Check this flying!
 

Auto-rotations are going to be interesting.

My kid wants one. Great!!! :)

I've already had my breakfast, so it's too late to believe any more impossible things today.

Lots of discussions already whether this is a fake or not, as the take off and landing are hidden from view, and one cannot figure the controls.( maybe from the ground or pre programmed) The fuel seems to be in the backpack, anyway it this is real, it is quite an achievement technologically-wise from a guy that designed and built this on his own apparently. ...

Want one!!

Uber
 

If you think this sort of thing is faked, you are a little behind the times. This capability is a direct result of development in small civilian drone technology.

There is a lot more happening in this sort of flying machine, and it should be looked at within the context of a paradigm shift, similar to the computer revolution, and possibly the beginnings of human flight itself.

The guy flying it reckons it's real.Flyboard® air en - Zapata Racing

That seems both pretty dangerous and ten bucket loads of fun at the same time!

"Nothing new under the sun" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aVI...hsonianChannel

Pretty cool.
The controller is in his right hand. Probably wireless. Looks like 6 model turbines strapped to a big drone frame. Id like to know if it is actually strapped to his feet and is it stabilised like a Segway.
I can see a few Darwin nominations if this product is produced for the masses.

Oh yes!!!!!

He's the same guy who invented the water-jet pack driven by jetski.
Clever guy. Love to know if it is as easy as he makes it look or if he is just a balance prodigy.

Be great for pruning those high tree branches.

Interview with the inventor(second link)
 

The Incredible Flyboard Air

Yes, the jet-powered hoverboard is real, and yes, the creator has crashed it - The Verge >

It has 4 x 250HP turbo reactors for power - 1000HP, just to lift one person?? Seems like massive overkill to me, and the fuel consumption to produce that HP must be enormous. Doesn't look like an economic or viable product from any angle, to me.
However, I guess the U.S. military will be itching to immediately order 100,000 of them at $1M each, to ensure that they have enemy-jaw-dropping, cutting edge, troop-movement methods, ready to hand. :rolleyes:

It does to me. It'll really appeal to the base jumping and wing suit crowd a lot of whom have a lot of money and are already really keen to get in on projects like Jetman

The wingsuit and BASE jumping, skydiving community isn't as big market as you would think. Plus most of them are broke DZ rats.

Autostab?
 

Me too Clark Y. It would seem to be a great idea.:ok:

I want one! The kids can get their own!

Where do you get the "It has 4 x 250HP turbo reactors for power - 1000HP, " data from?

It looks to me that 4x 50kgf thrust turbines would be sufficient, these units weigh about 7kg each, and cannot produce that much equivalent power. For sure, the fuel consumption is very high, leading to limited utility. But the real story is in the control system, and the fact that the cost of all the parts is really very low, sub $20k, and falling.

Also interesting is that in the shots that show the underside of the board, it clearly shows six, possibly seven outlets (four/five in a central group and one either side) expectedly four/five for vertical thrust and the outer two possibly for vectoring. One could easily presume that there are six turbines/motors. Definitely looks like the backpack is fuel as the pilot seems to do a fuel check by lifting the bag with his left hand on a couple of occasions.

I wonder what the FAA will make of it? If they ever do, that is!

Right from the mouth of the inventor, in his interview, below ...

"Interviewer: Can you tell me more about how it works? How many engines are in there?

Franky: We have four engines inside, and the power is 250 horsepower each. It’s about 1,000 horsepower total."

Franky Zapata racing - jet-powered flying hoverboard interview

Some table-napkin rough calculations tells me a backpack full of Jet-A1 sure isn't going to keep 1000HP fired up, for too long!

Mmm, ok, could be right. It would be nice to get to the detail beyond the journalism. If this is in fact the equivalent power of these turbines, it is quite an impressive way to use kerosene. Yes, maybe around 1 or 2 kg/minute.

Anyway, on the other matter about Stability and Control, likely similar concept to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2itwFJCgFQ
from 2:55.

No way are those turbines 250 Hp I Think he muddled his units; They certainly look about 250N size ie 100Kg of lift for 4

Typically difficult to rate a turbojet in terms of power, but we could look at the fuel flow (energy) rate a momentum metric. In any case, we know it needs around 100kgf thrust, which can be easily obtained and installed, and we know this sort of control system, if not the mechanism (maybe it uses gimballed units) is easy to get.

The thing is, while this one has low fuel efficiency, but excellent power/weight and cost*mechanical*complexity/performance, there is an increasing number of new devices coming out which perform a similar role and with longer endurance, less noise, less jet velocity etc.

They had the same as this a long time ago:
Williams X-Jet / WASP
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Williams_X-Jet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXNNc_HFodI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27HaGvHzbgQ

Empty weight: 401 pounds (182 kg) (182 kg)
Loaded weight: 550 lb (250 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: lb (kg)
Powerplant: 1 × modified Williams F107 turbofan, 570 lbf (2.6 kN)

Performance Maximum speed: 60 mph (96 km/h)
Range: endurance of 30-45 minutes
Service ceiling: 10,000 ft (3,049 m)
Rate of climb: ft/min (m/s)
Wing loading: lb/ft² (kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 1.11

Onetrack. You quote Zapata as saying the four "turboengines" (sic.) develop 400 bhp each. They appear little bigger than those used by RC flyers and those certainly don't develop anything like 400 bhp. 25 lbs thrust is typical, which, whatever way you try to convert lbs. thrust to bhp, is nowhere near 400 bhp. Might our noses be starting to detect a small furry rodent here?

Buster11 - No, the figure stated is 250HP each - not 400HP. I, too, am skeptical of even the 250HP figure, and I'm thinking the standard poor level of journalism has mistranslated the power ratings.
I cannot imagine where it would require 1000HP to levitate and accelerate a human body.
The Martin Jetpack propels the operator with a 2.0L V4 piston engine producing 200BHP, and appears to provide a similar level of performance to the Zapata Racing version, with its 4 "turboengines".