ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 7th June 2016, 10:25 AM   #241
esspee
black goo
 
esspee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by Jrrarglblarg View Post
This is called an "if I ran the zoo" argument. It's a form of fallacy.
true.

I do have experience working in aviation though, and I can say the people that run the zoo in most of the countries I've been to love paperwork and countless rules to be followed. They like to take tributes too.

For this record demo to be real i would imagine it would somehow have to not fall under aviation rules of any kind. Otherwise we would be seeing something different for sure. Set safety distances for the crowd, emergency vehicles on standby, that kind of stuff.


The rules may vary - it could be a case of how far off the ground you go before you fall under jurisdiction. In one country i lived in the rules were literally as high as you can jump.
If you are off the ground, they made the rules! it was ridiculous!


I don't know how it works in france. They are the KINGS of aviation and experimental flying stuff, so maybe their rules are more forgiving,
esspee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 10:34 AM   #242
Jrrarglblarg
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 12,673
I expect the first Flyboard death will be an X-games camera operator smashing into a broadcast van's antenna mast.
Jrrarglblarg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 10:49 AM   #243
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,149
Upthread I seem to recall seeing a question about what amount of thrust one would lose with angled thrusters. The answer is that the vertical thrust from each engine would be the total thrust from that engine multiplied by the cosine of the angle from the vertical.

If they were vertical, the angle would be zero degrees and the cosine would be 1. If they were horizontal, then the angle would be 90 degrees and the cosine would be zero.

When travelling forward, there will also be some aerodynamic lift.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 11:56 AM   #244
macdoc
Philosopher
 
macdoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Planet earth on slow boil
Posts: 7,964
SP...all you demonstrate is you fear of technology you don't understand...no kudos for false concern that is unwarranted.
macdoc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 12:16 PM   #245
esspee
black goo
 
esspee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by macdoc View Post
SP...all you demonstrate is you fear of technology you don't understand...no kudos for false concern that is unwarranted.
Because I am an uneducated savage, I actually had to look up 'kudos'.

"the public admiration that a person receives as a result of a particular achievement..."

Thinking....

Maybe i will get some 'kudos' around here when the hoax is finally revealed.

(That will be enjoyable)
esspee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 12:25 PM   #246
Jrrarglblarg
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 12,673
Or you might get kudos when you accept that the device you question is utterly possible, totally believable and is likely being reinvented from whole cloth by half a dozen future competitors right this very second.

I have no problem with questioning the legitimacy of claims when the questions are valid, like the James Bond diving gizmo. No valid questions about this device remain unanswered. The tech is all reasonable. Everything is within the bounds of physics.
Jrrarglblarg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 12:35 PM   #247
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,222
Originally Posted by Jrrarglblarg View Post
Esspee: You might consider reading the thread from the beginning. Most forums benefit from knowing what conversation has happened upththread and ISF is no exception.

The Zapata Racing Flyboard Air is not a hoax, scam, spoof or fake. Every piece of the device is built on preexisting equipment and ideas. Nothing in it is outside the realms of basic physics. You and I can order up most of the parts on Amazon to build our own from scratch.

Not one part of the Flyboard is incompatible with outside knowledge or preexisting equipment.

Besides which, its not as if the idea is a new one...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aVIzyWO1HE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXNNc_HFodI

In the first video, watch long enough to listen to the explanation of how the platform is flown. It will sound familiar!!!

Also, for interests sake, I lifted this...



...from this page

http://www.x-jetpacks.com/indy-jets-how-they-work/
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 7th June 2016 at 12:43 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 12:45 PM   #248
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,025
Originally Posted by Jrrarglblarg View Post
Or you might get kudos when you accept that the device you question is utterly possible, totally believable and is likely being reinvented from whole cloth by half a dozen future competitors right this very second.

I have no problem with questioning the legitimacy of claims when the questions are valid, like the James Bond diving gizmo. No valid questions about this device remain unanswered. The tech is all reasonable. Everything is within the bounds of physics.
None of that really matters to esspee, as he still thinks this is a hoax and a conspiracy. Pages and pages of technical talk have not convinced him of its reality, only its potential reality.

He still wants confirmatory evidence that any person has seen a guy flying on this device. He thinks that nobody has ever seen that happen. He thinks that the numerous videos and photos are all fake. He thinks that numerous people and organizations are intentionally telling lies including Guinness.

Vector thrusts and turbine whatnot factoids are meaningless for his position. His position is that this is a hoax even if such a working device is possible. He has not yet been convinced that any person has ever seen a guy fly on this thing.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 12:52 PM   #249
esspee
black goo
 
esspee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by Jrrarglblarg View Post
Or you might get kudos when you accept that the device you question is utterly possible, totally believable and is likely being reinvented from whole cloth by half a dozen future competitors right this very second.

