Slashdot Mirror
Martin Jetpack Climbs 5000 Feet Above Sea Level
rh2600 writes "For years the Martin Jetpack has stayed just a few feet off the ground, invoking frequent suspicion about its true abilities. Well, today that all changed [video] with the first climb test in New Zealand (with weighted crash-test dummy) reaching over 5,000 feet above sea level. The emergency parachute test was also a success. Kiwis can indeed fly."
Now I can FLY!!!
Where was this thing when you needed it the most???
Nothing here... So... SHOOO!!!
So it can go up to 5000 ft if it uses up all its fuel getting there, and then parachutes back down? Still not totally practical.
Also they used a crash test dummy? Couldn't they find a darwin award volunterr?
Hedgerow? You sure about that?
;)
I was under the impression that he flew straight into those pines in front of his home..
Nothing here... So... SHOOO!!!
Highlights @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHPedpE70Es
A jetpack should be no bigger than a hiker's backpack. This thing is more like a small aircraft.
I support metric but it's currently the standard world wide in aviation to measure altitude in feet.
Darwin is pretty far away from Christchurch. I guess they could get someone from there to volunteer, but I doubt anyone who has won some prestigious award would be into it.
Hell, Google Maps can't even figure out how to get there!
This is my footer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
The pack is big and bulky enough that the addition of a small wing won't make much of a difference. With a wing, you can transition from vertical takeoff using thrust only, to horizontal wing-borne flight which uses much less power (and/or achieves a much higher speed).
There were a lot of inventors who had a fix wing aircraft before the Wright Brothers but the reason they get to say they invented it is because they could TURN the Wright Flyer. Before that they all flew in a straight line, even the French who didn't believe them, had to admit they won, when the Flyer banked away from a row of trees in Paris.
After the first twenty feet the ascension would be much easier as my bladder and bowels empty out, lightening the load...
Ken
Who keeps the Metric System down?
So to answer GP's question, the aviation industry.
This is very cool, but it looks more like a personal helicopter than a true jetpack. Certainly could get people into inaccessible areas, but with how much gear, and you couldn't bring much of anything back (like an injured hiker, etc..). Still, quite a feat of engineering. I hope he gets investors!
cheers, ben
Never miss a good chance to shut up -- Will Rogers
Never been to Madrid, but, yes, it's damn cold in Denver.
Then again, I live in Florida, so my idea of cold and your idea of cold are probably different. ;)
My blog
Despite Martin Jetpack's talk of its usefulness for remote search and rescue, the real money is for military purposes. This piece describes the first practical uses of helicopters in Korea for reconnaissance, supply, and medivac. A decade later, the next generation of choppers -- Chinooks and Hueys -- were doing serious delivery work in combat.
I, for one, welcome our new kiwi jetpack flying overlords.
Obi-Wan: "I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were sudden
I heard that everyone was shocked when it banked, assuming it had gone out of control.
Although the Wright Brothers first few flights were primarily about flying in a straight line. I wasn't until their third flyer that they managed what could reasonably be considered sustained controlled powered flight (No disrespect to The Wright Brothers. A much more important first.)
Richard Pearse (the kiwi being referred to) did mange to get off the ground for short hops, so it's reasonable to consider that an aviation first as well.
Personally, I would have performed that test quite a bit beforehand.
Maybe I can get a FEMA grant for one for Search & Rescue. Probably cheaper than a Robinson heli. (Yes, I know you can't pick up search subjects but you can't do that in a two-place Robinson either).
Everytime you jump from a building you realize that the flying is not the problem, but the landing is the thing you have to worry about.
Of course a Kiwi can fly!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdUUx5FdySs
You are mostly correct, though you didn't mention the key word: control system. The patent that the Wright Brothers file was not for the shape of the plane, or the engine they used, but for the control systems that let them control the pitch, yaw, and roll of the aircraft. Indeed, controlling the aircraft in stable flight by defining parameters like pitch, yaw, and roll was a key insight of theirs. All their competitors weren't able to achieve stable flight because they were still guessing their way around how to keep their aircraft up and steady, and didn't really have a solution that let them control the aircraft.
