Gizmag Comment Feed: Water-propelled jetpack: could this be the one? http://www.gizmag.com We're nearly 10 years into the new millennium, and the stark reality facing science fiction fans is that we STILL don't have an affordable jetpack. Promising technologies like this ion-propelled, remotely-powered unit seem to pop up from time to time, but nothing materializes on the market. The guys at JetPack International have built a beauty of a machine that does exactly what you'd hope - but at USD$200,000 it's still way out of reach for most people. This one might not be, though. It's propelled by super-fast jets of water pumped up through a tube that connects the jetpack to an engine that sits under the surface of a body of water. By tethering the flyer to the ground, this device is able to vastly reduce the weight of the flying apparatus by leaving all the heavy fuel and engine components behind, and since you're flying around above the surface of the water, you've got a much softer landing if you fall. Most importantly, the device looks like exactly as much fun as you'd hope, and because there's nothing too complicated to it, we can't see it costing much more than a jet-ski if it goes into production. Excellent!en gizmag.com Comment on 'Water-propelled jetpack: could this be the one?' by Lawrence Klein http://www.gizmag.com/water-propelled-jetpack-could-this-be-the-one/10885/#comment-59449 http://www.gizmag.com/water-propelled-jetpack-could-this-be-the-one/10885/#comment-59449 Mon, 09 May 2011 12:57:38 -0500 Comment on 'Water-propelled jetpack: could this be the one?' by Craig Mclaughlin http://www.gizmag.com/water-propelled-jetpack-could-this-be-the-one/10885/#comment-2179 http://www.gizmag.com/water-propelled-jetpack-could-this-be-the-one/10885/#comment-2179 Mon, 04 May 2009 11:24:16 -0500 Comment on 'Water-propelled jetpack: could this be the one?' by jooster http://www.gizmag.com/water-propelled-jetpack-could-this-be-the-one/10885/#comment-814 http://www.gizmag.com/water-propelled-jetpack-could-this-be-the-one/10885/#comment-814 Wed, 04 Feb 2009 12:38:40 -0600