I have no problem with questioning the legitimacy of claims when the questions are valid, like the James Bond diving gizmo. No valid questions about this device remain unanswered. The tech is all reasonable. Everything is within the bounds of physics.
I don't pretend to understand engineering or physics.
But i was good in my physics class before i left school early. And i have a reasonably inquiring mind i am told.

I am basing my belief of it being a hoax on intuition regarding the footage. i experienced this on the first watch of the record. The first time i saw the device.

No other evidence i have seen has been concrete enough to shake me from that position.

And the more i look into the technical side, the more unlikely this machine seems. not impossible, just very very compplex and very very hard to pull off. but i agree - the device might be possible - but i base that on my ignorance of the technology and physics. i am too uneducated on those matters to say it is impossible with any authority at all.

i may be suffering from confirmation bias - i will admit that. The problem with suffering biases is they are hard to perceive in oneself.

But I tell you, its a rocky confirmation bias path to follow when 99.9% of the Internet peoples think it is real and when the footage is so well done. That is why i made this thread. To look for other doubters.... and see what the believers are thinking. (and to educate myself)

Did you know only three channels on youtube have said they think it is fake since the GUiness record. (that i can find)

One has dropped the matter entirely and made no follow up video.
One has chosen to walk the 'maybe real, maybe not, i have doubts' path and yet to make a follow up video.
Only one channel has is still really saying it is a hoax - and it only made one short 2 minute video focusing only on the footage and nothing else (the vid i posted in my OP)


Physics and advanced technology are not the Achilles heal of this hoax.
The FOOTAGE - that is the Achilles heal.


(IMO)

Last edited by esspee; 7th June 2016 at 01:12 PM.
esspee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 12:54 PM   #250
esspee
black goo
 
esspee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
None of that really matters to esspee, as he still thinks this is a hoax and a conspiracy. Pages and pages of technical talk have not convinced him of its reality, only its potential reality.

He still wants confirmatory evidence that any person has seen a guy flying on this device. He thinks that nobody has ever seen that happen. He thinks that the numerous videos and photos are all fake. He thinks that numerous people and organizations are intentionally telling lies including Guinness.

Vector thrusts and turbine whatnot factoids are meaningless for his position. His position is that this is a hoax even if such a working device is possible. He has not yet been convinced that any person has ever seen a guy fly on this thing
.
thankyou.

this guy gets it!

BTW though i really enjoy the technical discussion about it, that is the truth. i find this kind of stuff pretty interesting.
esspee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 12:58 PM   #251
macdoc
Philosopher
 
macdoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Planet earth on slow boil
Posts: 7,964
just very very compplex and very very hard to pull off.

Not very complex at all...that's what makes it work. Yes takes some engineering to pull it off.
macdoc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 01:02 PM   #252
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,222
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Upthread I seem to recall seeing a question about what amount of thrust one would lose with angled thrusters. The answer is that the vertical thrust from each engine would be the total thrust from that engine multiplied by the cosine of the angle from the vertical.

If they were vertical, the angle would be zero degrees and the cosine would be 1. If they were horizontal, then the angle would be 90 degrees and the cosine would be zero.

When travelling forward, there will also be some aerodynamic lift.
OK, so lets imagine angling each engine outward from the platform centreline by 10° (so a total divergence of 20°)

Cos 10° =0.984

so the vertical thrust of each engine...

My suggestion.................JetCat 200P....52lb * 0.984 = 51.2 (loses 13oz of thrust)
macdoc's suggestion........TJ40-G1........88lb * 0.984 = 86.6 (loses 22 oz of thrust

Overall that is a loss of 1.6% of your thrust, a very small price to pay for a big increase in stability.
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 01:13 PM   #253
foophil
Graduate Poster
 
foophil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 1,222
Originally Posted by esspee View Post
I think something like this device is possible, in the future. I like anything that flys.

Welcome to the future!

Actually, welcome to the forums. Glad to have you around. I don't have much else to add other than I'm quite confident that this device exists and works. My limited experience in this field is with the programming side of things along with a small amount of exposure to Armadillo Aerospace years ago (they were a competitor for the X prize to launch, land, and relaunch a rocket into space). One great thing about these forums is you'll find an expert (I'm not one for this particular field) in just about any walk of life.

So far, the evidence for the Flyboard working far outweighs the evidence against it, and a good skeptic, while never ruling anything out completely, would probably accept this as being a working device that exists based upon what has been said earlier in the thread regarding existing parts being easily accessible, suitable for the task, and it having been witnessed by Guinness.

