Video taken by pilots of what could be the elusive Los Angeles jet pack guy(thedrive.com)
thedrive.com
Video taken by pilots of what could be the elusive Los Angeles jet pack guy
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/38403/video-taken-by-pilots-of-what-could-be-the-elusive-los-angeles-jet-pack-guy-emerges
117 comments
Doesn't look much like a drone, more like a JetPack Aviation kit shown here.
https://youtu.be/y9B7WdlRafc?t=128
They quote endurance as 10 min and I presume it could go longer with an extra gas tank https://jetpackaviation.com/jetpacks/
Fuel seems to be about 5 gal kerosene for 8 min flight.
JetPack Aviation are located about 35 miles from the sighting so it seems a reasonable bet that it's one of their bits of kit.
https://youtu.be/y9B7WdlRafc?t=128
They quote endurance as 10 min and I presume it could go longer with an extra gas tank https://jetpackaviation.com/jetpacks/
Fuel seems to be about 5 gal kerosene for 8 min flight.
JetPack Aviation are located about 35 miles from the sighting so it seems a reasonable bet that it's one of their bits of kit.
The object in the video looked pretty high. With only eight minutes of fuel, if it was manned flight, that's got to be a pretty dangerous altitude to hit. The pilot would need a boat very close by.
3000 feet isn't that high, shouldn't take more than a minute to reach. And the info on those packs says their operating ceiling is 15000 feet, so going up to 3000 feet should be no problem.
> and I presume it could go longer with an extra gas tank
There are limits to that. If you carry an extra gas tank, then you're lifting even more mass- fuel is heavy! There are significant diminishing returns on carrying more fuel.
That said, you do make some great points- I could well be wrong.
I suspect the FBI are over there asking a lot of questions too, lol.
There are limits to that. If you carry an extra gas tank, then you're lifting even more mass- fuel is heavy! There are significant diminishing returns on carrying more fuel.
That said, you do make some great points- I could well be wrong.
I suspect the FBI are over there asking a lot of questions too, lol.
This is not true. There are jetpacks with 20min of flight time. They could have launched off a boat or the nearby shore.
Which jetpack gets 20min of flight time? Modern jetpacks get 30 seconds of flight time. The 20min flight sequences are actually lots of extremely short flights edited together to look like a single extended flight.
I believe Jetpack Aviation's current setup has a 20 min flight time. Their first jetpack was 10 min.
[deleted]
Yeah, and LA is full of people who like making realistic fakes/models and lots of time on their hands (pandemic really slowed model/prop making early on).
It could easily be a drone. It's happened before - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tB8D2QZ9lA4
It's unlikely to be an electric vehicle if it's carrying a full-sized human. You just need so much weight in batteries & swept area for props for more than a couple minutes of flight that it's difficult to pack it into a form factor anything like the size & shape of a human.
Given the location and the current state of the technology, though, a liquid fueled jetpack is perfectly possible. It doesn't have to be very efficient if the flight is only a few minutes long. A typical helicopter may achieve 5 hours in the air without any lift to glide ratio. Jets are less efficient, but still efficient enough for short flights.
You may infer a TWR limitation of jet aircraft. It's real, but it's not driven by technical limitations of the jet propulsion technology, but rather by maximizing the range using optimal amounts of lift & fuel for a fixed mass of engine. It doesn't make much sense to use engines so powerful & heavy as a fraction of aircraft mass that they can hover straight up to cruising altitude; If you had engines that powerful, you would be hanging a bigger fuel tank on the vehicle and launch it conventionally. VTOL at high subsonic or faster is an exceedingly range-limited means of flight.
It's unlikely to be an electric vehicle if it's carrying a full-sized human. You just need so much weight in batteries & swept area for props for more than a couple minutes of flight that it's difficult to pack it into a form factor anything like the size & shape of a human.
Given the location and the current state of the technology, though, a liquid fueled jetpack is perfectly possible. It doesn't have to be very efficient if the flight is only a few minutes long. A typical helicopter may achieve 5 hours in the air without any lift to glide ratio. Jets are less efficient, but still efficient enough for short flights.
You may infer a TWR limitation of jet aircraft. It's real, but it's not driven by technical limitations of the jet propulsion technology, but rather by maximizing the range using optimal amounts of lift & fuel for a fixed mass of engine. It doesn't make much sense to use engines so powerful & heavy as a fraction of aircraft mass that they can hover straight up to cruising altitude; If you had engines that powerful, you would be hanging a bigger fuel tank on the vehicle and launch it conventionally. VTOL at high subsonic or faster is an exceedingly range-limited means of flight.
