07 Nov 2025, 05:28 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Jetson One  Posted: 02 Nov 2025, 11:12 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Joined: 12/08/12
Posts: 1325
Post Likes: +1773
Location: Ukiah, California
|
|
Username Protected wrote: From what I can find online it is a BRS type parachute. https://verticalmag.com/press-releases/ ... one-evtol/How much will this parachute system reduce the UL? Right now pilot weight is limited to 210 pounds. Will owners have to go on a diet to have a parachute system? Dan
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Jetson One Posted: 02 Nov 2025, 11:16 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 04/05/22
Posts: 3562
Post Likes: +4366
Aircraft: D50E Twin Bonanza
|
|
Username Protected wrote: From what I can find online it is a BRS type parachute. https://verticalmag.com/press-releases/ ... one-evtol/How much will this parachute system reduce the UL? Right now pilot weight is limited to 210 pounds. Will owners have to go on a diet to have a parachute system? Dan
Anyone close to 210 is going to have a hell of a time getting in or out of it anyway 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Jetson One Posted: 02 Nov 2025, 18:27 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20732
Post Likes: +26197
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: From what I can find online it is a BRS type parachute. At the altitude shown in the video, the chute would be totally ineffective. If the motors shutdown, you'd be in the trees in less than 1 second. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Jetson One Posted: 02 Nov 2025, 22:37 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Joined: 12/10/07
Posts: 35787
Post Likes: +14234
Location: Minneapolis, MN (KFCM)
Aircraft: 1970 Baron B55
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Yes, but think of how safe you feel flying bc you have the rip cord in hand!
What I do not get is how every helo isn’t fly by wire at this point. You don’t need 4 electric motors to make a helo fly as easily as a drone. I have a tail rotor RC helo that is easy to fly as a quad copter. Put that in an R66 and be done with it. You'd need a lot of redundancy if safe flight depended on that technology which would come at a pretty steep price, not to mention getting it certified.
_________________
-lance
It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Jetson One Posted: 03 Nov 2025, 09:20 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/07/11
Posts: 855
Post Likes: +479
Location: KBED, KCRE
Aircraft: Phenom 100
|
|
I think this would be more effective to deploy at these altitudes. Attachment: hamster.jpg Chip-
Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Jetson One Posted: 03 Nov 2025, 11:06 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 08/26/15
Posts: 10029
Post Likes: +10020
Company: airlines (*CRJ,A320)
Location: Florida panhandle
Aircraft: Travel Air,T-6B,etc*
|
|
Username Protected wrote: From what I can find online it is a BRS type parachute. At the altitude shown in the video, the chute would be totally ineffective. If the motors shutdown, you'd be in the trees in less than 1 second.
I thought about this, in terms of the technical challenges they'd need to address to engineer a suitable system. I have more questions than answers 
What's the minimum deployment altitude in a hover for a BRS? About 100'? (Lower or higher?) It has to work like a 0-0 ejection seat, except those have the "advantage" that the seat also gets propelled tens of feet into the air to use that extra height a split second later to settle into a stabilized fall (hold that thought).
BRS systems are most of the way there in their function by using a rocket motor to deploy the parachute. Modern ejection seat parachutes use little rockets to deploy the chute and spread the canopy at the same time (rockets, cartridges, "explosive bolts" or "shotgun shells," take your pick of colloquialisms). Once the canopy is spread then it takes only a few feet of falling to inflate it- that's where an ejection has an advantage over a whole-aircraft parachute: both have to free fall several feet to finish inflating the canopy, but the seat gets to float down at least a few dozen more feet and stabilize its fall.
The key is getting the canopy spread, then inflated in the blink of an eye. It's possible to build and certify a system, but at what weight (payload cost) and expense?
(Deployment in a low altitude engine failure can be automatic- nothing novel about this concept, the V/STOL JSF already does it in hover mode.)
Maybe instead address the problem by alternate means: if you can confidently predict an impending failure with at least one or a few seconds of warning, have an automatic emergency mode that uses the "good" thrusters to bring the ship to a survivable height.
In any case, good luck!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Jetson One Posted: 03 Nov 2025, 13:48 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20732
Post Likes: +26197
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: if you can confidently predict an impending failure with at least one or a few seconds of warning, have an automatic emergency mode that uses the "good" thrusters to bring the ship to a survivable height. If you have that capability, you can land on the good thrusters. Any emergency system that relies on the motors working is not an emergency system. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Jetson One Posted: 03 Nov 2025, 14:39 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 07/19/10
Posts: 3290
Post Likes: +1631
Company: Keller Williams Realty
Location: Madison, WI (91C)
Aircraft: 1967 Bonanza V35
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Look at the Side-By-Side market. Those things have gotten insane, not uncommon for your average working folk to spend 50K+ on a toy. Some of them are nicer than my vehicles, there are some new electric ones that are over 100k and people are buying them. Except you can take Side-By-Side to a bar or grocery store. You can't / won't be able to do it with this toy. This looks more like gyros -> seems like almost a plane, yet you hardly see them leaving a pattern.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Jetson One Posted: 03 Nov 2025, 15:15 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 12/22/17
Posts: 1057
Post Likes: +1811
Location: Nova Scotia
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I think this would be more effective to deploy at these altitudes. Attachment: hamster.jpg Chip- Until this happens. They don’t go over cliffs all that well. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-v7_Ja3ExU
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Jetson One Posted: 04 Nov 2025, 18:47 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 12/10/07
Posts: 8220
Post Likes: +7957
Location: New York, NY
Aircraft: Debonair C33A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Any emergency system that relies on the motors working is not an emergency system.
For a machine like this, emergency system is the complete redundancy. Two motors in each arm, two independent control systems, two batteries. Still doesn't cover outlier scenarios like hitting a bird that takes out both props on one arm, but then again, we've had birds take out two engines on an airliner, so you can't protect from everything.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Jetson One Posted: 05 Nov 2025, 17:22 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/19/10
Posts: 3290
Post Likes: +1631
Company: Keller Williams Realty
Location: Madison, WI (91C)
Aircraft: 1967 Bonanza V35
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Three things:
1. This thing is cool. Anyone living more than 20 years and with an upper middle class income will a technological successor of one of these in their garage before they shuffle off.
2. Some avoidance and autopilot software will solve for congestion problems on the "airways". The technology problems here seem much simpler than Waymo and that is in the wild in multiple cities today.
3. Do not count out this Palmer Luckey dude. He's crazy, but he's a doer. Avoidance and technology doesn't solve lack of legal places to park it. It always comes down to a number of available "runways"
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|
How well does it autorotate? Never mind...
