Grab your jetpack and go!

Grab your jetpack and go!

This video clip highlights what might be the personal transportation vehicle of the future! Here’s the scoop from the Smithsonian: Martin Jetpack has unveiled their latest jetpack prototype, a model that could be available next year. Called “P12,” the machine will cost something between $150,000 to $250,000 when it  becomes available, and pilots will have to wear hearing protection along with a  helmet, neck restraints, boots and a fireproof suit. While aloft, the pilot can  travel for thirty minutes or about twenty miles.” With a maximum speed of 46mph and flight times of 30 minutes you might want to ditch the suit for longer commutes, but it seems like an ideal way for city dwellers to avoid traffic congestion. Worried about safety? The Jetpack includes a rocket-deployed ballistic parachute! Watch a video of the radio-controlled flight test below (warning: turn your volume down!) and get the entire story here.

Updated: July 27, 2015 — 2:32 PM


  1. Great technical achievement and sure nice to practice in crisis- or catastrophic regions for reconnaissance missions .. but unfortunately much to loud for the crowd in public spaces 🙁

  2. Nice idea but I can see some downsides already, the ‘pilot’ would need to first obtain a pilots licence. aulm helicopter can be bought for the cost of a new car so I can’t see this getting much interest from joe public.

  3. Awesome! , but not a “Jetpack”. Maybe a “Turbopack”, since it looks like it uses ducted trurboprops. Plus it’s not a true “backpack”, your still strapped into it , with it still has its own landing gear.

    I’m still a fan of the original “Jetpack”, made by Bell and improved upon by many, but it’s flaws are the 30 second or less flight time and the peroxide fuel mixture. Used as a movie prop in James Bond, Lost in Space and NCIS. It’s small and it is a backpack and it does have twin rocket engines, closer to a jet engine, so it to me, is the definition of a Jetpack.

  4. Let’s run down the check marks, Efficiency, Practicality, Safety, Convenience, Cost effective, Availability….need I continue? I found myself comatosed by the drone of its humming. Even the water jet pack systems score higher, although getting to work by water has practical limitations as well, depending on your geography.

    This is technically interesting at least.

  5. Too damn loud and expensive!!!!!!!!!

  6. I love anything tech, but this idea seems to be a 60’s re-hash and I don’t really see it taking off so to speak (but you could certainly hear it do so!) If the C.O.B.R.A. menace rises up, then this might just fill a need…

  7. Video is incredibly boring and uncompelling for such a cool thing.

  8. To me this would be a toy for a rich person… no good for recon work, whoever you are spying on will hear you a mile away. it appears to be slow and not very nimble so who ever you are spying on can easily take pot shots at you.

    As a commuter vehicle? what is the range? you think leaf blowers are annoying imagine hearing a few of these buzzing around the city in the AM & PM rush hour. A used airplane is cheaper than this thing and you can carry cargo in a plane. God help you if one of the fans fail, I doubt it would be easy to control, that is if it can fly on one fan.

  9. Amazing, but far too expensive and with a range of only 20 miles, it’s impractical. Search & Rescue…on 30 minutes of fuel? Not much time for searching!!!!!
    If we were talking under $50K then it might be of interest to the general public. Until then it’s just a toy for police and military to spend taxpayers money on..

  10. haha the ultimate couch potatoe

  11. Just listen to it. Even with to be expected noise improvements, my neighbors will love it.!

  12. I think it tooooo noisy, and too expensive. With enough power, as you know a lawnmower can be made to fly, so I don’t see much new technology here.

Comments are closed.

Air Age Media ©
WordPress Lightbox