I am actually hoping it is some person who has discovered an energy density breakthrough and is testing it out.
Such a discovery could kick off a new industrial revolution.
Such a discovery could kick off a new industrial revolution.
Such a discovery would be quickly whisked away by DARPA and never seen again outside of war footage.
If one were doing this as a prank, why would they be flying it over the ocean and near the airport rather than in areas with lots of people who might see and record it? Both locations this was spotted in reduce the effectiveness of the prank and increase the potential penalties for executing the prank.
You might notice the enormous rigid wingsuit in those videos...
For anyone with access to YouTube and not Instagram, or not willing to accept their cookie+tracking stuff, this might be an alternative: https://youtu.be/jKOFriZfJgw
There appears to be a line under his feet. My bet is someone with one of these fly-boards:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQzLrvz4DKQ
Still dangerous and stupid to be out over the water let alone flying around airliners.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQzLrvz4DKQ
Still dangerous and stupid to be out over the water let alone flying around airliners.
This is apparently thousands of feet above the ground, so no, can't be this.
Why not?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyboard_Air
They claim up to 9800 feet in altitude, so it seems very likely if anything.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyboard_Air
They claim up to 9800 feet in altitude, so it seems very likely if anything.
[deleted]
Wouldn't a cable that's thousands of feet long be prohibitively heavy?
It’s a jet turbine, so I assume the cable is just to lead and control.
A thousand foot of very strong fishing wire https://www.amazon.com/Sufix-Performance-Braid-300-Spool/dp/... is a mere 0.15 lbs, if Amazon’s description is to be believed.
So as a guide wire even with multiple strands (for redundancy) I think 3000 feet is very achievable.
A thousand foot of very strong fishing wire https://www.amazon.com/Sufix-Performance-Braid-300-Spool/dp/... is a mere 0.15 lbs, if Amazon’s description is to be believed.
So as a guide wire even with multiple strands (for redundancy) I think 3000 feet is very achievable.
Does Zapata's turbine flyboard use a line to the surface? I haven't seen one in videos. The more common flyboards that pump water from the ocean or a lake up into the jets and then back down obviously do.
No idea as this is the first time I even heard of this.
But a gas turbine (a jet engine, basically) is efficient, kerosene is very energetic, and for a hoverboard I imagine the hot & compressed exhaust itself is what’s mechanically useful.
There’s no reason to have a line other than as a tether, though that comes with its own risks.
But a gas turbine (a jet engine, basically) is efficient, kerosene is very energetic, and for a hoverboard I imagine the hot & compressed exhaust itself is what’s mechanically useful.
There’s no reason to have a line other than as a tether, though that comes with its own risks.
I noticed something under his feet too. I think you're on to something.
So more "hoverboard" than "jet pack" might be the future headlines. Or at least jet-pack-like hoverboard. The flight time impressive I guess, not sure of the state of these things.
Edit: I'm guessing the jet skis are following him to recover some expensive hardware quickly and the dude himself.
So more "hoverboard" than "jet pack" might be the future headlines. Or at least jet-pack-like hoverboard. The flight time impressive I guess, not sure of the state of these things.
Edit: I'm guessing the jet skis are following him to recover some expensive hardware quickly and the dude himself.
A couple weeks ago there was an ad on the front page of HN for some jet pack company that was hiring. Wonder if they're at all related.
Edit: I also wonder about the legality of this. Ultralights don't need to be registered and this would probably fall under that category. I think they are limited to Class E/G airspace.
Edit: I also wonder about the legality of this. Ultralights don't need to be registered and this would probably fall under that category. I think they are limited to Class E/G airspace.
I have a house in the area and frequently see ultralight aircraft flying out of Hawthorne Airport going back and forth around the PV Peninsula.
https://pacificblueairla.com/
Here's an article about a crash that occurred just a few months ago: https://www.dailybreeze.com/2020/10/04/1-dead-after-ultra-li...
I haven't yet personally seen Jet Pack Guy, but with the FAA/FBI involved, I'm sure we will soon know who he is.
https://pacificblueairla.com/
Here's an article about a crash that occurred just a few months ago: https://www.dailybreeze.com/2020/10/04/1-dead-after-ultra-li...
I haven't yet personally seen Jet Pack Guy, but with the FAA/FBI involved, I'm sure we will soon know who he is.
