Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

'Jetman' Rossy Flies Above the Grand Canyon

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the why-in-my-day-mules-and-snowshoes dept.

Transportation 90

cylonlover writes "Yves Rossy, the former Swiss jet fighter pilot better known as Jetman, flew over the Grand Canyon last Saturday (May 7th) using his wearable jet-propelled wing. It was the first time he has flown with the device in North America, having previously used it to cross the English Channel, perform an aerial loop, fly in formation with stunt planes, and to unsuccessfully attempt traversing a stretch of the Atlantic Ocean between Morocco and Spain."

cancel ×

90 comments

Don't bother with the video (2, Informative)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114756)

It's a boring fluff piece montage with horrible editing.. The flight doesn't start before half way in... and with dull music instead of ambient audio

Re:Don't bother with the video (5, Funny)

JustOK (667959) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114792)

I like the part where he didn't get physically groped by the TSA.

Re:Don't bother with the video (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36114994)

since this takes ingenuity and skill there's one thing we can be damned fucking certain about. the man is not a nigger.

Re:Don't bother with the video (3, Funny)

zill (1690130) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115018)

The groping was not shot for obvious reasons. Including it would make the video NC-17.

Re:Don't bother with the video (2)

justinlee37 (993373) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115326)

Just out of curiosity, have you ever been groped by the TSA?

Because my girlfriend got groped and it really wasn't as big of a deal as everyone is making it out to be. People are just overreacting and letting their imaginations run wild.

Re:Don't bother with the video (3, Funny)

immaterial (1520413) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115426)

This is Slashdot, try not to make it obvious that you're making up an anecdote.

...But in case you're serious: Since both you and your girlfriend are cool with it, mind sending her over here for a bit?

Re:Don't bother with the video (1)

cculianu (183926) | more than 3 years ago | (#36116276)

This is Slashdot, try not to make it obvious that you're making up an anecdote. ...But in case you're serious: Since both you and your girlfriend are cool with it, mind sending her over here for a bit?

OH NO YOU DINNT!!!

And can I join? Cue porno music: *boom chikka wauu wauu*

Re:Don't bother with the video (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36115432)

Maybe she likes being groped by strangers in public. Most people, however, don't.

Re:Don't bother with the video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36115884)

uh no, people are getting tired of giving up rights as laid out in the constitution. Plus people aren't getting anything back to have the crotches felt up by TSA pervs and pedophiles. It's all theater so they can soften us up for whatever they have coming down the pipeline. Probably nude searches of everyone with anal probes, because you can never be too sure.

Re:Don't bother with the video (1)

TheTurtlesMoves (1442727) | more than 3 years ago | (#36116220)

Yea, who cares about rights and other unimportant things. Just let em do whatever they want. What could possibly go wrong.

Re:Don't bother with the video (1)

evildarkdeathclicheo (978593) | more than 3 years ago | (#36119258)

My 11 yo daughter did, because my wife won't let her go through the radiation emitters. She cried for 2 hours. I guess your girlfriend is more used to strangers groping them. -W

Re:Don't bother with the video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36119326)

Interesting. The two or three times I have groped a female, who didn't want to get groped, I was slapped, punched or kicked. Clearly your girlfriend likes getting groped.

Re:Don't bother with the video (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114918)

Not only that but the video has been on liveleak for a few days now.

Re:Don't bother with the video (1)

GigaHurtsMyRobot (1143329) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115366)

I was going to say on a more general level, why is it that 2 days after I read about something it appears on Slashdot?

Re:Don't bother with the video (1)

NekSnappa (803141) | more than 3 years ago | (#36116784)

Hell, I saw it on ESPN Monday, or Tuesday.

How exactly did he fly 'across' it? (3, Insightful)

e9th (652576) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114816)

TFA says he started from a helicopter then parachuted to the canyon floor. I was expecting something cool, like he started standing on one side of the canyon, flew across it, then landed safely on the other side.

Re:How exactly did he fly 'across' it? (2)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115030)

I was expecting something cool, like he started standing on one side of the canyon

You should expect less from the guy using half a model airplane as a back pack. His thing is cool, I want one and all, but it's consistently oversold.

