speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/on-air...e-lax/2467329/

R_Strowe

Gosh! Go figure!

R_Strowe

Hydro Junkie

Considering how much the FBI brass and mainstream media sources are censoring and editing the news to fit their own narrative, especially in regard to the presidential election, I don't trust NBC or the FBI to give accurate and honest information. If the Australian news services said it was a parade balloon, I would believe that first

R_Strowe

Or instead of seeing some kind of conspiracy, the simple answer (I'm just applying Occam's Razor here) is what the FBI and various news organizations are reporting; this was either a drone or a balloon of some sort.

The logistics of either launching such a device from the ground (energy and fuel required is prohibitive for the required duration) or dropping from an aircraft (even more far fetched, as well as very easy to track via ATC) make either possibility unbelievably remote.

R_Strowe

Hydro Junkie

Trust me, it's not a matter of seeing a conspiracy, there's been an active campaign to oust Trump since 2016. Why would things be different now? The problem is that everything they have been saying the Trump family has been doing was proven to be false and now its coming to light that it's the Biden family that has been doing what the Trumps have been blamed for. It's just not being reported or, if it is, it's been called "Russian Disinformation" or "Republican Smear Attacks". If you don't believe me, check out the Australian news sources, Fox news or the new news networks that are actually reporting what's been going on.
Are you aware that if you mention voting fraud on Twitter, Facebook or Youtube, your account will be locked or deleted? The New York Times account was locked when it broke the story about Hunter Biden's laptop, followed by the first usage of "Russian Disinformation" in all the major US media sources

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Go watch the clip again. It said nothing of the sort. That is your interpretation. What the clip in the link actually said was.....nothing......it went full circle and gave no more definitive information than was given in the initial reports of the incident. The lady "reporting" the "news" sure was pretty and distracting though!

Astro

Hydro Junkie

She's okay. I would prefer Seattle's Rebecca Stevenson at King TV. I've met her and she is DAMM CUTE!!!!!!!! Unfortunately, the picture doesn't do her justice

init4fun

And , proving that this story has more lives than a cat , here's the latest ;

Tonight's news just reported that a flight instructor near LAX has taken some pretty clear video of what looks fairly convincingly to me like , , wait for it , a person flying a jetpack !

To any who still 101% believe it can't possibly be a jetpack (and maybe even to the FBI and their "Likely a balloon or a drone" answer) , I say search out the video

init4fun

PS , channel 7 news , Boston Massachusetts "Inside Edition" is where the video aired , if that helps anyone's search for it

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I wonder if, when this is all over, that we will see any public displays of eating crow by those that were so full of themselves and vehemently dismissing the jetpack theory as impossible, or will we get the usual proverbial head buried in the sand....


Astro

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

OOPS! Freudian slip!

I meant to post this one..

R_Strowe

I would expect the same from you and others if it turns out to be just a balloon or a drone.

I on the other hand will freely admit, and be totally impressed at the same time, that someone overcame all of the logistical issues pulling this off. I just don't see it happening.

And I've seen the video. The speed of the 'jetpack' is equal to what the relative speed is of the aircraft from which the video is being shot. I've flown past too many birds, balloons and other aircraft and witnessed this phenomenon. It's speed perfectly matches how a balloon would appear if flown past by a typical GA aircraft.

R_Strowe

init4fun

Good evening Mr. Strowe ,

And that's my whole point of posting what I just did , In the original thread discussing this seemingly repeated sighting , I had been very careful to neither 100% accept nor deny any possible theory , because I'm very simply not convinced yet that it is , or isn't , a person on a jetpack . Or a balloon . Or a drone . There were others , however , who used words like "Never" and "Impossible" , and I'm still not ready to accept 101% any of the proposed theories .

Now to be honest with ya , my safety/law abiding side regarding aviation doesn't like it no matter what it turns out to be , because no matter what it is , it's a danger to full scale aircraft .