My bet is viral marketing for the flight school/experimental aircraft company that posted it.
Why else put text ON TOP of the footage?
Why else put text ON TOP of the footage?
> Why else put text ON TOP of the footage?
Because they are flight instructors, not video editors?
Because they wanted their text to exist anywhere the video was shared?
Because they are flight instructors, not video editors?
Because they wanted their text to exist anywhere the video was shared?
also putting Does He Exist? over the video is a tell
Because they’re advertising their services? They’re the first people to have gotten a video of this. I doubt a flight school would risk their entire business for a vital marketing ploy.
They aren’t risking anything... I’m not saying they actually flew in a jet pack I’m saying the footage isn’t real.
Seems like a safe way to get a ton of free press then say it was a marketing stunt in a few days. Aviation websites would be covering this a lot more seriously if it had credibility. Not reporting it to the FAA is also a weird move if it is real.
Here is the article with a statement from the FAA: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/38403/video-taken-by-p...
Seems like a safe way to get a ton of free press then say it was a marketing stunt in a few days. Aviation websites would be covering this a lot more seriously if it had credibility. Not reporting it to the FAA is also a weird move if it is real.
Here is the article with a statement from the FAA: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/38403/video-taken-by-p...
> Why else put text ON TOP of the footage?
Isn't that an Instagram thing?
Isn't that an Instagram thing?
I think that’s unlikely because this jet pack flight was dangerous and illegal
> text on top
The video has clearly been altered.
The video has clearly been altered.
Has anyone tried to stack and super-res the video frames? It is awfully small to see details but it seems like there might be a few clips where a multi-frame-based enhancement could do something.
I get the sentiment but please don't make this a thing. You probably already understand that superresolution can only invent a plausible upscaling, no extra information is gained from the pixels - but the general public don't know this. I really think we should be cautious about normalising the use of such tools for conducting forensics on photos.
Can you elaborate on this? If you have multiple frames where the target has moved around and you line up the images couldn’t we get single image with more information?
Yes. But often "multiple" means tens of images and "moved around" does not include video compression where features are moved between frames.
https://m.dpreview.com/articles/0727694641/here-s-how-to-pix...
https://m.dpreview.com/articles/0727694641/here-s-how-to-pix...
It sounds like you're referring to machine learning based superresolution? Superresolution by aligning and combining images involves a lot more pixels in total, and so more information.
At least this one is in airspace reserved for training and aerobatics. Messing around in LAX's approach airspace is much worse. Frankfurt and Gatwick airports have been shut down at least once due to drone activity. Changi is shooting down drones with a microwave weapon.
Drones need a GPS module that also reports prohibited airspace. Drones could use that to shut down if someone tried to fly them into prohibited airspace.
These folks are working on something like that: https://www.altitudeangel.com/
Unfortunately (maybe), drones aren't magical technology that you can only get from the government.
The cat is out of the bag, it's easy to make a drone at home out of generic parts. Anyone who wants to fly a drone into prohibited airspace can do it. And an even remotely-sophisticated attacker could do it with almost no chance of getting caught. That's just the world we live in now.
The cat is out of the bag, it's easy to make a drone at home out of generic parts. Anyone who wants to fly a drone into prohibited airspace can do it. And an even remotely-sophisticated attacker could do it with almost no chance of getting caught. That's just the world we live in now.
And an even remotely-sophisticated attacker could do it with almost no chance of getting caught.
Anti-drone technology is advancing. Chengdu airport installed what looks like a fire-finder radar, usually used to track artillery shells. Avaelliant has a drone detection system for sale, and it's in use at a few airports. Both are phased array radars, with no moving parts and flat antenna panels. Avaelliant's unit looks like a big cell phone tower antenna.
[1] https://southerncrossdrones.com/aveillant-uas-detection-syst...
Anti-drone technology is advancing. Chengdu airport installed what looks like a fire-finder radar, usually used to track artillery shells. Avaelliant has a drone detection system for sale, and it's in use at a few airports. Both are phased array radars, with no moving parts and flat antenna panels. Avaelliant's unit looks like a big cell phone tower antenna.
[1] https://southerncrossdrones.com/aveillant-uas-detection-syst...
This is already the case with most consumer drones. Problem is you can easily build your own and ignore all of that.
You can see his legs moving at the end, right? I was all for the drone theory, but now think it's actually a guy.
Fly free Jetpack Guy!