There is no such thing as luck. Luck is nothing but an absence of bad luck.
It needs to look like a jet ski or motorcycle. There should be 4 fans, one on each corner and the user interface would be more like a motorcycle. Let go of the handles and it automatically goes into stabilized mode and your feet would control the brakes and forward acceleration. The whole thing would fit into a standard parking spot. It would have speed determined left and right tilt. In a high speed turn, the rider wants to tilt into the direction of the turn, just like a motorcycle. however, for low speed hover control the rider would lean into the direction he wants to go. Trying to nudge to the left a little to hit the parking spot, just lean to the left.
Why should the feet dangle like a pair of dead twigs. This isn't natural and it puts the operator in an uncomfortable position. No other human operated machine ignore the legs. You also loose two potential inputs for control. And lets be honest, you couldn't shoot at the enemy using this thing. But if it was a motorcycle in the air, you could still control it by leaning your body and controlling forward speed with your feet. That free's up your arms to fire.
And let's be honest, unless we get the army to buy enough of these things to lower the manufacturing cost, we'll never see one in the garage.
The more you scare people.....the more they will pay.
That's true, with some exceptions:
Gliders most commonly use the metric system. Never knew why. And then there are also all those soviet build aircraft using SI (don't know if modern Russian aircraft switched to imperial).
As for airspeed, its even weirder: Commercial aeroplanes universally use Knots, but light aircraft sometimes use mph in America, and km/h in Europe.
Really where is the metric whiners complaining about them using the term feet? Oh because it was a NZ newscast and a NZ citizen using them?
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
The basic trouble with jetpacks is that knees are terrible landing gear. You have to land vertically with a huge mass to stop, and you can't do a controlled fall like a parachute landing. Achieving altitude is not the problem. Landing is the problem.
This thing, like the Solotrek, has landing skids, which take the landing shock. But then it's not really a jetpack. It's more like the Williams X-Jet Flying Platform from the 1980s, probably the best flying machine in this category.
Waitaminute... a knot is an arc-minute, right? This makes sense at sea level... but does a craft traveling at 1 knot at elevation keep up with a craft traveling at 1 knot at sea level? Or, is an aeronautical knot just 1.151 miles regardless of elevation?
If cars never "took off" we wouldn't have _proper_ roads everywhere.
You can clearly see the 5000ft wire. They obviously did this in the same Hollywood studio where they faked the moon landing. My aunt's best friend's sister's cab driver knows a guy who works with a girl who dated a guy who did time with another guy who once shook hands with someone who claims to have gone to the movies with someone who claims to have worked at the company that may have supplied the raw materials to make the cable, so he obviously needs to be taken seriously; and he claims the video is a fake.
I think Faux News is investigating.
The linked video is raw: it was not edited in accordance with the US censorship requirements and was not fed through the typically mandatory US reality distortion filer. Consequently, it can case moderate to significant amounts of butthurt among the typical bumper-sticker-US-patriot types.
1 knot ground speed, yes. 1 knot airspeed, no. A knot isn't an arc-minute, it's an idealized average of that number that's fixed.
Learn to love Alaska
We actually do, and have for some time. Obviously, they opted to use Feet Above Mean Sea Level just. for. the. fuck. of it. (And to conform to the rest of the aviation industry around the world)
Actually... the correct answer to the GP's question is:
We dooo, we dooo!
I think yesterday's installment of Schlock Mercenary is apropos regarding the military use of jetpacks.
-- Alastair
Not exactly world wide.
...if he adds some frickin' laser beams.
The thing just guzzles fuel for the load that it is carrying and it's not a jet. The word "jet" is marketing and fraudulent because there is no jet propulsion. It's two inefficient ducted fans that are inappropriate for hovering compared to a small helicopter rotor. This is why the thing can only fly for 30 minutes.
You can make cars that'll travel in 9 feet of horseshit. I don't think you cam make a horse do that.
As always, all IMO. Insert "I think" everywhere grammatically possible.