Slashdot Mirror
The World's First Commercially Available Jetpack
ElectricSteve writes "It's been a long time coming. While Arthur C. Clarke's geosync satellites have taken to space, and James Bond's futuristic mobile technology has become commonplace, still the dream of sustained personal flight has eluded us — until now. At $86,000, the Martin Aircraft jetpack costs about as much as a high-end car, achieves a 30-minute flight time, and is fueled by regular gasoline. A 10% deposit buys you a production slot for 12 months hence." Here's a video of some indoor test flights. This isn't Buck Rogers's jetpack — it's about 5 by 5 feet and weighs more than the average human. You won't be able to commute with it (the FAA has not certified this class of device) so it's recreational only for now.
This thing looks more like a Jet Refrigerator or a Jet Stove that you attach to it. The whole beauty of the Jet pack was that it was something you carried with you, perhaps even under your sport coat, then, suddenly, you throw your coat off, ignite your rocket, and you are saved, and probably with a hot chick in your arms.
This is my sig.
The summary doesn't mention the location...it's in New Zealand. What about US companies developing this kind of stuff? Not happening here?
I'm still waiting for my jet pack (and supersonic flight).
I think it would be bit cooler if it got more than 6 feet off the ground.
TFA says "can reach 8000 ft (estimated)" but none of the picks or videos show that.
If these things go fast enough, why would you actually need a flying car? Everyone could just move with jetpacks.
Exactly.
This is one of those things that is seemingly announced annually, and never seems to get any closer than a few prototypes.
Flying is dangerous. A sky full of unregulated idiots is even more scary. Luckily the price tag is high, probably to fund the lawyers they will need.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Um...compared to the stuff you're talking about a 200 lb human, even one carrying an M4 and covered in full body kevlar, is a downright bargain in the weight department. Armor, machine guns, imaging, and remote controls? How little do you think that stuff weighs?
Having my head 1 meter from a 100+ decibel turbo props for 30 minutes at a time does not sound like a good idea. Crashing in the equivalent of a flying motorcycle (human body moving fast on a structure required to hold a combustion engine) does not sound good for my health either.
I think they meant dangerous as in when you're car's fuel injector breaks and the car stops your biggest risk is getting hit by the car behind you, with a jetpack you just fall out of the sky. In fact, with almost any failure you just fall out of the sky. So if these things start going like 20 or 50ft up, you're gonna miss for just a plain old car accident.
Lighten up. If you're willing to pay ~$100k for a flying toy, I'm sure you can pay a mechanic to rebuild it if you can't cope with more than a screwdriver. The engine has been purpose built for the application, but it's nothing overly special, basically just a large-ish motorbike engine.
It has a ballistic parachute for when the shit hits the fan(s). Not much good at low altitude, so you woulnd't want to be hovering about the rooftops for too long, but no light aircraft is overly safe.... I'd imagine that for most of the people buying this device, that would be the point. It's dangerous, therefore fun.
Depends on comfort and how it handles. Have you ever BEEN in an ultralight? Or skydiving/parachuting? (I don't mean to closely associate those two, generally you do one or the other, not both at the same time, ho ho he he.)
Actually flying, and looking down on the world below you, and knowing that it really is the ground, and not some sort of BS simulation, is a heck of a thing. The world below that was once almost entirely hidden by facades is all laid out bare before you; you don't see storefronts, you see the entire complex, including the service entrances. You don't see the eight cars directly around you, you see a hundred in a line, some merging in and out of traffic, some carrying onwards. You don't see houses with their trimmed lawns, trying to make themselves look like DISTINGUISHED suburbanites, you just see another prefab lot out of thousands.
With airplanes, if only as a matter of control (and law), you can never drop below several hundred feet. But if, with a jetpack, you could... you could be in both worlds at once--seeing the land below, as you did from the ground, and then the roofs and patterns and skies from above.
If you get caught up in something like that... thirty minutes is nothing. You could spend that thirty minutes just noticing things you'd never seen before in your favorite places--and not just the first time out, but the tenth or more. And then, since you spent thirty minutes flying instead of fifteen out and fifteen back, you'll run out of fuel...
you'd be surprised at how many gold diggers are out there.
Will your wife let you use it?