Possibly they've been dropped from a plane. With parachute.
And a boat waiting below. Rich people can afford to lose a few drones.
(But likely a dummy as some have mentioned)
(But likely a dummy as some have mentioned)
Definitively something similar to what Franky Zapata [1] do with his invention. He crossed the Chanel [2] with a step in the middle (on a boat) to refill.
[1] https://www.instagram.com/p/CHnkFLPqW8L/
[2] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49225001
[1] https://www.instagram.com/p/CHnkFLPqW8L/
[2] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49225001
Looks like that has a range of 11 miles, I can't seem to find an estimate of how far off land this sighting was.
He had to refill for a 22 miles trip, it does not mean that it has a range of 11 miles, it means it's less than 22.
Any possibility it's a military prototype?
There's at least two or three Air Force bases in the area around Palo Verdes. I don't think they'd be flying some secret prototype in that area and in broad daylight like this, but its always hard to figure out what and why the military does sometimes.
There's at least two or three Air Force bases in the area around Palo Verdes. I don't think they'd be flying some secret prototype in that area and in broad daylight like this, but its always hard to figure out what and why the military does sometimes.
Possible? Yes. Probable? No. The Air Force has a thousand better places to test such a prototype, should it exist.
I think you're probably right in this case. However The Quiet One, a stealth helicopter based on the Hughes OH-6, was reputedly tested over Los Angeles in the 70s. An unusually quiet helicopter doubtlessly attracts less attention than a jetpack though.
(Hughes was based out of Culver City in LA.)
(Hughes was based out of Culver City in LA.)
Unless they're testing reactions, rather than the vehicle.
Amazing, they managed to record Airrack photoshopped jetpacker.
I Fooled the Internet with A FAKE Jetpack At The Airport... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=td9n5-QUGKM
I Fooled the Internet with A FAKE Jetpack At The Airport... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=td9n5-QUGKM
Theoreticaly speaking, a lightweight sabre rocket engine (breathing engine) should be able to power a jetpack with far less fuel.
3d metal printers (such as makerforge) let home engineers design/build all kinds of bizarre stuff that wasn't possible till it was one day.
3d metal printers (such as makerforge) let home engineers design/build all kinds of bizarre stuff that wasn't possible till it was one day.
I have no idea what this is, but no doubt that it exists. I'm guessing it's a drone, but have no idea really. I really can't wait for this mystery to be solved though. It's really captured my imagination.
It is difficult to judge the airspeed of another flying object from an airplane unless you are going at approximately the same speed and direction. Is there any evidence in any sighting that these are not balloons?
That is the very logical thing to think to me on first viewing.
It's looks like a pile of balloons released from some party.
That also fits technically outside of UFO tech.
But this is a CIA/UFO tech forum. No point trying to explain it's not a drone, or a balloon made to look like a jet pack or a weather balloon. The normal X-files Scully stuff is fun. Boring things like party balloons are boring.
It's looks like a pile of balloons released from some party.
That also fits technically outside of UFO tech.
But this is a CIA/UFO tech forum. No point trying to explain it's not a drone, or a balloon made to look like a jet pack or a weather balloon. The normal X-files Scully stuff is fun. Boring things like party balloons are boring.
I can’t believe this flight school does training out over open water like that. As a pilot from the Midwest I actively fly around the Great Lakes in light piston engine aircraft, even in the summer.
You can't really compare Midwest and LA. Despite lack of good engine out options over the ground, LA Basin has several very busy airports, complex airspace and crazy traffic.
The ground in the LA basin around LAX is very crowded. It's safer for the people on the ground that new pilots not be flying overhead.
Why? So you don't crash in water if something happens?
Crashing in the water, particularly the water temperature of the Great Lakes, is nearly a death sentence. You can definitely survive impact and get out but you’re not likely to survive the water unless rescue is minutes away. The exception is the end of a particularly warm summer in maybe Lake Erie or southern Lake Michigan.
Now compared to over land, you can easily land a small piston engine plane just about anywhere. Highways, large parking lots, open fields, all become acceptable landing spots. In a Cessna 172 which is commonly used for flight training, impact speed can be as slow as 45 knots. Even a crash into a dense forest is survivable with some luck.
I guess I’m just not familiar enough with LA airspace to fully appreciate the lack of space for training flights. I’ve been in and out of LAX and it is busy no doubt. I just haven’t done GA operations in that area so I wasn’t all that familiar with all of the additional airports and traffic.
