Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Aviation
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-02-2020, 06:02 AM
 
Location: North America
4,430 posts, read 2,705,662 times
Reputation: 19315

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chava61 View Post
Are those regulations specific only to aircraft? In any case, I agree that person will be in a very sticky situation when found.
If a lawnchair hanging from balloons was an aircraft subject to FAA restrictions - and it was - then so is a jetpack.

Quote:
Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (e-CFR)
Title 14. Aeronautics and Space
Chapter I. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Subchapter A. DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
Part 1. DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Section 1.1. General definitions.
Quote:
Aircraft means a device that is used or intended to be used for flight in the air.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text...ing%20aircraft.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-02-2020, 11:26 PM
 
Location: El paso,tx
4,514 posts, read 2,521,736 times
Reputation: 8200
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackmccullough View Post
Obviously the guy shouldn't have been that close to the flight lanes, regardless of altitude.

Getting that out of the way, do we think there is a lot of increased danger from being up at 3,000 feet? Assuming no parachute you're just as dead if you fall from 100 feet as 3,000 feet, right? There's no significant pressure gradient or oxygen deprivation at that altitude, leading to either loss of consciousness or oxygen supply problems for the engine.

So is it just general stupidity people are talking about, or am I missing something?
Its the flying a jetpack on the final approach path to a major airport (or really in any class B or C airspace) . If you think a bird strike is bad...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2020, 01:41 AM
 
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,705 posts, read 58,022,681 times
Reputation: 46172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spottednikes View Post
Its the flying a jetpack on the final approach path to a major airport (or really in any class B or C airspace) . If you think a bird strike is bad...
An albatross strike...

Things are moving pretty fast around LAX, even at landing speed would be easy to miscalculate your Jetpack acceleration / maneuverability.

Add a few thousand Amazon Drones, and it might get pretty crowded up there.

Can you imagine the LAX area freeway traffic once they all become 'flying cars'.

https://learningenglish.voanews.com/...y/5569712.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2020, 06:15 AM
 
4,345 posts, read 2,163,972 times
Reputation: 3398
There should have been a report or sighting by now.....almost impossible to takeoff with the huge noise of those jets and fly to altitude and return with no one seeing it during the day......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2020, 10:22 PM
 
28,122 posts, read 12,586,929 times
Reputation: 15335
This has got me thinking...to lift and fly a person, you wouldnt need much thrust/propulsion, Im not sure what the smallest jet engine is today, Ive seen some around 14" long, about 8" diameter...but really, they could be made smaller, if you wanted one with just enough thrust to lift and propel an average person (180 lbs)..


Anyone estimate what size jet engine would be needed here?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2020, 10:20 AM
 
4,345 posts, read 2,163,972 times
Reputation: 3398
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
This has got me thinking...to lift and fly a person, you wouldnt need much thrust/propulsion, Im not sure what the smallest jet engine is today, Ive seen some around 14" long, about 8" diameter...but really, they could be made smaller, if you wanted one with just enough thrust to lift and propel an average person (180 lbs)..


Anyone estimate what size jet engine would be needed here?
Several candidates around now.........here's 89lbs of thrust........the gravity guys are running 4 jets on the hands and one on the back.........doubt they would need one this big...........

https://www.chiefaircraft.com/jc-p400-pro.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2020, 10:58 AM
 
19,020 posts, read 27,579,284 times
Reputation: 20266
A prototype maybe?
Are they sure, it was not Superman? Carrying backpack instead of cape?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2020, 11:02 PM
 
28,122 posts, read 12,586,929 times
Reputation: 15335
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vf6cruiser View Post
Several candidates around now.........here's 89lbs of thrust........the gravity guys are running 4 jets on the hands and one on the back.........doubt they would need one this big...........

https://www.chiefaircraft.com/jc-p400-pro.html
Wow, that one only weighs 8lbs, and looks to be 14" long, and 5" diameter, thats pretty small for a jet engine, Im surprised it only produces 89lbs of thrust.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2020, 04:02 AM
 
Location: Grosse Ile Michigan
30,708 posts, read 79,786,099 times
Reputation: 39453
Quote:
Originally Posted by ukrkoz View Post
A prototype maybe?
Are they sure, it was not Superman? Carrying backpack instead of cape?
Getting ready for back to school.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2020, 04:07 PM
 
46,946 posts, read 25,976,294 times
Reputation: 29440
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2x3x29x41 View Post
If a lawnchair hanging from balloons was an aircraft subject to FAA restrictions - and it was - then so is a jetpack.
This did cause a bit of debate among aviator friends last night. Imagine, if you will, someone launching himself on a ballistic arc that enters and then exits controlled airspace with, say, a catapult, a compressed-air cannon or even a solid-rocket booster that detaches before he reaches the controlled zone. While in the restricted zone, all he's got on him is the stowed parachute he'll use for landing after his trajectory leaves the zone again. Is he in an aircraft and, as such, under FAA jurisdiction?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Aviation

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top