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo
"when done properly" is the key phrase there. Flying is HIGHLY regulated by the government. For one, you need a medical certificate to fly which needs to be updated every few years (depending on what class it is). Also, you need a certified AP mechanic to sign off on your aircraft. With a car, your drunk neighbor can basically build a car for you, and as long as you acquired a driver's license.... even 50 years ago.... you can drive it. As long as you are 18 (in Wisconsin at least), you don't even need a driver's education course. All you need to do is pass the test, which is ridiculously easy, and you get a license for the rest of your life. Now, I have flown in a few aircraft that were slightly "questionable", but they were definitely airworthy. It is a bit scary pulling out the throttle and having the knob immediately pop off hehe. Also going into the clouds for the first time and having your VOR about 15 degrees off (I think I got a few more gray hairs on that one). My point is that the reason why flying is so safe is because it is extremely regulated. If everyone's car went through the same maintenance procedure as a Cessna 150 built in the mid 50s, then we would have almost no broken down cars on the highway. If the drivers were put through the same sort of training as pilots, we would have far fewer accidents.
Two-stroke engines are notoriously unreliable.
Only among the ignorant...
Wind and weather in general are going to be huge problems.
I feel sorry for people that don't drink, because when they get up in the morning, that's as good as they're gonna feel
35 mph isn't that bad. If you land on your head or stomach you're (probably) dead, but landing on your feet is survivable. Some could probably even walk away from that. Most would be in a wheelchair for a while (maybe forever) but it wouldn't be that much worse than a car accident.
This isn't an insurmountable problem. I'm sure the first cars that could go faster than a horse were criticized in the same way. Throw in a small parachute to ensure you don't land on your head, and lessen your speed by 25% and it's basically the same as jumping out of a barn loft.
On what _possible_ basis do you make this claim? With home jetpacks, (or more likely the jetwings at www.jet-man.com), you open the world to a lot of poorly maintained one-man craft that can drop out of the sky onto _anything_. And while there may be "no roads", there are a relatively limited set of common destinations.
Your belief that "people are self-regulationg when it comes to life and death" is also founded in, I'm sorry to say, complete fantasy. Take a good look at the number of people who smoke, overeat, engage in unsafe sex, are under-insured, and text while driving for examples of very porly regulating the risks of life and death.
" You could spend that thirty minutes just noticing things you'd never seen before "
like power lines RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU *ZZERTAARGHH!*
I think there's a reason not to drop below several hundred feet and it'd be good to keep to it ;).
Every experiment which ends in a big bang is a good experiment.
It's because people are more afraid of risks they can't control. They are *especially* afraid of risks that are in other people's hands.
Pilot error (or driver error if you are driving) wind gusts other drivers.
Everyone believes they are an above average driver.
Where's my god damned flying car?!!
I know you must mean this is jest, but...
The limiting factor in flying cars (and in sure in this jet-pack thingy) is the pilot. People can hardly keep their shit together in a regular car. Folks don't even use their parking break, can't drive a standard, can't use turn signals, drive around drunk or stoned... it's just not feasible for the average dork-in-the-street. Sending them airborne is not going to help.
That being said, amateur pilots have their problems too. My Dad, a mechanical engineer, was an avid amateur pilot. He built himself a gyrocopter, also known as an autogyro. (See Mad Max 2) He never had any severe problems. However, metal eventually fatigues, and engines eventually quit, no matter the maintenance schedule. He did do a number of emergency landings, which are relatively easy in a gyrocopter, especially considering he'd always fly over sod farms.
However, my family have attended many funerals for my Dad's flying buddies. These were not stupid guys. They were competent, educated, level headed, and sober-minded. Most were of them were of the engineering persuasion. That doesn't me they can't make mistakes. Some of these mistakes, or gross mechanical failure, cost these guys their lives.
Amongst the reasons why my Dad survived his piloting days was that he was grounded due to an unrelated medical problem.
We'll build the flying car when we built the flying car pilot. Look not to the stars.
How can you call it a jetpack when it doesn't have any jets? More of a ducted-fan pack.
Nah, you just need one of those beer helmets filled with coffee instead of alcohol.
..that the first kill by one of these is a multi-millionaire executive of a top company that missed to reach his office's window on the 100th floor after commuting from a distance which burned most of his fuel?
You will get engine failures on these every couple of hundred hours of flying time, and most likely it'll occur when the engine is under load in initial takeoff or landing.
That's probably why the company suggest that proper maintenance includes:
100 hours engine TBO (Time Between Overhaul)
In other words, having the engine tuned and overhauled before you reach that couple hundred flying hours. Don't let RTFA get in the way of your unhinged cynicism or anything though. That would be inconvenient.
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!