# Flying Marine?



## Cat's Cradle (Jan 7, 2022)

I have no idea if this YouTube video is real or not... it looks real to me, but computers can create amazing fakes these days.
But if this video does depict real-world technology, the tech is just amazing:






The channel owner's handle is 'JJ Gamer', but I checked his other videos, and he isn't posting video game stuff, so maybe it's true... I saw this vid posted at a news site on Twitter, so let's hope it's legit, CC


----------



## CupofJoe (Jan 7, 2022)

I'm sure I read about this a few months ago. There was also a piece about Mountain Rescue [in the Lake District?] trying it out as a way to get some aid to casualties as quickly as possible.


----------



## Cat's Cradle (Jan 7, 2022)

What amazes me is how controlled the flight is... this is generations beyond the jet packs I first saw in the '60s on Lost in Space (as you'd expect).


----------



## CupofJoe (Jan 7, 2022)

I wonder how long it took to get that good?  ***
Even the landings look like something out of Iron Man. Now I wonder if that is the film following the physics or training following the film?
*** I have an images of a Sergeant screaming at the Marine "If you get that wet, I tear it off your arm off and beat you with burny bit!"


----------



## Pyan (Jan 7, 2022)

Moved to Technology.


----------



## Foxbat (Jan 7, 2022)

These have been around for a while. Here’s an older model (about 1 minute in)





And here’s the takeoff from Big Lizzy  (HMS Queen Elizabeth)
You can also check out the specifications.








						Man in jetpack takes off from carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth
					

Watch as Ex-Royal Marines Reservist Richard Browning flies a 1000bhp jetpack suit off of HMS Queen Elizabeth.




					ukdefencejournal.org.uk


----------



## Pyan (Jan 7, 2022)

And an even older version (about 1949!)


----------



## CupofJoe (Jan 7, 2022)

And James Bond in 1965




and the Mountain Rescue


----------



## Ursa major (Jan 7, 2022)

Cat's Cradle said:


> it looks real to me


The marine is moving forward (and quite fast), but the views we get make it look** as if the jets are pointing down (understandably so) and slightly forward (less understandably so, to me anyway).


** - I'm prepared to believe that this is some sort of unintended optical illusion and that the thrust of the jets _is_ propelling the marine forward.


----------



## Cat's Cradle (Jan 7, 2022)

It's good that there are three perspectives/views/angles. If - as looks to be the case in CupofJoe's 2nd video just above - there are jets in both the backpack and each of the hand attachments, I can see where one set of jets can point down to help support hovering, while the other is angled backward (even slightly) to drive the flyer forward. It almost seems as though each set of jets - the backpack or the hand jets -  can be used to perform either task... provide lift, or forward flight (thrust). While the hand jets seem also to be used for the fine tuning of direction (maneuvering), and for landings. I know nothing about the scientific application of force, or really, about jetpacks. 

In the first part of the video I posted, it seems as though the flyer is leaning his upper body forward when he starts to head forward to the ship. But in each of the three views the person's body angles seem a bit different to me, at each moment of the flight, so I don't know. But this level of maneuverability in a jet pack system - if real - just amazes me, and so I hope it's legitimate.


----------



## CupofJoe (Jan 7, 2022)

I've found videos of the Dutch special forces training with them. So I think it is real. It is just if it really has a use. Flight times seem to be in be the range of a very few minutes. you fly there but you might be walking home or waiting for a boat to catch up They also seem to be very loud so no use for covert operations.
Would you need some sort of a pilot's licence? It is a powered flying machine after all.
And thinking about it... How strong must your arms be to keep them in place?


----------



## Cat's Cradle (Jan 7, 2022)

I really like the videos of this technology that we both have posted, CupofJoe, because I actually can see real-world applications for it. I think of how much better batteries are now than they were 50 years ago (lithium and all of that). And I imagine that maybe in the next ten years, say, a device like this could be made to fly for, perhaps, and hour. And imagine someone is trapped on the top of a burning building... or with the footage of every major flood I've seen, there are always people trapped on the roofs of ruined houses who need saving. To my mind the real-world applications are just endless. I kind of dream that technology is endlessly capable of being additionally developed, and improved. 
Maybe it'll never happen, but for some reason I just love these videos.


