Talk:Martin Jetpack

New Zealand Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Aviation: Aircraft / Rotorcraft

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by the aircraft project.
	This article is supported by the rotorcraft project.

Aircraft type

I beleive the description of the Martin Jetpack as a personal helicopter is inappropriate for the follwing reasons:

 1. From the Wikipedia description of a Backpack helicopter the helicopter has a rotor with all the
 associated structure and control system which the Martin Jetpack does not have.
 2. The Martin Jetpack uses ducted fans for thrust along with vanes for vectoring the thrust.

The reference to a personal helicopter and a Backpack helicopter needs to be reconsidered for this article. Comments? Mac160 (talk) 00:38, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to agree; it's rather more a personal VTOL aircraft than a helicopter. - The Bushranger (talk) 20:34, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Additional flight expenses

Are the two guys who lift you into the air part of the purchase price? If so, can you pay extra to get taller guys to increase the maximum altitude?Romaniantruths (talk) 16:52, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "two guys" are not necessary, as you can see from the video on Martin's website. 76.28.72.87 (talk) 18:30, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is speculative, is it not

I've seen a video of this thing hovering (my assessment of what it was doing) and I've read a press release that implies it shot skyward (without pilot) and deployed a parachute. As far as I can make out this thing has yet to "fly" in any other sense, yet the article is written as though it's a viable proposition rather than a work in progress.

One particular phrase "...is cheaper to maintain and operate than other ultralight aircraft" - I'd be fascinated to know the basis for that! I know how much it costs to maintain a microlight from personal experience; I can't imagine anything this complex being cheap - and there are no working examples (correct me if I'm wrong) and therefore there can be no cost data available. - Fjleonhardt (talk) 11:52, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hovering counts as flying, however the article probably does need a good going-through. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:46, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Combat Radius is higher than Range

How it is possible? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.47.189.25 (talk) 08:24, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Glenn Martin

Is it a coincidence that the designer of the Martin Jetpack, Glenn Martin, shares his name with Glenn L. Martin, the founder of Glenn L. Martin Company, builder of many aircrafts and rockets such as Titan IV and now a part of Lockheed Martin? --HelgeStenstrom (talk) 14:29, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is probably a coincidence, but there has been no verifiable proof that the machine started development in the 1980's. All links and reporting simply repeat what the so-called inventor says. The craft strongly resembles the SoloTrek XFV, which flew 7 years earlier than the Martin Jetpack. The amount of disinformation around this thing is truly incredible and does not speak well of journalists or the people who promoted it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.61.209.125 (talk) 00:48, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Martin Jetpack. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151009044300/http://www.martinjetpack.com/news/ to http://www.martinjetpack.com/news/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.martinjetpack.com/technical

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:31, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]