This doesn't prevent someone from wondering HOW it is built, and how to go about building their own.
foophil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 01:14 PM   #254
macdoc
Philosopher
 
macdoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Planet earth on slow boil
Posts: 7,964
excellent post.
macdoc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 01:14 PM   #255
Ernie M
Muse
 
Ernie M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 809
Flyboard Air: Hoax, a model with cobbled-together parts

I ALLEGE THAT FLYBOARD AIR IS A MODEL THAT DOESN'T FLY AND THE WHOLE THING IS A HOAX

To me, Flyboard Air has many earmarks that it’s a model made with cobbled-together parts, and the operator is suspended via a harness with an array of 'wires' from either an overhead structure or a helicopter to give the appearance of flight. "Wires' so thin they wouldn't be visible from way the videos were shot. Flyboard Air seems to violate some laws of physics as well as certain flight characteristics.

Some parts may actually function, but not do what they should had this been an actual, flying-on-its-own, prototype.

The red, Electric Ducted Fans (EDF)

Two, red-colored, externally mounted Electric Ducted Fans (EDF), supposedly control yaw are like those from http://www.shop.rc-electric-jets.com...70-12-2250.htm

The EDFs were manufactured with two mounting flanges, however, it appears that each EDF had a flange cut off. It's possible both flanges were removed, but the location of the second tab can't be seen in the photos or video I've seen. And, it appears each EDF was attached with a zip tie.

The EDFs are not structurally integrated into the frame of the Flyboard. They are attached as if an afterthought. The attachments of the EDFs do not appear to be structurally sound as if the life of the operator would depend on them not to fail at what was given as an operational altitude of 10,000'.

Due to relatively small thrust for this application, the EDFs likely wouldn’t produce enough thrust to effectively control yaw. Nor would the EDFs respond fast enough to rapidly changing situations like a strong wind gust or change of torque from the four jet engines.

Also, if the EDFs are intended to control yaw, there is no evidence in the videos that the Flyboard Air fishtails (as a helicopter responding to torque and wind changes) as it travels in a straight line.

Theoretically the Flyboard would rotate in the opposite direction that the four jet engine fans (not the two EDF units) rotate, and the two 70mm EDFs would correct it like anti-torque pedals would act on a helicopter tail rotor. But it seems impossible that the EDFs have enough thrust to affect the yaw, especially if the Flyboard was moving forward at a fast rate of speed on a windy day. I say they are there just for show.

The upper cover

The upper structure doesn’t follow best manufacturing methods, nor does it appear to be a well thought-out design. Too many angles with no purpose or reason.

Same-width edge pieces should be of a wider width at the corners to add strength. The way they are now, they could be prone to failure (by cracking) at the angle areas.

Although inconclusive from available video and photos, I hypothesize that the upper cover is made from vacuum formed styrene sheet plastic. It is possible that I see paint runs and/or joinery seams where pieces may be joined.

(If I'm correct about the styrene material) Due to some not-so-straight lines, I speculate that the cut-outs for the screen areas and places by the boots were not machined with a CNC router but cut by hand using a matt knife.

If the top structure featured in the videos and pictures is cast metal, the corners (some which aren't currently) should be rounded, and have as large fillets as possible. But some of what’s shown doesn’t follow that construction, which means the upper structure is weak and could fail, as in break, if stepped on or took some type of hard enough impact.

Screens (with no structural integrity?) in the upper cover

I could see that he screen material could be viewed as if it was there to protect the four jet engines from ingesting foreign objects or to keep stuff from falling in. However, due to what looks like thin screen that's doesn't have much strength, I think it's there to visually obscure the inside of the Flyboard Air from view.

Top cover appears to be too thin to be able to properly attach screen material and keep it from getting sucked into the four jet engines.

If the screen were to be functional, it appears the current design and construction is problematic.

I don't know how much air should get sucked into the jet engines, but it looks suspect that if the engines were running at speed, they may draw enough air that would literally suck the screen from the cover, or at least deform the screen resulting in buckling in.

Seems like a poor design if the screen were to require changing. Screen section on tope looks like it was pushed down in one photo, which could indicate the screen lacks strength and could pose a design flaw.

Poor and non-existant air intake design of the top cover

There is no intake lip that could govern, improve, or accelerate clean air intake. Problematic design of the screen means that screen material could possibly get sucked into jet engines. Although I can't see the inside of the top cover, I don't see how it's possible to easily remove, clean, or replace a screen section. Based on what's visible, the wall thickness of the upper cover is thin, perhaps too thin. Gaps of varying thickness lead me to question if the screen was simply glued to the inside of the top cover without consideration it might get sucked into the jet engines?