Personally, my pucker factor would be exceptionally high practicing stalls, or multi-engine training with engine shutdowns and Vmc demos over open water. Regardless of the temperature.
Now compared to over land, you can easily land a small piston engine plane just about anywhere. Highways, large parking lots, open fields, all become acceptable landing spots. In a Cessna 172 which is commonly used for flight training, impact speed can be as slow as 45 knots. Even a crash into a dense forest is survivable with some luck.
I guess I’m just not familiar enough with LA airspace to fully appreciate the lack of space for training flights. I’ve been in and out of LAX and it is busy no doubt. I just haven’t done GA operations in that area so I wasn’t all that familiar with all of the additional airports and traffic.
Personally, my pucker factor would be exceptionally high practicing stalls, or multi-engine training with engine shutdowns and Vmc demos over open water. Regardless of the temperature.
Planes are really easy to land in an open field in the event of emergency - simulated forced landings are required training for pilots. Landing on water without a sea plane is much harder.
There are very few "open fields" near LAX. Feel free to look at a satellite view on google maps, and compare to Great Lakes area. One of the denser urban areas vs a lot of agricultural use.
Hm yeah, I can relate. As an RC plane pilot, water is my bane.
Hasn't this been happening for a while?
At least locally with idiots pointing lazers near airports usually the culprits get apprehended in fairly short order.
Is it this usual for a repeated event near a busy airport to go on without intervention?
At least locally with idiots pointing lazers near airports usually the culprits get apprehended in fairly short order.
Is it this usual for a repeated event near a busy airport to go on without intervention?
They have (assuming its been the same person) been sighted 2 times previously by airline pilots.
No one knows who they are, so they're obviously unregistered. But they're flying into the arrival and departure paths of LAX. So they will be in a heap of trouble once they're identified. That makes this latest sighting all the more brazen.
No one knows who they are, so they're obviously unregistered. But they're flying into the arrival and departure paths of LAX. So they will be in a heap of trouble once they're identified. That makes this latest sighting all the more brazen.
The second sighting is suspect:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24790406
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24790406
This sighting at least isn’t in the bravo. The person is under the shelf in class E and therefore isn’t violating any airspace. They wouldn’t be subject to transponder or ADS-B requirements either because they (probably) don’t have an engine-driven electrical system.
The previous sightings do sound like this person busted the bravo but I’d have to do more research to be sure.
The previous sightings do sound like this person busted the bravo but I’d have to do more research to be sure.
At this point maybe FAA should have several "hot drones" charged and ready to takeoff as soon as the next sighting occurs to chase down the culprit.
Does he not show up on radar?
He would probably be too small to show up on the type of radar you are probably thinking about, known as "primary radar." Most airspace isn't covered by primary radar though and instead relies on transponders to track planes.
Without a transponder, it likely won't show up on the civilian radar.
Big military radars can track a cricket ball miles and miles away, so I assume yes, but they probably wouldn't say because it gives away their capabilities
I got a radar in the garage that can hear a mouse's heartbeat at 100 miles but I don't dare turn it on.
This sounds so weird that I thought it would be a reference to something, but it doesn't seem to be. Can you...elaborate on this?
Maybe I heard it somewhere but was just joking around with claims for capabilities that can't be confirmed.
This is going to end badly
Superman confirmed!
I thought we all knew that jetpacks are a thing - is there still some mystery I'm not aware of?
"A guy flying out over the ocean in a jet pack at around 3,000 feet, especially one without any lifting surfaces, is a puzzling proposition, to say the least. Jet packs that do exist have very short ranges and are not equipped to be flying in dense airspace, especially thousands of feet in the air. "
Maybe a jet pack with a large fuel tank in the shape of a human would be able to pull it off.
that seems to be a jet turbine pack which can be 15-20 minutes of flying at 60mph+ - enough to get several miles into the ocean.
With no lifting surfaces?
very napkin as we don't know how good their engines are. For small and thus low efficient jet engines - with exhaust velocity of anywhere between 500-1000m/s and with the 1:50 fuel/air ratio one has to burn 40-80g/s to get 200kg thrust. Thus a 1000s of flight takes 40-80kg of fuel.
> ... and are not equipped to be flying in dense airspace, especially thousands of feet in the air.
Isn't this just saying that you have no way to avoid being hit by an airplane, no transponder, maybe no radio, no flightpath, and are breaking about a million laws by doing so?