----------



## Foxbat (Jan 7, 2022)

This could revolutionise the way special forces are inserted into mission zones. Attack subs like Astute already have the capability of carrying SF payloads and these jets would be much less bulky than a rigid inflatable (and probably quicker at getting ashore). It’s not difficult to imagine a sub surfacing in the littoral, a hatch opening and a group of dark clad soldiers jetting like killer bats into the darkness.


----------



## Ursa major (Jan 7, 2022)

CupofJoe said:


> So I think it is real.


So do I, as there's been at least one civilian set of kit demonstrated on the TV before now. It's just the way it looked er... looked wrong.



Foxbat said:


> and a group of dark clad soldiers jetting into the darkness.


But how loud would they be?


----------



## Foxbat (Jan 7, 2022)

Not sure. It’s hard to say from the video because some of what we hear might be wind rushing by the microphone but would they be louder than an engine on a rigid inflatable?

Edit. Found this on the UK defence journal…..Currently, noise and flight time (or lack thereof) make these suits impractical for use in military service, sadly. Plus, the suit sells for $440,000…

I’m sure they’ll find a way to make it work and if not, MOD love to waste money on fruitless projects.


----------



## Ursa major (Jan 7, 2022)

Foxbat said:


> MOD love to waste money on fruitless projects.


What about one-person stealth ballons...? (I must admit to not knowing how much they might cost per pop....)


----------



## Wayne Mack (Jan 7, 2022)

With the cost of drones so low, why try to fly a man?


----------



## Foxbat (Jan 8, 2022)

Wayne Mack said:


> With the cost of drones so low, why try to fly a man?


Drones don’t cut it if it’s about taking and holding territory- even if just for a short period of time. There will still be events where boots on the ground are needed and, if it’s a quick in/out job, I can see these being useful (if the sound and range problems can be overcome).


----------



## Danny McG (Jan 8, 2022)

Too small, they need mini copters instead.....like Little Nellie in James Bond.
(It's the difference between a jogger and a mountain biker)


----------



## Pyan (Jan 8, 2022)

Foxbat said:


> Drones don’t cut it if it’s about taking and holding territory- even if just for a short period of time. There will still be events where boots on the ground are needed and, if it’s a quick in/out job, I can see these being useful (if the sound and range problems can be overcome).


I'm sure that they'll develop an quiet electric drone with man-carrying ability soon. Or just weaponised, very small, drones to protect the soldier jet-packing in, as per the Culture's knife-missile, and the Hunter-Seeker in Dune.

Edit: Yes they have: Secret U.S. Missile Aims to Kill Only Terrorists, Not Nearby Civilians


----------



## Foxbat (Jan 8, 2022)

Reading that account, it eliminates collateral damage by eliminating the need for an explosion but would only work if they pick the right target. If a civilian is mistakenly targetted, it would only limit the number of other innocents killed in the surrounding area. It’s not as if the missile has a specialised terrorist sniffer.


----------



## Foxbat (Jan 8, 2022)

After a bit of research, I found the missile was the R9X variant of the Hellfire. It has long blades that pop out and essentially lacerate everything in its radius. It would make one hell of a mess if it hit a car (but with no explosion).









						AGM-114 Hellfire - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




Here’s the but - it wouldn’t have saved that family struck by a missile just after the pull out from Afghanistan. They weren’t terrorists, they were simply mistaken as being a threat. The missile itself doesn’t differentiate so it’s complete nonsense to claim it will kill only terrorists.


----------



## Ursa major (Jan 8, 2022)

Rather handily, someone posted, yesterday evening, this video on Charlie Stross's blog --





-- which explains why the engines (two per arm, one in the backpack) are where they are.

It also talks about why flying low and/or over water is preferable (because it's safer if the engines conk out).


----------



## The Crawling Chaos (Jan 19, 2022)

Problem with this tech is both your hands are too busy controlling your flight speed and direction to fire back at anyone trying to shoot you down (but I'll grant you that shooting a small moving target out of the sky is not that easy).

Still, when it comes to rapid troop insertion I'd rather use the flyboard.


----------

