Jet Pack Man is back in LAX airspace

[MA2 317]

Sighting on Wednesday at 5000 feet.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Pilot reports possible 'Jet Pack Guy' sighting 5,000ft high near LAX

Previous sightings of 'Jet Pack Guy' (pictured left last year) sparked panic over his proximity to LA's LAX, and speculation over who - or what - was flying through the air.

www.dailymail.co.uk

.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

So now FAA has to deal with manned aircraft vs crazy manned aircraft ?

They should send a drone net up to get him !! haha.

 

[Rich QR]

So now FAA has to deal with manned aircraft vs crazy manned aircraft ?

They should send a drone net up to get him !! haha.

I've seen speculation that it IS a drone.

Jet packs burn fuel really quickly, and can't carry a lot of fuel, so their endurance is very limited, and they can't climb very far from their launch point. The TV spot I saw was interviewing people with experience in military jet packs, saying that they didn't believe their equipment could reach the alititudes described by pilots around LAX.

But they showed a quadcopter drone, with a lightweight inflatable mannequin made to look like a guy in a jet pack. Up close, it was obviously not a real guy in a jet pack, but at a distance, to a pilot flying by at 170 knots, it could be reasonably convincing.

The inflatable mannequin plus quadcopter was a LOT less expensive, and less dangerous, than a real jetpack.

 

[BSauce955]

I've seen speculation that it IS a drone.

Jet packs burn fuel really quickly, and can't carry a lot of fuel, so their endurance is very limited, and they can't climb very far from their launch point. The TV spot I saw was interviewing people with experience in military jet packs, saying that they didn't believe their equipment could reach the alititudes described by pilots around LAX.

But they showed a quadcopter drone, with a lightweight inflatable mannequin made to look like a guy in a jet pack. Up close, it was obviously not a real guy in a jet pack, but at a distance, to a pilot flying by at 170 knots, it could be reasonably convincing.

The inflatable mannequin plus quadcopter was a LOT less expensive, and less dangerous, than a real jetpack.

I personally am having a hard time imagining a drone climing to 5,000 feet with a manequin attached to it. But at the same time, I can't imagine a human with a jetpack doing it either...?

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

I personally am having a hard time imagining a drone climing to 5,000 feet with a manequin attached to it. But at the same time, I can't imagine a human with a jetpack doing it either...?

In some other video I saw last night, from a year or so back, it actually looks like a balloon moving in high wind jet streams.
All shot from planes though, so hard to tell with the movement of the planes to contend with.

 

[Rich QR]

I personally am having a hard time imagining a drone climing to 5,000 feet with a manequin attached to it. But at the same time, I can't imagine a human with a jetpack doing it either...?

Any way you imagine it, it's hard to believe. If it were only reported by one pilot, it would certainly be tempting to say he was mistaken, hallucinating, intentionally misleading us, etc.

When I used the word manequin, I didn't mean something from a department store window. Think more along the lines of an inflatable Santa Claus used as a lawn ornament during the holidays. Think extremely lightweight construction made of cloth, probably custom-sewn. And it may not be an off-the shelf drone, either. It's certainly not an unmodified DJI product getting up near 5,000 ft.

It would take some moderately unusual skills and motivation to do it, but there are plenty of people with experience in aerospace and movie industries in the LA area. I can certainly imagine the old Mythbusters crew easily having the ability, for example (I'm not accusing here).

Compared to the skills required to get a real human carrying jetpack up there, I think I know which would be easier.

 

[Meta4]

Listening to the three ATC "jetpack" episodes, there's no hard detail.
The pilots of four planes reported seeing something that some guessed might be a jetpack guy.
One of the pilots just reported a bright flying object and ATC translated that to be a jetpack guy.

A video of an alleged jetpack guy has shown up:

Bizarre Video Captures L.A.’s Mysterious Jetpack Man in Flight

He's back—and now he's caught on camera.

www.popularmechanics.com

It's out of focus, has no detail and could be any drifting debris.
Maybe a guy with a jetpack, but a drifting mylar balloon is more likely.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

..
This is the video I found the other night that makes me think balloon . . .

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[BSauce955]

When I used the word manequin, I didn't mean something from a department store window. Think more along the lines of an inflatable Santa Claus used as a lawn ornament during the holidays. Think extremely lightweight construction made of cloth, probably custom-sewn. And it may not be an off-the shelf drone, either. It's certainly not an unmodified DJI product getting up near 5,000 ft.

Even in this case, it'd have to be a fairly large drone to not lose control with a "Santa Claus" attached. You must also take into consideration the higher wind speed found at such a height. And then, the inflatable "thing" would have to be fairly large for the pilot to spot it and the drone would have to be about equal size. I can't image that the pilot would see the inflatable and not the drone. Also, the inflatable thing would be an easy target for the wind to pull around and would cause the drone to lose control. I just can't imagine the drone getting that far up with a manequin and not losing control. Maybe I'm wrong. Someone, show me where my thinking messed up.