When are we seeing these bad boys in action?
>>65089932As soon as you rub your shoes in lotion.
Five minutes from now, thirty thousand marines will storm Iranian and Chinese tankers in the blink of an eye, and the robocop thrusters will just fuckin' thrust em there. Tomorrow, there will be no shortage of jetpack marines. No shortage of mcnamara's morons part more jetpacking into the Three Gorges Dam with SADM backpack nukes wired to a deadman's switch. I know you understand.
Realistically these are amazing for search and rescue and civilian facing tasks like boarding some family's boat because Dad got too close to a military area.
>>65089948They seem completely retarded for combat related anything but I would be inclined to see some value in public safety mobility
>>65089954Give em to base patrol with drone wingmen ready to take out any unauthorized drone activities.
>>65089954Could kinda see them being used by heavily armored dudes in a very aggressive, very risky vertical trench jumping tactic, but that's assinine.
>>65089963If you make the suits disposable, they could be high tech one way transits in rough terrain where you can't use other transportation to get infantry quickly somewhere.
>>65089971This. Fast transportation would be the their biggest use case. For combat is just stupid. Unless they find a way to fly it without using your hands so you can actually use a gun while flying.
>>65089971That's a good one. Give the dudes with them a shitload of grenades and they could basically be mini-bombers in mountainous terrain.
It seems like an innovative piece of equipment for boarding and inspections, but the fact that we haven't heard anything about it being put into practical use suggests there must be some problem.
>>65089932The problem is they are loud. No sneaking up. the only use I can see is if you want fresh troops up a big ass hill really quickly. Or make it a fully autonomous air medivac.
>>65089983>shitting grenades on enemiesWe swooping hawks nao. Which begs the question , which aspect shrine would /k/ join? Explain your answers.
>>65089990I think the primary issues are cost and fuel economy. Makes their applications limited even for militaries.
>>65089992Considering the body armor trend is only getting to be MORE and MORE and MORE, use disposable versions of these to move dudes in rough terrain where you can't use vehicles.
Imagine killing one of those guys with a throat/headshot and seeing them zip around out of control into the distance/ricocheting against the roof of some building
>>65090020>slides dead face along the ground for a mile until it runs out of power
>>65089997>Shitting shit on your enemies
>>65090026>Everyone watching it happen
>>65089982The Apache had a system in the 80s (maybe even the 70s) where it would automatically point the gun wherever the gunner turned his head. I'm sure that could be scaled down to fit in a jetpack now. >where would the gun go? Between the pilot's legs.
>>65089932Never. They have no practicality whatsoever.
>>65089954>>65090566We might actually be in the perfect moment for jetpack troopers right now. These guys would be perfect for naval boarding actions against uncooperative but largely undefended merchant ships, like we've been seeing in Hormuz or off the coast of Venezuela.
>>65089997I don't want to have to train very hard so Fire Dragon because meltagun.
>>65090020>zip around out of control into the distance/ricocheting against the roof of some buildingThis has happened before and will happen again.
>>65090526>Between the pilot's legs.What would the system be named? What would its users actually call it?
>>65090820Doom Cock, both answers.
>>65089997Elder rangers>grab rifle, go innawebway
>>65090577Just use a helicopter dude. Stop trying to make a useless, gimmicky technology work
>>65091112Think modern.Apply this hoverpack to a UAV. You can now move a man-sized load with an octocopter-like platform over short distances at high speeds. High speed supply drop, maybe CASEVAC. Can it lift an ATGM launcher? Drop satchel charges? Mineclearing line charges?
>>65091118You literally described unmanned helicopters. Those are already a thing
>>65089948Or intercepting drug boats. Or rescuing someone off a sinking boat. Honestly, this would be best for the Coast Guard, not the Navy.
>>65091458> intercepting drug boats> get shot in the chest > can’t control suit so spin of wildly into the ocean
>>65091467>Send a man over>man gets shot>"They're armed, Open Fire">Drug boat now sunk, problem solved.
If we can move the jet nozzles that are occupying both hands to another location, we'll be able to find a way.
>>65091472> lose a man> lose equipment that’s probably too expensivetotally worth it for one drug boatHonestly i can’t stop thinking about them flying wildly away dead> sorry ma’am, we couldn’t recover your husbands body.