Re:How exactly did he fly 'across' it? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36115278)

but it's consistently oversold

so is yo mama.

Re:How exactly did he fly 'across' it? (2)

toetagger (642315) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115446)

With a helicopter and a parachute, of course! (you answered your own question!)

Re:How exactly did he fly 'across' it? (1)

BonquiquiShiquavius (1598579) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115590)

Agreed...the key word in the title is "above". Not "across" not "through" but above. I mean, the wingsuit is cool and all, but I don't see this as any more interesting as "Jetman flies above Canadian Tundra". Actually the latter might be more interesting if they included data on the perfomance of the suit in cold vs warmer climates.

Re:How exactly did he fly 'across' it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36116084)

Unless your engines are unable to tolerate the weather, cold air is generally better for flight. Hot air expands. Hot air is less dense. You can't get as much lift or as much thrust from a given system in hotter air.

Re:How exactly did he fly 'across' it? (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36122194)

The use of "above" is inadequate. He did in fact fly below the rim. And he landed at a point within the canyon.

Re:How exactly did he fly 'across' it? (1)

hoboroadie (1726896) | more than 3 years ago | (#36117714)

TFA says he started from a helicopter then parachuted to the canyon floor.

That's how he's always done it. Like Buzz Lightyear, it's just "falling with style". I still prefer the flying squirrel guys, now that's stylish.

ho hum, personal jet propulsion (0)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114818)

how 1950s and 1960s. I'm almost 50 and this kind of shit was done long before I was born.

Re:ho hum, personal jet propulsion (2)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114824)

I'm almost 50...

Get offa my lawn!

Re:ho hum, personal jet propulsion (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114908)

I'm almost 50...

Get offa my lawn!

It's Astroturf, kid... I stopped mowing years ago.

Re:ho hum, personal jet propulsion (2)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114922)

It goes fast. You'll see. And soon you'll have little punks telling you how old you are. I forgot the point I was trying to make...

Re:ho hum, personal jet propulsion (1)

demonlapin (527802) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114850)

Do show us the youtubez of that. I'm Ford administration vintage and I never saw this until Rossy started doing it.

Re:ho hum, personal jet propulsion (1)

Chrutil (732561) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114906)

Do show us the youtubez of that. I'm Ford administration vintage and I never saw this until Rossy started doing it.

Silly. Everybody knows YouTube wasn't invented back then.

Re:ho hum, personal jet propulsion (3, Informative)

timeOday (582209) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115128)

I suppose you're thinking of Hydrogen Peroxide packs, which are totally different. Those basically hover; this goes 125 mph.

Re:ho hum, personal jet propulsion (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 3 years ago | (#36117406)

not just those, real jet engines were also used, with wings, open cockpit mini-planes, wing suits, on packs. Even the Nazis in Germany were playing with them.

Re:ho hum, personal jet propulsion (1)

timeOday (582209) | more than 3 years ago | (#36117582)

Nazis with real jet-engine backpacks? Do tell. Their Me-262 was the first operational jet aircraft, and wasn't out until the final year of the war.

why so critical? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36114866)

...and you're all so critical of this being a lame story because you have flown all over the place at 160 kph in your own, much better and well designed and fully functional jet propulsion systems, is that about right?

Re:why so critical? (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114932)

I coded a flight simulator does that count?

Re:why so critical? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36115186)

No, its just that it has reached the point of being the same story over and over. Wait, this time it was the Grand Canyon. Its new! Its news! Then he'll do it somewhere else and we're all supposed to be more and more impressed. Yeah, its neat. Then it was neat again. And again. Maybe another time too.

Yawn.

Re:why so critical? (1)

ls671 (1122017) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115382)

In that sense, you are right, read my post about watching an "old" documentary below ;-)

Re:why so critical? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36115922)

so then....don't watch it if you're bored with it. or don't watch it and then criticize that it's boring. no, wait. if you're bored with it, just don't flipping watch it. with all the spare time you'll have NOT watching and reading things you find boring you might be able to build your own better, super duper fast jetpack.

Re:why so critical? (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#36117180)

A fully functional jet propulsion system would be able to take off and land.

Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (5, Informative)

ls671 (1122017) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114870)

This is funny, I was just watching an old documentary about him. Just before he flew across the English channel, he realized in a wind tunnel that his wings were unbalanced so he would always starts an endless looping that leads to a crash on the same side. He learned to recuperate from this anyways. Amazingly, he said that he didn't have time to rebalance his wings before the English channel crossing so he did it as is.

This guy is serious business. Another poster was unsatisfied because he needs to be launched from a plane or helicopter. Believe me, it is a must with his setup. Also, he can't land and he uses a parachute to land. His setup involves only a wing set and a turbine. There is no other controls but the turbine speed. All directional control is done with his body.

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (3, Insightful)

moonbender (547943) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115192)

I thought it was kind of underwhelming when compared to the elegant awesomeness that is wingsuit flying [youtube.com] . No turbine needed. Those videos always give me the chills.

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (2)

ls671 (1122017) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115244)

The guy is former jet fighter pilot and he deals with speeds well above what you reference in your link. If I remember right, it took him less than 10 minutes to cross the English channel while you can multiply that time by about 10 with your suggested setup.

If you do not care about speed then, of course, you are right.

I wrote that the guy meant serious business. I will put more emphasis on this by saying the guy is crazy. Out of reach of common mortals.

 

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (2)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 3 years ago | (#36116002)

Out of reach of common mortals.

Duh. He's wearing a jetpack!

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (1)

ls671 (1122017) | more than 3 years ago | (#36116244)

I meant to make it still alive. Try it for fun.

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (1)

mijelh (1111411) | more than 3 years ago | (#36116752)

The turbines are needed if you want to achieve level flight.
Besides Wingsuits have glide ratios of less than 3:1 (they advance 1 unit of distance for every unit they descend) and even when attached with jets they've never been able to keep a level flight path for more 30 seconds.Rossy's setup has a glide ratio of more than twice that, and is the only of such devices to have achieved sustained flight.
That being said, the sense of freedom that I guess a wingsuit provides is probably unmatched.

That's not flying (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36117896)

That's falling, with style.

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36122208)

The fact that nobody can follow him around with a helmet-mounted camera means you don't get the same shots. But, seriously, there never has been anything at all that's nearly as cool as what this guy is doing. Never anything.

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115242)

Ne, he's a serious NUTTER. This "technology" is no more "useful" than any of the crap every other "daredevil" cobbles together to put on their personal brand of Freak Show.

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (1)

ls671 (1122017) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115308)

Agreed, read my reply to another poster about him being crazy, out of reach of common mortals. So, no use for common mortals planned. He does it just because he can. This is why this is his first stunt in USA. No profits at reach with his product.

Still, it is interesting to see what he knows about aerodynamics. He knows enough to implement aerodynamic principles with his own body at a time where computer assisted stealth flying is more popular.

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (3, Interesting)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115458)

Meh. You want real Serious Business, watch this film Devil at Your Heels [www.nfb.ca] , a documentary shot in 1981. Screw jetpacks, this guy had a ROCKET CAR. He was going to jump a river from Canada to America with a TEN-STORY RAMP. For real! If you have a spare 100 minutes, I highly recommend the film. At least watch the first five minutes about the rose bushes. If you have an engineering background, the opening shot of the ramp plus an unaerodynamic car going 250mph...make your predictions about how the film ends. The guy Ken Carter is full of unintentional humor. Fans of Napoleon Dynamite or School of Rock will love it. And unlike these two films, the subject is 100% in earnest. Filme Board du Canada didn't make that sort of film back then.

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (1)

ls671 (1122017) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115582)

This does count against somebody being to implement directional control with his body.

By the way I have already watched the reference you provided in the early days. Not the the same at all, in my scale at least.

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (1)

ls671 (1122017) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115594)

This doesn't count against somebody being able to implement directional control with his body

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36116196)

I find the amount of "pshaw" in this thread slightly disappointing. HE'S FLYING you freaks!!! You wouldn't want to be up there?

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (1)

ls671 (1122017) | more than 3 years ago | (#36116262)

Of course I would. I am sure that it becomes easy once you get the hang of it. The hard part is not getting killed while taking your first flying lesson using his setup.

