanned boat that houses an engine, pump, and fuel tank and sends pressurized water up the hose, where it's shot out by two nozzles just behind the wearer's shoulders. Called the JetLev-Flyer, the design purportedly can reach a height of 15 meters, a speed of 72 kph, and a range of 300 kilometers based on four hours of flying time. A digital fly-by-wire system is used to control the throttle. Future designs may achieve higher altitudes, higher top speeds, and extended range, and even travel below the water's surface. The American manufacturers claim it is 'amazingly easy to learn and operate' and they're taking orders now at $130,000 each."

49 of 268 comments (clear)

  1. are you crazy? by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    and a range of 300 kilometers based on four hours of flying time.

          But based on the actual length of the hose, the range is more like 100 feet.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:are you crazy? by GreenTech11 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The boat is towed along behind the jetpack, so the range is correct, if you are only flying above water :)Which limits the practicality in my mind. If however they can engineer them to work underwater, with a longer hose like those used on old diving suits, then I can see this having a purpose, i.e faster descent times and time spent examining shipwrecks etc.

      --
      Laughter is the best medicine, except if you have a broken rib.
    2. Re:are you crazy? by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 5, Funny

      It reminds me of the electric car I invented - the one with the really really long extension cord.

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    3. Re:are you crazy? by ToadMan8 · · Score: 4, Informative

      lol; I think they mean the boat / pump thing will be underwater, not the jetpack. Divers are limited by physiological things when ascending and descending, not how fast they can swim. SCUBA certification organizations will tell you one foot per second up and down is about the limit. They already have underwater propulsion things (little units you hang on to that you point in the direction you want to go, and they run of batteries) to combat currents, long distance requirements, etc. that are about as good as required.

      --
      I haven't posted in so long, my sig is out of date.
    4. Re:are you crazy? by rohan972 · · Score: 2

      The boat is towed along behind the jetpack, so the range is correct, if you are only flying above water :)Which limits the practicality in my mind.

      You're right. It's unlike all the other inventions that have no limit to their practicality.

    5. Re:are you crazy? by yotto · · Score: 4, Funny

      This seems more of a limit on a jetpack than I'd be willing to accept. I mean, cruising along 100 feet over the ground (Well, the water) is fine until you hit a dock, or accidentally go over land. Then you've got 100 feet of free-fall.

      As a bonus, you're almost guaranteed for this thing to ONLY fail when you're NOT over water, eliminating the only chance you have of surviving that big of a fall.

    6. Re:are you crazy? by ericspinder · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It reminds me of the electric car I invented - the one with the really really long extension cord.

      So, you invented the Trolley? Wow, nice to meet you.

      --
      The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
    7. Re:are you crazy? by __aamnbm3774 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      yea, because it's safe to skyrocket beneath the waters surface and rise back up. (The Bends)

    8. Re:are you crazy? by ArcherB · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This seems more of a limit on a jetpack than I'd be willing to accept. I mean, cruising along 100 feet over the ground (Well, the water) is fine until you hit a dock, or accidentally go over land. Then you've got 100 feet of free-fall.

      As a bonus, you're almost guaranteed for this thing to ONLY fail when you're NOT over water, eliminating the only chance you have of surviving that big of a fall.

      Right! Just like a jet-ski, boat or any other water craft tends to fail when pulled out of the water. Well, except on a jet-ski, you impact the pier at 50 mph whereas with this thing, you your jets fail and you fall on to the pier or bank. There is no mention of how this thing operates when it's pulled out of the water. The jets may die all at once, causing you to free-fall, or the pressure may drop over a few seconds, giving you are much softer landing.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    9. Re:are you crazy? by Goaway · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As a bonus, you're almost guaranteed for this thing to ONLY fail when you're NOT over water, eliminating the only chance you have of surviving that big of a fall.

      You could just, you know, not try to fly over land.

      Since it doesn't work.

    10. Re:are you crazy? by leuk_he · · Score: 2, Interesting

      YOu have no (big) problems diving deep down and rising quickly up as long as you are not using presusired breathing.

      Free diving with a jet-pack?

    11. Re:are you crazy? by SnarfQuest · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What's the advantage to this, over just riding on a boat? You can get the same results by towing a balloon with a camera attached to it, without risking someones life. The only use I can see for it is for entertainment, like those parachute rides at the beach.

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    12. Re:are you crazy? by rohan972 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The reality is this 'er' jet pack has no real practical application at all.

      The ability to significantly extend visibility on boats too small to have a mast. This can have significant impact on search and rescue operations. It gives some of the visibility without a helicopter or large craft with the rescue potentially being much simpler by pulling someone into a boat.

