How much for a full tank of gas?

Instruction manual:

1) Do not raise your hands above your head.

This is the sort of thing I could imagine would be very useful for helping a lost cat find its way home.

People strapped to flammable equipment that is attached to spinning blades.

Why is this still a concept for the future?
Or was it just a scheme to resolve the growing population issue all along?

@scoobydoo:
2) Do not wave good-bye, as doing so may lead you to forget Rule 1).

Without some form of a tail rotor (or offset lateral thrust), how is the rotational torque negated to prevent the person from spinning as well? That flimsy little rudder won't do the job.

@scoobydoo: I can only imagine the scalping incidents that would arise.

Rpckets at the end of the tips or not, an anti torque rotor is still needed - unless you are entering a breakdance contest at 4000 feet up.

Sniff, Sniff,...Smells like Pentax Technology...I throw Chimerestry and turn it into a Deathcopter, doing 25 d20 flying damage. Good thing I have 5 dots, Horrid Reality.

"It works! High five!!" *BZZT* "Gyaaaah"

@gmaxwell447: "rockets at the end of the blades negate the need for a tail rotor"

I have wanted this my whole life! Ya'll are pussies.

That'd be incredibly deafening, doncha think?

Not to mention dangerous, as others have pointed out.

Sure this thing will be dangerous, but just think of how spectacular you would look as this thing took off like an oversized firework.

great, so much for the border fence, then.

I'm as ready for a jet pack as the next guy but do the blades have to be so close to my neck

Every time I scroll past the main photo without looking directly at it, my brain gets the impression its a picture of a fire extinguisher, stupid red jump suit.

It strikes me that it would be difficult to get a continuous flow of fuel from the tanks to the ends of the blades while they are spinning. Any joint that can spin and move liquid would seem too error prone to trust it to something that flammable.
Damn I am a sissy

this is going to sound off topic at first, but just bare with me

in the movie twenty eight weeks later, theres a scene where the helicopter pilot tilts the helicopter downward in such a way as to basically put the blade in front of the plane and proceeds to fly directly through a crowd of zombies...hacking them to pieces as he flies right though

now picture that, but with this, and with pedestrians, whom may or may not be walking around, minding their own business, and who dont realize whats going on until its too late.

We will all have these in the year 2000.

@jrghoull: ...and honestly, how is the latter different from the former? PAY ATTENTION, PEOPLE! They get what they deserve, not watching the sky for errant rocket-pack personal helicraft and all.

Back when I was a youth, it was the odd steam powered combine toolin' down mainstreet that ya had to watch out for; if ya didn't eat yer Wheaties, you'd likely BE the Wheaties, by gum.

@che_leo: pfft its easier and safer to take the tunnels and drug subs into the United States. Or to fly to Canada and cross from there. All of which are cheaper options than the heli-jetpack.

Nice idea, too bad 55 years ago a belgium comic artist had a better design!

[en.wikipedia.org]

I think I've seen this before.

+ Watch video

@Adrian Covert: Re-quoting stupidity doesn't make it right. You can't work for a geek site and expect to get away with mistakes like that. When someone corrects you, you should thank them and take the opportunity to actually look up the physics involved on this little thing we call the Internet. Both gmaxwell447 and ShinySideUp are right about the force of the rotors needing an equal an opposite reaction on the body. This is just another in a long line of bad concepts that Gizmodo keeps posting without the least bit of critical thought.

"Tip Jet Helicopter" is what they are called. Here is a homemade version that reminds me of this prototype: [ww.rqriley.com]

If you search youTubewith those terms, you can find large military made ones with no tail.

How they work, I haven't a clue. H3ll, if I could get a model R/C (w/ tail rotor) to hover in one spot I'd be a happy camper.

I'm less concerned with the physics of this, and more concerned with the logistics. If this starts shipping in bulk, I could imagine the skies will quickly fill up with millions of cats strapping these things on and flying around. Is that safe?

Go-Go-Gadget Copter!

Also, as a logistical matter, until this approach to personalized air transportation is able to keep Mario Batali airborne throughout an entire episode of Molto Mario, I would expect the Food Network to direct their entire legal team to stymie the noble efforts of Tecnologia Aeroespacial Mexicana. Ironic, really, given Mario Batali's consistent support of next generation individualized flight technologies.

I'm just too paranoid about getting decapitated.

@Computer_Chef: See [www.aerospaceweb.org] for info on how it works.
Since the motor is placed on the blades instead of in the body the bulk of the torque traditionally produced doesn't exsist since the motor isn't turning against the body to make the rotor spin.
I'll refrain from making any sarcastic comment about looking the physics up on the internet since i'm wrong sometimes :o).

Will they be able to refine the form factor into a Beanie?

Hècho en México?

The Minutemen won't like it.

@Computer_Chef: Where would we be without you? If it weren't for your willingness to climb out on a limb and begin sawing behind you, one of us might get stuck doing it.

@6street: Great reference. Really describes the science involved in a very readable way (for us easily-distracted types).

@6street: I know how it might work, but you'll have to do a lot more than reducing the bulk of the torque to "eliminate" measures necessary to combat counter-rotation of the pilot. If you can't zero it out completely, you have to state what mechanism is used, not just pretend that putting the power on the blades solves the problem.

As noted in the site you link to, the wash of the main rotor could be used, and the first picture even looks like the fin in back might be a control surface, but it isn't obvious that it's big enough to fully solve the torque problem without specific mention that it was engineered to do exactly that. Another factor is that the pilot changes their center of gravity to move forward, which should give them a slight slope of stability but, again, it isn't obvious that it would be enough nor would it be available when hovering.

In short, the torque remains a problem and, if anything, that would have been the more interesting detail to cover than the handwaving stupidity of saying that rockets on the tips solve the problem completely.

I've seen footage of all these types of rocketpacks, tip jet rotor packs from the 50's & 60's but none, even the Hiller Flying Platform's turned out not to be practical.

Best option for personal flight is a paraglider with backpack motor. At least when your motor quits you have a nicely inflated glider wing above your head.

@Fzzt: I do have to wonder about the auto-rotation abilities of tip jet helicopters... seems the extra drag of the rockets on the end would negate alot of the free spinning of the blades.