news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7747307.stm
Why aren’t these things commercially available yet? Why do I take the bus to work? This technology exists and I don’t have access to it?! Madness!
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7747307.stm
Why aren’t these things commercially available yet? Why do I take the bus to work? This technology exists and I don’t have access to it?! Madness!
…madness indeed!
There is so much technology that has been around since I was at college (and that being many many years ago ) that those in power are keeping under wraps, so that they can keep making money off the old inferior versions/technolgy/methods of transport - those in power are no damn fun!
they just care about sex and A-class’
I’m with Carleas, definitely.
Except, comedian Joe Rogan brings up a valid point on the jetpack issue:
“Two things that will never happen at the same time; jetpacks and legal weed. Who is going to show up to work at the mortgage company when you can smoke pot and flllllllllyyyyyyyyy.”
I think the government really does fear freedom.
I have visions of New York, LA and instead of the multitude of accidents on the ground, you now have collisions in the air, bodies falling. If folks can’t avoid accidents whle driving cars or crossing streets, you just know idiots will collide in the air, forget to look around, forget to check their fuel. Oh Yea, I think this is one time the govt’ feels rightly inclined to prevent mass stupidity. Its not the fall that kills you its that sudden stop at the end.
I like that…
True
…unless they made lanes in the sky
I can see it now… “Oh, excuse me ma’am, I didn’t mean to rear-end you…”
Ooh er
The consequence of being single for too long, is that everything starts to sound like a double entendre/an innuendo.
Almost as cool as jetpacks:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MutvUfQcmMg[/youtube]
With jetpacks, you could easily install some safety features that would prevent most accidents: a automatic low-fuel controlled descent; a licensing program like for cars or aircraft, but somewhere in-between in terms of strictness. I think collisions would be few: cars have a lot of blind spots, jetpacks have many fewer. As far as I know, bicycle lanes in asian countries have relatively few collisions for the same reason (although, I don’t actually know the number on that).
Besides, we’ll have wearable computers with heads-up displays in the next few years, we’ll basically be flawless flying robots. And Mas, we’ll also have robotic gardeners and factory workers, and sweet enhanced pot so we won’t even need to stop fucking around to get a bite to eat.
Carleas You don’t know the depths of stupidity we US people can get to. Women put makeup on while driving, folks read, talk on phones look down around and anywhere else except where they should be looking, we eat in our cars, now that one alone has caused pile ups.
As an experiment we put jet packs on the folks that live in LA,give them rules and license them after giving them tests . I live across country from them so its safe enough for me. The first day I would bet on 100 acts of pure stupidity resulting in at least 10 deaths. We have road rage here and LA is one of the worst for it, Air rage will happen… Oh yea… Stupidity.
You all might handle it better but, here we tend to be fairly immature and stupid.
Geeze, Magsj.
That was about as blatant as I could make it without it being pron…
…they could be designed with an anti-collision mechanism, that would ensure that jetpackers could never come within a certain distance of each other - not an entirely brain-taxing mechanism to design, so it could be easily done.
Oh! Then you’ll be pleased to know it had the desired effect you intended it to have Tent.
One air traffic cop to another:
“Hey, man?”
“What?”
“I’m starved, when the fuck are they gonna put a Dunkin’ Donuts up here?”
popularmechanics.com/technol … 17989.html
You can buy them.
I would wait though…better one’s are on the way.
“To some extent, everyone’s in the market for a jet pack.” Excellent opening line. Yeah, jetpacks need some work. It’s really nuts, though, isn’t it? People have been dreaming about robots and jetpacks for so long, and most of us will live to see them. So, so cool. I would totally pay 5 years’ salary for to live a decades old dream.
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7821979.stm
Flying cars!
EDIT: actually, this one sort of annoys me, because the way they do it seems so stupid and mundane, I’m angry no one figured it our earlier. Maybe they needed space-age materials and such.
I think this will be a better flying car, and has the strongest potential:
This may seem like a piece of complete fantasy, but it’s actually far easier than one might think, and here’s why:
This car already exists; it’s called a Carver:
And, this gyrocopter exists:
Now, mix the two of these ideas together, and you get the PAL-V6.
The reason that I think this will work is that:
Here are some citations from the PAL-V site (which btw, is pal-v.com/):
Chart of estimated statistics:
Statment of functional use in flight:
Carver car specifications (carver-worldwide.com):
Regarding the general ride of the Carver:
Combine the two of these concepts and you have the most reasonable step towards a practical and useful flying-car.
Wouldn’t the road-building types have something to say about this…?
Who’s going to invent the “flying articulated lorry”…?
And won’t roof-insurance premiums go up…?
The autogyro has been around for about 80 years. I fly RC models, and let me tell you, there are a couple of things they are forgetting to tell you. They are easier to fly than a helicopter, but harder than a conventional plane. When they figure out how to keep air moving over the control surfaces in a stall, maybe, but stall one of these things and all you have is a semi-controlled crash.
I think I’ll wait for anti-gravity with lots of foam padding…
well…sure, the autogyro has been around, but the carver design is lightweight and handles uniquely better than any other small car, so it adds another twist to the old idea.
And true…stability bit.