>>65091485You could lose an entire rubber boat full of men trying to board the ship instead. Bare minimum, you need one man steering the ship and one man to hook up the ladder and they'd be crowded enough for one AK burst to take them both out.
>>65090820Defensive Ocular-aimed Nether-region GunDONG
>>65091491Since when? Are we really that retarded with these drug lords? No wonder Trump started drone bombing them, our fruity boat military sucks. Definitely wouldn’t trust them with that sort of equipment.
>>65091118...why wouldn't you just use propellers? Cargo UAVs are already a thing. Electric props are way, WAY more efficient, reliable, lower maintenance, cheaper, and just superior in every respect for that role. Microjets are a neat gimmick and that's it.
>>65089997Slicing spheres because that way noone can molest a model of me>>65091109He's leaving the craftworld! Break his legs!
>>65091546Probably when you said they'd shoot the man with the jetpack. See>>65091485Drug boats aren't brave enough to trade shots with a coast guard cutter, they'd prefer to just run and hope to get out of gun range before the enemy loses patience with them. The jet pack is for that. You send over a man with a shotgun and self-inflating life jacket and have them stop the boat at gunpoint.
>>65091561Hydrocarbon fuel is more energy dense than any battery. By a lot.
>>65091936>Hydrocarbon fuel is more energy dense than any batteryYes? What does that have to do with that though anon?
>>65091942You can't run electric props on hydrocarbons. Not directly, anyway. At best, you can convert methane with a solid oxide fuel cell but that's got it's own issues. Adding an additional step adds mass and inefficiency.Working out the math, you get a lot more endurance running on microturbines rather than electric props for a given weight.
>>65089938Based reference.
>>65092016Yeah I was thinking fuel cells anon. They can run 40-80% efficient vs like 30% for ice, and electric motors can run near completely efficient. Also avoids plumbing. Bigger engines work better, the real problem is trying to shrink. Small jet engines, which fwiw I've played with in RC fun stuff with a club in my area, are notorious fuel pigs. You really can't do all the tricks and the bypass amount that big commercial jet engines do to get efficient.>Working out the math, you get a lot more endurance running on microturbines rather than electric props for a given weight.Last I ran the math that definitely wasn't remotely true but I'll admit I wasn't being that rigorous about it. Would be worth redoing.
>>65092102The biggest issue is in hydrogen storage. Damned stuff doesn't want to stay contained with naked protons slipping through even solid walls of metal. Hydrogen's notoriously low density multiplies the issues since not only do you need a thick storage tank but unless you freeze it the hydrogen tank is going to be bigger than the rest of the drone AND the payload. Seriously, you might as well use the hydrogen to float the drone. Methane doesn't work with PEMs which means they run hotter and less efficiently. Also, you get similar containment issues. Damn stuff doesn't want to get dense unless you supercool it.
>>65091835Did you mean shining spears?
>>65091934Why not just keep using drones?This would still be the most retarded option. How would he shoot the shotgun? You think they'll let him land, buddy?
>>65091508Based>>65090820dongers or dong lords
>>65092254>Why not just keep using drones?Because drones can be disabled without provoking a response. It's why drones are used.>How would he shoot the shotgun?Land first. >You think they'll let him land, buddy?If the boat shoots him then the ship sinks the boat.
>>65091479being able to move the thrusters with your hands is what provides all your control
>>65091934>You send over a man with a shotgun and self-inflating life jacketHow does he use the shotgun with jet engines strapped to his hands?
>>65092322He lands first. I answered this here>>65092268>>65092319Might be better to control them with the legs or feet.
>>65089963You can't up armor a dude enough to both fly and take hits.
>>65089963Getting shot at in general is less than ideal. Maybe use them for vertical flanking? Jet pack a team to a rooftop or clifftop?
>>65089997Warp Spiders, nigga.>teleports behind you>splooge monofilament web all over an infantry squadHeh. Nothin' personnel, mon-keigh.
>>65089932Not on humans. Stick em on one of these. Maybe don't even make them humanoid-like.
>>65092319instead of manipulating weapons or whatever equipment-for-the-job with your hands?
