?

Log in

No account? Create an account
More things we were supposed to have here in our brave 21st century future: Jetpacks - Adventures in Engineering — LiveJournal
The wanderings of a modern ronin.

Ben Cantrick
  Date: 2006-08-02 00:29
  Subject:   More things we were supposed to have here in our brave 21st century future: Jetpacks
Public
  Mood:complaining cause I'm jealous
  Music:Roxette - Crash, Boom, Bang!


Rick Herron, creator of Skywalker Jets, has devised a rocket pack that weighs about 90 pounds and can propel a 200 pound pilot around the air for what is likely the most invigorating 5 minutes of their life. The crazy part is this thing actually works, and it doesn't get your backside all crispy in the process. Rick plans on producing a finalized model that has a range of about 4 miles and includes a GPS unit integrated into a HUD showing flight time and engine information among other things.

http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/31/skywalker-jet-packs-in-development/

http://www.skywalkerjets.com/


I still say this guy needs to learn what a bypass turbine design is. I also envy him his deep pockets - The original pack was made from eight "AT-450" model aircraft turbines made by American Micro Turbine, at a cost of only $4800 each! Hm, eight turbines to power this jetpack. I'm reminded of section 2.3 of RFC 1925...

(See also.)
Post A Comment | 12 Comments | | Link






  User: nickhalfasleep
  Date: 2006-08-02 02:10 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
I think an off the shelf reliable engine beats dicking around with creating small high bypass turbofan engines on your own (look at where the AeroCar is these days.. planted firmly on the ground). Besides, those can't fit a whole arm in those intakes.

Reply | Thread | Link



MegaZone
  User: zonereyrie
  Date: 2006-08-02 02:10 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
I'm not sure a bypass engine scales down that well. When you get down to tiny engines you have issues with the core producing enough power to power the fan. They scale *up* real well though - the bigger, the better, really.

He's really going to want computerized controls that can auto-throttle to compensate for any lost engine, etc. So if you drop an outboard engine on one side the other engines on that side throttle up a bit, and the other side throttles down a bit to keep balanced and same net thrust.
Reply | Thread | Link



MegaZone
  User: zonereyrie
  Date: 2006-08-02 02:18 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
I thought I remembered a turbojet pack: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_pack#Turbojet_pack_.28Bell_Jet_Flying_Belt.29
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Ben Cantrick
  User: mackys
  Date: 2006-08-02 03:41 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
Yes, hence my "See Also" link.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



MegaZone
  User: zonereyrie
  Date: 2006-08-02 03:47 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
Ah, so, oops. ;-)
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



MegaZone
  User: zonereyrie
  Date: 2006-08-02 02:19 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
There are jet powered motorcycles out there, even street legal. Jay Leno has one IIRC.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Ben Cantrick
  User: mackys
  Date: 2006-08-02 03:42 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
http://www.marineturbine.com/motorsports.asp
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Ben Cantrick
  User: mackys
  Date: 2006-08-02 04:14 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
If you're going to go that route, Rotax engines are a lot cheaper and might be pretty effective at driving a turbofan (just think of it as a multi-axial design where the central spool doesn't contribute thrust).

That sounds like the Solotrek XFV, which is boooorrriinnnggg.............

We use turbine engines because WE DON'T CARE about efficiency. Just raw unbridled power! ;]
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



  User: nickhalfasleep
  Date: 2006-08-02 02:46 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
Shouldn't this be filed under "This Week in Boomers?"

Reply | Thread | Link



Trevor Stone: blue sky red rose
  User: flwyd
  Date: 2006-08-02 20:56 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
Keyword:blue sky red rose
I don't know if I want to fly if it means carrying a device that weighs more than half as much as I do.
Reply | Thread | Link



Ben Cantrick
  User: mackys
  Date: 2006-08-05 22:38 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
Well that's it then, buddy!

We're revoking your puer aeternus license right now!

;]
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



browse
May 2015