At OSH, did you see the "jet pack" fly?

[kentb]

Originally Posted by JDRhodes

Step back and look at the bigger picture. Why go though all the trouble of turbofans, rockets or ducted 2stroke powered propellers to create bouyancy when the same thing can be achieved with a very simple device -- a balloon?

Like this...
http://www.cloudhopper.org/Sightings.htm[/quote]

Let see:
Fuel is ignited and burned without the use of piston, rod, crank, no moving parts.
There is a whooshing sound and lots of hot gas.

This must be a rocket pack!

Kent

[John Clark]

Originally Posted by kentb

If you can't stand to be ridiculed, don't hype your machine.

Besides they have some very stiff competition.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vfht9TRBnhc&NR=1

Kent

Now that I would stand in line for!

John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

[boom3]

What could have been.

[chinch]

Well, I understand the disappointment for those who had let their imaginations run a little free at hearing 'jet pack' and waiting for ages, and then not seeing anything, or hearing a screaming two stroke when you expect a tick-tick-tick-whoosh of a personal turbine firing up.

It's two years later, and having seen the steady progress of this aircraft, and having listened to Glen speak and having spoken to him, I can categorically say that this is nothing remotely close to the 'Moller Flying Car'. There is no hyperbole, no crazy promises, just solid engineering, hard work, and steady, steady progress.

The MJP has flown with 210lb pilots, it has flown out of ground effect, and the company is working very closely with a ballistic parachute company. They live, eat and breath the dead mans curve.

Rockwell execs saw the demo at Oshkosh and rushed away to get clearance to provide MJP with a restricted gyro/sensor/flight control package, which means the aircraft is now VERY easy to fly, with more safety features than have ever been seen on a small aircraft. Dial in a max altitude, max speed and ring fence your flying area, and you CANNOT fly outside those parameters or beyond your capabilities. The MJP will very politely and gently, say "no".

More importantly, Glen has a solid business plan that is based on commercial realities, not promises, snake oil and charisma.

I don't want to sound like a parochial cheer leader, but having been very skeptical of this thing in the past, I now genuinely believe that the engineering advances made by this company, steadily and quietly over the last 20 years are indeed cause for quiet celebration and admiration.

I'm all for healthy cynicism, but I am saddened by the the negative rock throwing response from this particular audience, for whom I have immense respect, in that they cannot recognise exactly the same qualities they hold so highly in themselves and their peers - or are methodical engineering, problem solving, innovation, hard work and sheer determination only things to be valued if you are building an RV?

[chinch]

By way of follow up:

A hovercraft? Only in ground effect? Attached to the ground by two safety guys? No, no and no.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaTfCKkJpOY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TBndcBjQFM

Yes, I appreciate there is no pilot on board in the first video but there is an 80 kilo lead weight.

Perhaps the reason they don't currently fly higher than 10' manned is that they understand the dead mans curve, and until they have solved or managed that particular problem to their complete satisfaction, they don't want to place their test pilots at unnecessary risk. Like most other aircraft designers, builders and engineers, I suspect.

Is it noisy? **** yes. It also has no muffler, yet. MJP are working towards a target noise level of a street motorbike, which does not seem unreasonable.

Is it big? Yes, bigger than a back pack - which also means there is a safety frame and crush zones to offer some protection to the pilot in the event of a crash.

Is it small? Yes, smaller than an ultralight aircraft. Flight time is 30 minutes, which is a 20x improvement on the Bell Rocket Belt (What? It's not a Belt! A hoax, I say. A HOAX!)

It seems that most people are profoundly disappointed that it's not what they imagined, and that is completely understandable. But I would have thought that pilots, and homebuilders more than anyone else, would understand that no one is going to turn up at Oshkosh out of the blue and present a fully fledged Rocketeer type backpack just like in the movies.

Real progress doesn't work that way.

And it's an indictment on the snake oil salesmen who have gone before that there is so much cynicism at something that should be applauded and celebrated.

As I alluded to earlier - we all are quick to congratulate our peers who finally get the aircraft of their dreams into the air - and quite rightly so. I just don't understand why so many here (of all places!) are so quick to decry someone else who has done exactly that - without a kit, without a design, without the shoulders of giants like Van to stand on. Just trial, error, smarts, hard work and belief in oneself.

Weren't there two brothers like that a wee while ago?

[rv8ch]

Originally Posted by chinch

...
As I alluded to earlier - we all are quick to congratulate our peers who finally get the aircraft of their dreams into the air - and quite rightly so. I just don't understand why so many here (of all places!) are so quick to decry someone else who has done exactly that - without a kit, without a design, without the shoulders of giants like Van to stand on. Just trial, error, smarts, hard work and belief in oneself.

Weren't there two brothers like that a wee while ago?

Stating the obvious, but humans are very resistant to change - this is coded into our DNA. Risk takers get weeded out of the gene pool. We have to accept this, understand it, and work with it. Humans are also very adaptable when change does come.

I didn't see the jet pack at OSH, but saw the hype before hand, and I can understand why people were disappointed. There have been fantastic products launched with too much hype that have failed, and crappy products launched in such a way to keep our attention long enough to be successful. This is why marketing people get paid so well.

I really hope that the Marting Jetpack is successful, and that I have the opportunity to fly one.

[plehrke]

Critics are people that have no idea how things work and get done. They do not understand the huge effort it takes to get something built, made safe, and approved by a government authority. Most homebuilders only have to deal with the "get it built" part as the other two peices have been accomplished by the people that came before them.
I did see the jet pack demo at OSH in 2008. I was very skeptical and felt I was right in my attitude when I saw the demo. That was mostly due to me over expecting based on my vision of a jetpack. I do admire the effort and wish all the luck for success. With out individuals trying there would be no EAA and OSH. I love innovation in aviation, that is why I am here (day job and evenings in the hanger). All the best for those making the effort.

[Inverted]

After the jetpack accident portion there appears to be video of an actual working jetpack:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndfpr...eature=related

[gasman]

Oshkosh 2008......... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUrE6...eature=related

Here is the news report......... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvD8z...eature=related

And this is what we expected to see...... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EP3JI...1&feature=fvwp

[chinch]

Gasman - I fully understand that, EAA hyped the thing (not Martin, BTW) and the media came like moths to the flame - as it captured their imagination as much as anyone else.

I don't think MJP are wholly blameless - calling their aircraft a 'jet pack' was always going to cause people to point out that technically it is neither (the same "misnamed" criticism can be pointed out of the Bell Rocket Belt and the 'jet' pack in the last video you posted). It's clearly not jet turbine powered, and it is large, if you are expecting something you strap ON, as opposed to strap TO.

But I also understand that from a marketing perspective, everyone knows what a jet pack is and after decades of the term being in pop culture (Flash Gordon, Rocketeer, etc) it makes commercial sense to leverage that existing common knowledge. I don't pretend that it is 100% accurate (I found the verbal gymnastics on the website describing how it was a jet because there was a jet of thrust to be somewhat disingenuous) , but I fully understand the commercial marketing realities of that part of business.

As I said, I understand the disappointment, I felt exactly the same way when I first saw the MJP. But once I got over the fact that I wasn't going to be rescuing pretty girls from the clutches of evil nazis in zeppelins using a rocket pack strapped to my back, I could fully appreciate just what MJP have and are achieving.

As for getting a chance to fly the MJP, I understand MJP are looking very closely at an adventure flying franchise model to complement the production side of the business, where people can fly the MJP (low and slow) after an hours training. So, if you want to fly it without actually having to purchase one, then it sounds like that is going to be very possible.