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36116958)

. Another poster was unsatisfied because he needs to be launched from a plane or helicopter. Believe me, it is a must with his setup.

We're unhappy because we're let to believe this is a Jet-Man, but he's only a "Helo Launched, Jet Powered Wing, with Parachute".

Re:Funny, I was just watching an old documentary. (1)

VirtualJWN (1084071) | more than 3 years ago | (#36125712)

This guy is a complete moron. The idea is stupid, and frankly suprised the FAA would allow such a atrocity to be in US Airspace. (Then again, they let Southwest Airlines fly)....almost the same idea, people hanging onto a wing with jet engines strapped to it......cabin optional. This has GOT to be the STUPIDEST application of OZONE depleting gas I have seen. Why not fire the moron from a cannon, same aerodynamics involved there. (frankly I don't believe in Ozone layer depletion, that was a nod to our lib buddies. Not a must with the setup, just an example of how truly impractical and stupid this concept is. Not even worthy of an honorable mention X-Prize, those have to accomplish something. All this guy is doing is a prolonged attempt at a Darwin Award. We are stupider as a race for allowing morons like this to pursue stupidity on this scale, and to promote it with coverage. He is a Human version of Wile E. Coyote. what a joke. And before you comment and say I am jealous, I have developed many bleeding edge designs in many fields. Trust me, This is a joke. Next thing you know the guy will strap himself ot a rocket and be "rocket man"....."WOW look at me....I am rocket MORON".....

A jetpack could deliver the news faster.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36114876)

..this news is two days short of being a week old - whooosh!

Turbo fire (-1, Offtopic)

fraya (2149318) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114896)

Turbo fire workout [bestturbofireworkout.com] is just as tough, If you’re going to do one of these, prepare to be truly challenged no matter which you pick! Turbo fire [bestturbofireworkout.com] never make you regret to your choose,Now in our turbofire [bestturbofireworkout.com] websit ,offers the most compective price enjoy free shipping,take it back you will have a different experience. Turbo fire [turbofire-workout.org] is a good procducts for people that want to lose weight, turbo fire workout [turbofire-workout.org] can make you different experience in during exercise,it can get the best result, power 90 [turbofire-workout.org] is a medium power, p90x on sale [turbofire-workout.org] on discount,enjoy free shipping here.

Air Jordan shoes (-1, Offtopic)

fraya (2149318) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114916)

Air Jordan Shoes [air-jordan123.com] has many fans,it is a fashion brand shoes,jordan shoes has top grdade quality and simple design features,it has different kinds of style Air Jordan 1 [air-jordan123.com] is one of the most popular shoes,you can choose the one what you like different size of Air Jordan 3 [air-jordan123.com] all on discount on sale. Cheap Jordan Shoes [air-jordan11.com] on hot sale in our jordan website ,Our Air Jordan store online is the best value and a superior customer experience. We are honest, helpful, efficient, accountable and trustworthy, and we are committed to profitability and service, Air Jordan 11 [air-jordan11.com] is a classic one of the jordan shoes,to Air Jordan 6 [air-jordan11.com] is on hot sale in our shop online.

whoop dee (1)

strack (1051390) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114938)

fucking doo. this is nice and all, but call us when he can actully strap on a pair of skates or something and takeoff from the ground

Re:whoop dee (1)

jimmydevice (699057) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114986)

Skates??? How about some flying ointment? Rub it on and you're off. Of course you never leave the ground, but you think you did.
Too bad the recipe was lost long ago.

Re:whoop dee (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36114988)

use a little common sense please.
unless you like breaking your legs and jetpack on every landing, in which case build your own fucking jetpack.

Re:whoop dee (1)

Technician (215283) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115100)

Do you have any idea what the stall speed of that wing is? If you live trying that, you will have made a new land speed record for roller skates.

Not to mention... (2)

denzacar (181829) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115964)

If you live trying that, you will have made a new land speed record for roller skates.

...you'll be able to finally catch that damn bird.

Re:whoop dee (1)

hubie (108345) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115214)

Better yet, he should buy a huge-ass inner tube (I think the Acme Corp. makes a good one) and stretch it across a big homemade slingshot. Then he can get on his wing and roller skates and really launch himself.

