Car and Bike Talk Discussions and comparisons of cars and motorcycles of all makes and models.

www.jetpackforums.com

Old 10-03-2010, 03:08 PM
  #1  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
CHEESEFRIES333's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default www.jetpackforums.com

http://shopping.yahoo.com/articles/yshoppi...to-take-flight/

Once they get em down ide rather have one over a motorcycle
Old 10-03-2010, 04:25 PM
  #2  
Registered User
 
luder_5555's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: So Cal
Posts: 2,781
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Things like this will never be allowed to be mainstream. I mean people generally cannot as a whole manage a 2 dimensional field of travel. Do you really think that society can handle 3 dimensional travel?

Beyond that, when someone runs out of fuel, they will not simply coast to a stop, they will fall to their death.

As fun as i think that this or personal aircraft would be, We are just too stupid as a society, and it would be impossible to make this safe enough for the masses.
Old 10-03-2010, 05:06 PM
  #3  

 
whiteflash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Benicia, CA
Posts: 23,911
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Well at least I know what 1 of the future top 10 darwin awards will be a result of. Besides that, fckin awesome.
Old 10-03-2010, 06:44 PM
  #4  
Registered User
 
tarheel91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Why not use a rotary instead of piston engine? Much more efficient in terms of power/weight.
Old 10-03-2010, 07:10 PM
  #5  

 
whiteflash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Benicia, CA
Posts: 23,911
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

While we're at it, let's wonder why they're not using magnetic anti-gravity engines....
Old 10-03-2010, 08:42 PM
  #6  
Registered User
 
sean2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by tarheel91,Oct 3 2010, 06:44 PM
Why not use a rotary instead of piston engine? Much more efficient in terms of power/weight.
because after 50,000 jetpack miles the rotary engine would need a rebuild
Old 10-03-2010, 09:47 PM
  #7  

 
mic_crispy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 5,904
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by sean2k,Oct 3 2010, 10:42 PM
because after 50,000 jetpack miles the rotary engine would need a rebuild
and you would have to add oil / gas mid flight.
Old 10-04-2010, 07:26 AM
  #8  
Registered User
 
tarheel91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by sean2k,Oct 4 2010, 12:42 AM
because after 50,000 jetpack miles the rotary engine would need a rebuild
A rotary is typically bulletproof (moreso than a piston engine) if maintained correctly. Where the hell does this misconception come from anyways?

Rotaries can be charge cooled as opposed to oil cooled, thus removing the oil consumption issues (I get its a joke, but still). Rotary efficiency issues come into play at lower power levels (I.e. cruising along the interstate) but are almost equal to piston engines at full throttle. In an application where large amounts of thrust are constantly required the efficiency issue isn't really a big deal. Plus, less weight means less thrust needed.
Old 10-04-2010, 07:51 AM
  #9  

 
vader1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: MAHT-O-MEDI
Posts: 11,814
Received 423 Likes on 298 Posts
Default

[QUOTE=tarheel91,Oct 4 2010, 09:26 AM] A rotary is typically bulletproof (moreso than a piston engine) if maintained correctly.
Old 10-04-2010, 01:31 PM
  #10  
Registered User
 
nearwater4me's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I want this!

Dan

Quick Reply: www.jetpackforums.com



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:54 PM.