Carbon fiber legs with weight-saving holes?

The four legs are possibly made from carbon fiber and appear to have been drilled out with holes to reduce weight. Drilling holes that size and out of that material would be inconsequential and not necessary. One alternative would be improved leg design by using less carbon fiber in the first place, by perhaps designing the legs with more taper.

More weight below the Flyboard Air could add stability, so why take away that little amount? Other ways to save weight: (1) Don’t carry as much fuel- fuel is heavy. (2) Tell the Flyboard Air operator not to eat or drink much before ‘flying.’ (3) Use a Flyboard Air operator who weighs less, is smaller.

Flight too stable, where's the wobble?

Flight path doesn’t fishtail like a helicopter would when it needs to counteract varying torque and wind forces when trying to fly in a straight line. Videos of the Flyboard Air don’t show it wiggling like a helicopter. Also, to me, it appears as if the Flyboard and operator (Franky?) are suspended from an overhead structure, like a pendulum bobbing below.

No real press coverage, not even for the supposed GUINNESS BOOK OF WORLD RECORDS event

The crowd seem to be confederates, in on the (alleged) hoax. The people turning around to take pictures of the crowd is reminiscent of the 'audience' reactions you see with magician, illusionist, and endurance artist David Blaine. There is no major TV news outlet at the Flyboard Air events that have a visible news logo.

Software controls?

There's supposed to be some software that controls the four jet engines and two Electric Ducted Fans? Sorry, but if the design and construction of the Flyboard Air is so flawed and unrealistic, I believe it would also be unrealistic to expect there's functioning software that can control the characteristics of the equipment. I say hoax.

Will Franky Zapata talk about the (alleged) hoax at the CHALLENGERS conference?

As ISF member esspee mentioned in an earlier post, the "Challengers" conference in Barcelona starting June 9th 2016, Frank Zapata will talk in a "Future of Transportation" presentation. Personally, I don't believe there will be any Flyboard Air exhibition of a flying prototype, but I believe Frank should mention why he demonstrated the Flyboard Air the (alleged hoax) way it was.
__________________
paranormalstateillustrated.com

Taking a close look at what you see and hear
on a "Real Life. Drama." TV series.
Ernie M is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 01:21 PM   #256
esspee
black goo
 
esspee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Besides which, its not as if the idea is a new one...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aVIzyWO1HE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXNNc_HFodI

In the first video, watch long enough to listen to the explanation of how the platform is flown. It will sound familiar!!!

Also, for interests sake, I lifted this...

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...9-778x1024.jpg

...from this page

http://www.x-jetpacks.com/indy-jets-how-they-work/
Hmmm after much thought...regarding the second video - i choose not to get sidetracked in this thread by discussing what i think about that! No more mention of it will be from me.

i will stay focused on the current hoax at hand!
esspee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 01:26 PM   #257
foophil
Graduate Poster
 
foophil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 1,222
Mentioned earlier was parachutes and flying higher up. That got me thinking. Parachutes aren't exactly lightweight. That would of course add a lot more weight to the human wearing it, possibly compromising whether the Flyboard could get off the ground at all, and if it could, how much it would impact its flying time to compensate for the added weight.

Then there is the whole regulations thing. I can't imagine the FAA (if this were done in the US for instance) being exactly happy that someone was flying a drone above 400m (the max altitude they allow I believe). Does France have similar laws regarding drones and their max altitude?

No doubt if I were a daredevil, I'd fly that thing as high as I could and jump off with a parachute at some point.
foophil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 01:32 PM   #258
esspee
black goo
 
esspee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by Ernie M View Post
I ALLEGE THAT FLYBOARD AIR IS A MODEL THAT DOESN'T FLY AND THE WHOLE THING IS A HOAX

To me, Flyboard Air has many earmarks that it’s a model made with cobbled-together parts, and the operator is suspended via a harness with an array of 'wires' from either an overhead structure or a helicopter to give the appearance of flight. "Wires' so thin they wouldn't be visible from way the videos were shot. Flyboard Air seems to violate some laws of physics as well as certain flight characteristics.

Some parts may actually function, but not do what they should had this been an actual, flying-on-its-own, prototype.

The red, Electric Ducted Fans (EDF)

Two, red-colored, externally mounted Electric Ducted Fans (EDF), supposedly control yaw are like those from http://www.shop.rc-electric-jets.com...70-12-2250.htm

The EDFs were manufactured with two mounting flanges, however, it appears that each EDF had a flange cut off. It's possible both flanges were removed, but the location of the second tab can't be seen in the photos or video I've seen. And, it appears each EDF was attached with a zip tie.

