Looked like battery packs to me. Basically just high powered fans pushing you forward, not true jet-engines or rockets or anything.
That said, adding distance would require more batteries, and that would add weight, but I would bet that the batteries are 1/10 the total weight with all the metal-housing and motors involved
Batteries are about the least energy-per-kilo way of storing it - increasing battery energy would cost the very most in weight you could imagine (except perhaps a windup spring)
Liquid fuels (gas/alcohol) are very efficient. Metal-air batteries may beat liquid fuels for ergs/kilo?
Right. It's a bit disappointing in the context of a page with the lead-in "What if every soldier could run a four-minute mile?" but I trust this research is still a work in progress and adding an 11lb weight + helmet and taking those times off is a significant achievement.
Presumably this would be 11 pounds on top of the existing load out, in which case 11 extra pounds wouldn't be a trivial amount. Probably subjective though.
Exactly what I was thinking. Being able to apply force at different angles would make for an interesting test for a project like this. Sure it can make you run farther, but can it make you jump higher? What about prolonged ability to run on a steep incline (either parallel or perpendicular to the slope)? Once again it seems like the applications of this tech is dependent on energy technology that may not exist yet. Where's my pocket fusion generator?
Alternatively, bikes. Folding bikes have been used for paratroopers and military purposes for decades. And they can go much faster than a 4 minute mile.
I don´t think they have published any paper, but this kind of experiments are tricky. In the setup showed in the video (n=1, not blinded[1], no control group, no crossover), I would conclude that Jetpack does not work. The time differences are small and the athlete is biased - unconsciously - to run faster with Jetpack.
[1] Blinding in this case it not easy, but they can use a JetPack that sounds like the real one, but does nothing.
It seems like it's more of a feasibility demonstration at this point. Blinding would be hard as you say, but if they could incorporate variable pitch blades into the pack it should be doable.
Really interesting idea. As an amateur runner myself, I'm always interested in how I can run faster.
My experience with personal fitness is this - there's never just "one thing" you can do to make yourself run faster. Your entire body needs to be trained to the level to maintain performance.
In the case of a jetpack - that means hips and legs have to be able to turn over rapidly, heart and lungs need to be match turnover rate, elasticity of tendons, adapt to impact forces on ankles/knees/feet, and muscles need to process energy efficiently. There's much more i'm sure.
Basically - the only way this would work is if it was paired with an exoskeleton that would mitigate these issues to a large extent - for example, almost no force required from legs, with minimal turnover - using a "leaping" motion from the suit. So any fatso can move at a 4 min/mile.
Otherwise, all I could see this doing is possibly making an already highly trained runner about 5-10% more efficient, but with zero military application as a standalone. Soldiers typically carry about 50-60lbs of gear already, so you'd be asking people to be highly trained runners with 50-60lbs of gear - plus a jetpack - sounds like a recipe for face-planting and injury. You would need an exoskeleton to manage the load. Then - this could get very interesting.
These were my first thoughts as well. As is, the machine is really only good for long-time runners who have their own natural mechanics nailed down, and that's ignoring the long-term effects of the increased impact, faster than normal muscle movements, etc.
Lot more research required, and yes, they'll probably need additional hardware for feet/legs to prevent injuries.
I disagree with you about zero military applications. Imagine a backpack that can engage thrusters to significantly reduce it's weight for a few minutes. There is a significant difference to sprinting with 20 versus 120 pounds on your back. Details are, as always, in execution. There are a host of reliability, safety, and economic challenges to work out before this could get anywhere.
It would be interesting to develop a vectored thrust inertia compensator. Allow the troops to wear heavier armor but handle the load as if they aren't wearing anything.
It reminds me of an experiment some biologists did (sorry can't cite) to demonstrate how wings could have evolved by showing how half a wing could help. They cut short wings on flying bugs. The clipped bugs couldn't fly, but they could move around a lot faster on water surfaces, which seemed a clear advantage over walking speeds. You could imagine a leg evolving to act like a half-wing to give that speed advantage, then you could imagine that leg further evolving to a wing that could enable flight.
Designers and inventors can learn from this. When we want to make a huge jump, like to a working jet pack for flying, it often helps to take small, evolutionary steps.
I think it would be interesting to see how this thing works for long distance running if you could also extend the runners stride another 6 inches or more through special shoes. Assuming that the key to efficiency by this machine is to get the runner in the air for as long as possible and exert the least amount of human energy.
34 comments
[ 4.3 ms ] story [ 84.1 ms ] threadps: For flat surfaces I hope they made a test using some kind of rollerskates / shoe hybrid.
That said, adding distance would require more batteries, and that would add weight, but I would bet that the batteries are 1/10 the total weight with all the metal-housing and motors involved
Liquid fuels (gas/alcohol) are very efficient. Metal-air batteries may beat liquid fuels for ergs/kilo?
I guess it would have to be almost silent and not have a huge profile in the infra-red in most use cases, though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folding_bicycle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_infantry
[1] Blinding in this case it not easy, but they can use a JetPack that sounds like the real one, but does nothing.
My experience with personal fitness is this - there's never just "one thing" you can do to make yourself run faster. Your entire body needs to be trained to the level to maintain performance.
In the case of a jetpack - that means hips and legs have to be able to turn over rapidly, heart and lungs need to be match turnover rate, elasticity of tendons, adapt to impact forces on ankles/knees/feet, and muscles need to process energy efficiently. There's much more i'm sure.
Basically - the only way this would work is if it was paired with an exoskeleton that would mitigate these issues to a large extent - for example, almost no force required from legs, with minimal turnover - using a "leaping" motion from the suit. So any fatso can move at a 4 min/mile.
Otherwise, all I could see this doing is possibly making an already highly trained runner about 5-10% more efficient, but with zero military application as a standalone. Soldiers typically carry about 50-60lbs of gear already, so you'd be asking people to be highly trained runners with 50-60lbs of gear - plus a jetpack - sounds like a recipe for face-planting and injury. You would need an exoskeleton to manage the load. Then - this could get very interesting.
Lot more research required, and yes, they'll probably need additional hardware for feet/legs to prevent injuries.
Designers and inventors can learn from this. When we want to make a huge jump, like to a working jet pack for flying, it often helps to take small, evolutionary steps.