The concept (1)

DaMattster (977781) | more than 3 years ago | (#36114984)

may be old but I still say that it is cool as hell!

Re:The concept (2)

Provocateur (133110) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115008)

Agree 100%. Worthy of an ex-fighter pilot. (As long as he doesn't dive off NY skyscrapers and try to fight crime. Maybe do aerial traffic reports, but then he'd still move faster than anybody.)

Speaking of flying in formation (1)

Burz (138833) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115046)

Here's a different wingsuit guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oY60556JJU [youtube.com]

I wonder if Rossy and Jean-Albert know each other.

geography fail (2)

cheeks5965 (1682996) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115048)

traversing a stretch of the Atlantic Ocean between Morocco and Spain."

umm.. what is the straits of gibraltar? I'll take geography for 500. Daily double!

Re:geography fail (1)

Bucc5062 (856482) | more than 3 years ago | (#36116600)

umm.. I'll take geography for 500. Daily double!! what is the straits of gibraltar?

There, that's better. I love that show.

What is up with the replies? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36115062)

Does nobody test the UI commits before they push them out to the front page? On Chrome and IE6 (not logged in) the replies are all masked by a block of white, I can see the top 8th of the characters. Site is broken, someone needs to fix this ASAP.

Re:What is up with the replies? (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#36116652)

I can't even post on android anymore.

Re:What is up with the replies? (1)

spaceplanesfan (2120596) | more than 3 years ago | (#36116746)

Same here in Firefox 4 running on Ubuntu 11.04.

BTW, I disabled Unity too (but not compiz)

Re:What is up with the replies? (1)

tompaulco (629533) | more than 3 years ago | (#36117616)

Same on Firefox 3 on Windows 7. Sounds like pretty much everybody is seeing the same thing.

Re:What is up with the replies? (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#36123894)

In android I get the text input box but it seems to lose focus every couple of seconds, which closes the keyboard and prevents me from typing. It might be connected to the behaviour I see on ubuntu 11.04 with firefox 4 where the page occasionally scrolls up or down in response to some mouse movements or clicks. Its probably just somebody's idea of a UI improvement with javascript.

Where was Rickey Ranger? (2)

Virtucon (127420) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115116)

Doesn't the National Park Service have to approve this? I remember when Evel Knievel was trying to jump the Grand Canyon, they gave him a lot of grief then he went to Snake Canyon instead. http://weirdscifi.ratiosemper.com/evelknievel/canyon.html [ratiosemper.com] He failed but still would you strap yourself into a steam powered rocket that had never been tested? Later on Knievel blamed the engineer. Typical.. but he still made money on the deal by selling the TV rights and charging spectators a lot for admission and for concessions. ABC Sports had the rights to the event and it was a national thing. This was before the Internet and ABC had always had deals with Knievel.

Then a few years ago his son, Robbie, got permission to jump. Why? I don't know, maybe they weren't selling enough National Park coffee table books at the gift shop? I realize that the national parks are public lands but they're there to be preserved, not to be used for circus attractions. There wasn't the huge hype and once he did it everything was ho-hum.

It seems that every time one of these daredevils actually does something, we raise that bar and consider something similar to be mundane. " Fly over the grand canyon with your little jet pack? Pffft. I saw a guy do it in a hang glider 30 years ago. " I guess that's sad in a way and says something that as society we're becoming bored with things more quickly. We have to be constantly entertained and have the attention spans of two-year-olds.

Now, this guy launched himself from a helicopter. I'd prefer him to try
it like those old time aeronautical pioneers and jump off a rock or a bridge with his wings. Think of the Drama! What if he tripped over a rock or some shit like that? The jet fuel could have exploded or maybe he could have set himself on fire when he launched himself? he'd be like the human torch! Now that would be cool.

Or he could have launched himself like the old "Sky Car" bouncing around.. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4622565557055437255# [google.com]

Re:Where was Rickey Ranger? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36115542)

If it was within the helicopter flight zone then there is nothing to be preserved there anyway. There are roughly six-twelve copters per hour flying through that corridor
Made me wish I brought a Stinger on my last hike.