      It doesn't lack utility, it's just that your imagination must be busy doing something else.

  2. So it doesn't run on water at all? by richy+freeway · · Score: 4, Informative

    It actually runs on whatever powers the engine that drives the pump.

    1. Re:So it doesn't run on water at all? by Overkill+Nbuta · · Score: 5, Funny

      The real question should be. Does it run Linux.

    2. Re:So it doesn't run on water at all? by Overkill+Nbuta · · Score: 2, Funny

      More than likely that it runs on beer.

      I'm pretty sure i can run Linux on beer also. Just my efficiency goes down.... or up depending on the task.

    3. Re:So it doesn't run on water at all? by radtea · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, typical /. headline: so misleading that you have to read the article to figure out what they're talking about, and 90% of the discussion is focused on either annoyance about or misapprehension of the false headline.

      There's a story below that has a headline about the odds of finding an Earth-like planet within a few dozen lightyears of Earth, but I'm pretty sure the actual story is about a new way to bake pastry. With a /. headline, why would anyone assume otherwise?

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    4. Re:So it doesn't run on water at all? by camperdave · · Score: 3, Informative

      Could easily use beer as the thrust media, if the support boat was a Budweiser tanker.

      ... after all, it runs on water.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    5. Re:So it doesn't run on water at all? by Rogerborg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, typical kdawson headline: so misleading that you have to read the article to figure out what they're talking about, and 90% of the discussion is focused on either annoyance about or misapprehension of the false kdawson headline. There's a kdawson story below that has a kdawson headline about the odds of finding an Earth-like planet within a few dozen lightyears of Earth, but I'm pretty sure the actual kdawson story is about a new way to bake pastry. With a kdawson headline, why would anyone assume otherwise?

      There, fixed that for you.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  3. A range of 300 km? by YeeHaW_Jelte · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I assume this is dragging the boat after you.

    What exactly are the advantages over just simply using a boat?

    --

    ---
    "The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
    1. Re:A range of 300 km? by Demoriel · · Score: 2, Funny

      You pretty much just nailed why this is a totally useless design.

    2. Re:A range of 300 km? by SeaFox · · Score: 2, Funny

      What exactly are the advantages over just simply using a boat?

      Is your boat 15 meters tall? You get a higher view, which has many uses.

    3. Re:A range of 300 km? by nmg196 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Same goes for water skiing and parascending... The point is, its fun!

    4. Re:A range of 300 km? by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ahh, so yer mizzen t'gallant crowsnest is two and a half fathoms above the waves, matey?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  4. Missing the point of a jet pack. by Ihlosi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... that is, not to have any wires or hoses connecting it to something else on the ground or in the air. Duh.

    Seriously, these guys take some sort of high-output water pump and call it a jet pack?

  5. round and round by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I doubt how anything that makes you spin 300 km of circles around a fixed point in the water (and probably vomiting every now and then) is going to make you look cool.

  6. Re:Dollars are cheaper than pouns! by andy.ruddock · · Score: 4, Informative

    The web site advertises two models :

    155 HP = EUR 99,000 which is $125,116 (£88,122)
    215 HP = EUR 119,000 which is $150,392 (£105,924)

    so the Telegraph has the prices wrong.

    (Exchange rates courtesy of Google)

    --
    God: An invisible friend for grown-ups.
  7. Worms by harry666t · · Score: 2, Funny

    FTFS:

    > but there's always been one problem: they run out of fuel in around 30 seconds

    But that's what made them fun in the game :)

  8. Military and coastguard applications by Kupfernigk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of the earliest uses for balloons and large kites was to tow an elevated observer behind a ship. I guess navies will be extremely interested in this. It's much less visible than a helicopter, cheaper, and safer, yet it permits over-the-horizon observation. Think of pirates off Somalia. Currently they can easily see and avoid ships, but fast patrol boats can't see them beyond a few miles. With one of these a small intercept craft can see the pirates, while remaining almost invisible themselves. Think of it as a floating artillery OP and the uses are obvious.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    1. Re:Military and coastguard applications by BenihanaX · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are much easier ways to do this than pumping water 50 feet in the air, like say... a camera on a balloon? The only ships going after pirates are sufficiently large enough to carry a mast or helo with enough range that another 50 feet vertical wouldn't change.

  9. YouTube Video by Maddog+Batty · · Score: 5, Insightful

    YouTube video

    Most people are missing the point of this. It isn't a sensible solution, it is a FUN solution. I would love to have a go.