But , , , the wild & crazy/adventurous side of my long ago youth kinda DOES hope it's some nutjob on a jetpack , a zillion years ago when I was young and would ride anything with an engine that went fast , I could see me taking a few laps around the city on it

With age truly does come wisdom .... Or fear of pain & persecution , take yer pick .....

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I will ditto what init said. I never said it was a jetpack either, so I won't be eating any crow no matter the "official" findings.

Astro

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

more new fodder for the herd

Maldives Jet Suit Adventure!

looks like fun

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Hmmm...

Hydro Junkie

The guy in that video must have strong arms to control that much thrust and, when you consider the fact that he actually took off from the ground VERTICALLY, that kind of kills some of the arguments about not being able to do so by some "naysayers" here in the forum

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I'm still waiting to see if they will make good on their word....Astro

Dick T.

My Feedback: (243)

Have seen other videos of the same dude, agree about the arms. Wouldn't want to arm wrestle with him.

In other videos I've seen he rarely gets more than 20 feet off the deck and is generally over water. Makes a better cushion than dirt should an arm or turbine flame out.

Saw a video of a different fellow buzzing back and forth about twenty yards over the surf in front of beach goers. Yup, flame out and a plop into the surf. People had to rescue him so he didn't drown.

Glad he wasn't injured but I'm guessing his thousands of dollars in gear is junk after electronics and high temp turbines hit salt water.

Personally I think any jet pack type of flying is low altitude stuff and not 3000 feet over LAX. When you look at the gear carried to fuel the turbines not much room left for a parachute.

So when I see evidence of a take off to 3000 feet and a safe landing I will congratulate the dumb ass doing it.

Hydro Junkie

I'd like to see someone fly that in person. Now, granted, he didn't get up to 3000 feet, but he did go up vertically, something some said wasn't possible. That is something else I'd like to see since I know it is possible, just not proven yet. Then again, 115 years or so ago, man didn't think it was possible to fly. Now, with the right aircraft, it's possible to top mach 3

R_Strowe

I don't think anyone said VTO wasn't possible, what was said was that to perform a VTO, then climb up to 3000', and loiter before descending for a controlled landing was the issue. There simply isn't enough room in that backpack for the fuel required, plus the additional thrust required to lift it would be an issue as well.

Very different than flying along the beach around 60' altitude or so.

And as DickT said, I'll happily congratulate the idiot who manages to do it.

R_Strowe

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

See quote in post #16 above. That was the basis of the other thread. After all of his, “expert” calculations, speedy said vertical takeoff and landings were “impossible”.

Astro

Retiredat38

And in the last 120 or so years, how many so called aviation impossibilities have been accomplished? Manned flight itself, across the ocean, around the world, the sound barrier, jets, carrier ops, space and going to/from the moon. The list goes on.

Point is and especially since the advent of computers, there may be many things in aviation we may not be able to do today. But don't try to tell me we won't be able to do them tomorrow. Those with vision will continue to push that envelope. And those who back them will make fortunes and be witness to some fantastic events. And those who lack the vision will continue to sit on the sidelines, out of the game, wondering what all the excitement is about.

The basic concept of Jet Packs has been lurking in the minds of experimenters since the 1940s and probably before that. And the fact is there have been some amazing success' with the various Jet Suits (for lack of a better general description) being designed today. And since we have idiots who will fly an RC aircraft intentionally close to the Blue Angles, I have no doubt we can find someone idiot enough to take one up to 3000 feet near LAX. Maybe not today but certainly tomorrow.

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

gotta wonder how much fuel he carried on this flight:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...t-Channel.html


and, notice the dates on this.

Retiredat38

Works out to about 12.5 years ago. And since then he's flown the English Channel, the Grand Canyon and a number of other events. Last I knew he has been able to do vertical take offs and there have a few newer versions of his wing. All in all quite the interesting story should one be so inclined to check all of it out.

But of course it would be impossible for one of these to appear near LAX at 3000 AGL.