(I mean, doesn't address the "short range" problem, but "idiocy" seems sufficient to overcome all the rest.)
Isn't this just saying that you have no way to avoid being hit by an airplane, no transponder, maybe no radio, no flightpath, and are breaking about a million laws by doing so?
(I mean, doesn't address the "short range" problem, but "idiocy" seems sufficient to overcome all the rest.)
Mystery 1) Who is the unregistered flyer?
Mystery 2) This jetpack is outperforming known jetpacks. How?
Must be some " boring company " product promo
Strangely enough, I also thought this might be something Elon is responsible for.
Tberes no way Elin would be secret / anonymous. Under him, it would be massive PR stunt, social media circus.
There was a science fiction short story where a group of scientists was invited by military personnel to watch a short secret footage of someone flying a jetpack. The scientists were told that the inventor only had one prototype and he crashed it killing himself and destroying the unique device. Next several months the scientists spent brainstorming and trying to figure out how he did it.
Spoiler!
The footage turned out to be fabricated by military. The scientists still built a prototype of the jetpack. Not so fast, light and agile but they made something that was previously considered impossible.
Spoiler!
The footage turned out to be fabricated by military. The scientists still built a prototype of the jetpack. Not so fast, light and agile but they made something that was previously considered impossible.
I have an anecdote from a mobile device manufacturer: a new sensor module was able to provide all sorts of biometric data to a smartphone and just snapped onto the phone, no other configuration. The device was shown to a team of top engineers and they were given a couple weeks to develop an equivalent system.
The sensing was easy and worked fine, but at the end of the project they could never replicate the seamless pairing of the device to the phone. Left with all sorts of theories about hacked network stacks...they admitted defeat. Only to then learn: the device was transmitting data with inaudible soundwaves picked up by the phone's microphone.
What you're hinting at can cut both ways: you can fake the magical, while often the magical is far simpler than you thought.
The sensing was easy and worked fine, but at the end of the project they could never replicate the seamless pairing of the device to the phone. Left with all sorts of theories about hacked network stacks...they admitted defeat. Only to then learn: the device was transmitting data with inaudible soundwaves picked up by the phone's microphone.
What you're hinting at can cut both ways: you can fake the magical, while often the magical is far simpler than you thought.
Source? Sounds like bullshit or terrible engineering. Transmitting data via audio would come up in a 10m brainstorm about possible communication channels.
My boss plays these games.
"I just got back from a super-secret conference where someone you don't know--and can't ask questions of--gave me a private demonstration of how they're doing ___ using nothing but Coca-Cola and Mentos.
Your request for funding for ___ is denied, but I'll meet you halfway-- here's a pack of Mentos."
"I just got back from a super-secret conference where someone you don't know--and can't ask questions of--gave me a private demonstration of how they're doing ___ using nothing but Coca-Cola and Mentos.
Your request for funding for ___ is denied, but I'll meet you halfway-- here's a pack of Mentos."
Reminds me a bit of the movie "The Rocketeer" which featured a jetpack of unknown origin [0]. Great movie.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gi0Et31E7s4
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rocketeer_(film)
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gi0Et31E7s4
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rocketeer_(film)
Does anyone know the title of this short story?
That’s the gag. You now have to write it yourself.
I did read that short story a long time ago. That was not jetpack but rather based on anti gravity.
I was sure that I've also read that story. But I don't remember nor the author, nor title.
Started searching and found a thread on stackexchange. It looks like thaere are several stories with such a plot: https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/74090/scientists-s...
Started searching and found a thread on stackexchange. It looks like thaere are several stories with such a plot: https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/74090/scientists-s...
My bet is that it's Elon Musk testing a new unannounced technology that will spur yet another company.
Will know for sure if Jet Pack Guy starts making appearances over Texas.
I came here to suggest we inform the Franchise Tax Board that we have evidence Elon is still in California.
But apparently this idea was already... in the air.
But apparently this idea was already... in the air.
Could be Tom Cruise? Noted crazy stunt person, has been known to live in LA, has access to money, crazy stunt films to virally promote.
Whatever that object is, it's too small to hold enough batteries to contain the energy needed to lift a human being for any serious length of time. Even using chemical storage like gasoline or kerosine, you'd need to bring a very large tank with you to stay airborne any length of time. There's no lifting body, like wings, to make staying aloft more efficient either, like an airplane uses.
My guess is that it's a prank. A fairly large drone loosely carrying a very light dummy. And as far as pranks go, they have succeeded.