    --
    wot no sig
    1. Re:YouTube Video by cdrudge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can think of many more ways that would be quite a bit more fun then spending $130k on this. But hey, if you have the money to blow on it, more power to ya.

  10. Re:This is a joke, right? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So... what's it going to be used for? Rescuing cats from trees along the river?

    Basically the same use case as a parasail towed behind a ski boat. They are a lot of fun, actually.

  11. Re:Disappointing. by Shrike82 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Same for flying cars. Just look at the number of *regular* car accidents. Adding an extra degree of freedom will not exactly lower down that number.

    It looked fine in Back to the Future Part 2. How hard could it be? They had floating lane dividers and everything. The only problem I can see is that it will add a whole new dimension to being "double-parked".

    --
    You can advertise in this sig from as little as £99.99 a month!
  12. Prior art by bobdotorg · · Score: 2, Funny

    This is pretty much a human Water Wiggle:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4D_WdavMuKs

    --
    __ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
  13. So What? by bgray54 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Mario has been doing this for years, and he doesn't even need the "small unmanned boat". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Mario_Sunshine

  14. Name: this is a JET CART by Morgaine · · Score: 2, Informative

    As many others have pointed out, the name "jet pack" conveys entirely the wrong meaning. Jet packs are by implication untethered, with the "pack" containing everything required by the jet. So we need a more appropriate name to convey that the pack is tethered, and that the jet is pulling something on the end of its tether along.

    Well the answer is obvious: this is a JET CART, because the jet takes the place of a horse and is pulling the cart (boat) along. Naturally the horse is tethered to the cart, and it can't get any further from the cart than the length of its tether (pipe) --- the name conveys the right meaning exactly.

    With a bit of flexibility from readers, this could even be taken as a car analogy. ;-)

    --
    "The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
  15. You are invited... by srussia · · Score: 4, Funny

    to take a ride on the Firehose.

    --
    Set your phasers on "funky"!
  16. Team sports by dpbsmith · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This sounds like a recreational device, and perhaps an interesting one. Calling it a "James Bond-style jet pack" is rather misleading, though.

    Safety: a fall into water from that height is not safe but not suicidal. I wonder how bad it is to be underneath and accidentally get sprayed by one of those jets? The video clip is silent; I'll bet the thing makes a hell of a racket. I wonder how many waterfronts will put up with it.

    I'm thinking, team sports. An extreme kind of polo or soccer or something. With players deliberately maneuvering to hit each other with the jets and/or tangle their hoses.

  17. Runs on water? by jamesswift · · Score: 2, Funny

    I have a crane that runs on gravity!

    --
    i wish i could stop
  18. Prior Art by Monoliath · · Score: 2, Informative
  19. Firetruck? by Tim12s · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is this going to replace/augment the firetruck with a more flexible and maneuverable rescue platform?

    Who says that it needs to be connected to a boat.

  20. but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But at least it is compatible with over 70% of the earth's surface

  21. Join my campaign by Kupfernigk · · Score: 2, Funny

    To allow respectable recreational boaters over 50 to be armed with twin torpedo tubes and surface-to-air missiles. As the NRA keeps telling you, an armed society is a polite society.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  22. Re:old and wrong, typical kdawson by PortHaven · · Score: 2

    I don't think you get the design. The hose reaches down to a raft. The raft has the energy plant and sucks up the water which is pumped to the jet pack.

    Essentially, this is a Jetski seat which hovers above the water via a tether down to the jetski.

  23. Yes it is! by camperdave · · Score: 4, Informative
    I struggle to see this as a jet pack.

    Go and look up what a jet actually is. Here. Let me help you.

    jet (plural jets)

    1. A collimated stream, spurt or flow of liquid or gas from a pressurized container, an engine, etc.
    2. A spout or nozzle for creating a jet of fluid.
    3. A class of airplane using jet engines rather than propellors.
    4. An engine that propels a vehicle using a stream of fluid as propulsion.
    5. A part of a carburetor that controls the amount of fuel mixed with the air.

    Pay particular attention to number 4.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  24. I can't believe no one has said this yet by Optic7 · · Score: 3, Funny

    In Soviet Russia... the [waterskier|parasailer] tows the boat!

  25. Clap on - Clap off by XB-70 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Clap on: Amazing device that is completely useless.

    Clap off: Recession (and reality) checks in. End of extremely useless device.

    --
    *** Don't be dull.***
  26. Prior Art by kidphoton · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So basically you're at the end of an uncontrolled firehose tethered to a boat? Didn't Buster Keaton or Charlie Chaplin do this?