Re:Where was Rickey Ranger? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36119846)

Read the article again, he did it over tribal land...west end of the canyon. Ricky Ranger wasn't involved.

Re:Where was Rickey Ranger? (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36122226)

Pretty sure he had approvals. And the park service doesn't own the whole canyon. Some of it belongs to the Hualapai indians.

That's cool and all but (2)

WonderingAround (2007742) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115586)

Where do I get mine? Seriously this is as close as we're getting to jet packs right now, so how long until this is commercialized or I'm not interested.

Re:That's cool and all but (1)

ShooterNeo (555040) | more than 3 years ago | (#36120728)

You can buy a real jetpack here : http://martinjetpack.com/ [martinjetpack.com]

They are about 100 grand and fly for a good half hour.

Re:That's cool and all but (1)

WonderingAround (2007742) | more than 3 years ago | (#36124388)

Well I'll get saving then, I hope by the time I can afford one they're not still the size of smart cars.

Re:That's cool and all but (1)

ShooterNeo (555040) | more than 3 years ago | (#36125170)

How do you propose to make one smaller? Certain physics and engineering constraints are very hard to overcome without technology radically more advanced than anything humans can make today. Right now, hydrocarbon fuels are the most dense fuel sources we have for small high energy output systems (nuclear doesn't work on a small scale). And right now, it's much more efficient to use a high bypass turbofan instead of a pure hot exhaust jet. Once you pick an engine powerful enough to pick up the jetpack user + itself + fuel + frame and control systems...that's what you end up with. Something that is pretty huge and can't really be worn on someone's back.

Rocket belts have flight times measured in seconds, so using a turbofan is a gigantic improvement.

Can _ANY_ technology lead to a jetpack like you are desiring? Yes, ofc. But we're talking nuclear energy or a battery fabricated using atomically precise manufacturing, extremely high power densities, and it's still going to make a huge amount of noise because you're moving enough air to support your own weight. And actually said high technology jetpack would probably use nanotechnology and be composed of millions of moving parts that can assemble themselves into something that looks like the Martin Jetpack but then compact itself back down into something backpack sized when shut down. Think 'transformers'. All the parts would be diamondroid and carbon nanotubes and other exotic materials to get the weight down to something a human being could carry.

Anyways, you can save all you want, that kind of tech is unlikely to show up for 50-100 years or more.

Re:That's cool and all but (1)

WonderingAround (2007742) | more than 3 years ago | (#36129264)

Well I can only assume the Martin Jetpack is somewhat of a prototype of this sort of technology as advanced as it may be, but If/once we would be able to customize something like this then I could purchase something more suitable to my jet-packing needs, the "useful pilot" load for this is 280lbs, so being around 160lbs I should be able to theoretically either use the weight gap to my advantage in terms of need for thrust or acceleration speeds, etc. And surely there's should be somewhat of a sport model, probably a lot less safe and having the undercarriage and flight displays stripped, because honestly I'm not too concerned about safety, If you're going to crash this thing it's going to go badly, and If the outside of the craft was covered in a solar panel coating then I'm sure if they can't make it much smaller they can at least make it fly longer. The design is very rigid as of now, why not design some way to fold it once it's landed? No suggestions on how exactly you would do that, but I'm not waiting 50 years for nanotubes to show up I'll just wait 10 for human ingenuity to do it's job.

Re:That's cool and all but (1)

ShooterNeo (555040) | more than 3 years ago | (#36130668)

...Can't happen. Some engineering constraints we have nothing available to overcome them with.

I'd like to buy a watch for some reason (1)

c_jonescc (528041) | more than 3 years ago | (#36115604)

Anyone else accidentally pronounce that site's name with the first g soft, as in magic?

Re:I'd like to buy a watch for some reason (1)

monk2b (693792) | more than 3 years ago | (#36117772)

Is this thing working

Buzz Lightyear look-alike? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36117334)

Once again, life and art imitate each other [wordpress.com] (definitely SFW). This is awesome, so pardon while I will just a little here by pointing out that he jumped from a helicopter. In the words of Woody from Toy Story, "That's not flying, that's falling with style!" Woody's point was that flying should involve taking off as well as soaring and a controlled landing.

Fake (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36118502)

This never happened. Word

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...