The EDFs are not structurally integrated into the frame of the Flyboard. They are attached as if an afterthought. The attachments of the EDFs do not appear to be structurally sound as if the life of the operator would depend on them not to fail at what was given as an operational altitude of 10,000'.

Due to relatively small thrust for this application, the EDFs likely wouldn’t produce enough thrust to effectively control yaw. Nor would the EDFs respond fast enough to rapidly changing situations like a strong wind gust or change of torque from the four jet engines.

Also, if the EDFs are intended to control yaw, there is no evidence in the videos that the Flyboard Air fishtails (as a helicopter responding to torque and wind changes) as it travels in a straight line.

Theoretically the Flyboard would rotate in the opposite direction that the four jet engine fans (not the two EDF units) rotate, and the two 70mm EDFs would correct it like anti-torque pedals would act on a helicopter tail rotor. But it seems impossible that the EDFs have enough thrust to affect the yaw, especially if the Flyboard was moving forward at a fast rate of speed on a windy day. I say they are there just for show.

The upper cover

The upper structure doesn’t follow best manufacturing methods, nor does it appear to be a well thought-out design. Too many angles with no purpose or reason.

Same-width edge pieces should be of a wider width at the corners to add strength. The way they are now, they could be prone to failure (by cracking) at the angle areas.

Although inconclusive from available video and photos, I hypothesize that the upper cover is made from vacuum formed styrene sheet plastic. It is possible that I see paint runs and/or joinery seams where pieces may be joined.

(If I'm correct about the styrene material) Due to some not-so-straight lines, I speculate that the cut-outs for the screen areas and places by the boots were not machined with a CNC router but cut by hand using a matt knife.

If the top structure featured in the videos and pictures is cast metal, the corners (some which aren't currently) should be rounded, and have as large fillets as possible. But some of what’s shown doesn’t follow that construction, which means the upper structure is weak and could fail, as in break, if stepped on or took some type of hard enough impact.

Screens (with no structural integrity?) in the upper cover

I could see that he screen material could be viewed as if it was there to protect the four jet engines from ingesting foreign objects or to keep stuff from falling in. However, due to what looks like thin screen that's doesn't have much strength, I think it's there to visually obscure the inside of the Flyboard Air from view.

Top cover appears to be too thin to be able to properly attach screen material and keep it from getting sucked into the four jet engines.

If the screen were to be functional, it appears the current design and construction is problematic.

I don't know how much air should get sucked into the jet engines, but it looks suspect that if the engines were running at speed, they may draw enough air that would literally suck the screen from the cover, or at least deform the screen resulting in buckling in.

Seems like a poor design if the screen were to require changing. Screen section on tope looks like it was pushed down in one photo, which could indicate the screen lacks strength and could pose a design flaw.

Poor and non-existant air intake design of the top cover

There is no intake lip that could govern, improve, or accelerate clean air intake. Problematic design of the screen means that screen material could possibly get sucked into jet engines. Although I can't see the inside of the top cover, I don't see how it's possible to easily remove, clean, or replace a screen section. Based on what's visible, the wall thickness of the upper cover is thin, perhaps too thin. Gaps of varying thickness lead me to question if the screen was simply glued to the inside of the top cover without consideration it might get sucked into the jet engines?

Carbon fiber legs with weight-saving holes?

The four legs are possibly made from carbon fiber and appear to have been drilled out with holes to reduce weight. Drilling holes that size and out of that material would be inconsequential and not necessary. One alternative would be improved leg design by using less carbon fiber in the first place, by perhaps designing the legs with more taper.

More weight below the Flyboard Air could add stability, so why take away that little amount? Other ways to save weight: (1) Don’t carry as much fuel- fuel is heavy. (2) Tell the Flyboard Air operator not to eat or drink much before ‘flying.’ (3) Use a Flyboard Air operator who weighs less, is smaller.

Flight too stable, where's the wobble?

Flight path doesn’t fishtail like a helicopter would when it needs to counteract varying torque and wind forces when trying to fly in a straight line. Videos of the Flyboard Air don’t show it wiggling like a helicopter. Also, to me, it appears as if the Flyboard and operator (Franky?) are suspended from an overhead structure, like a pendulum bobbing below.

No real press coverage, not even for the supposed GUINNESS BOOK OF WORLD RECORDS event

The crowd seem to be confederates, in on the (alleged) hoax. The people turning around to take pictures of the crowd is reminiscent of the 'audience' reactions you see with magician, illusionist, and endurance artist David Blaine. There is no major TV news outlet at the Flyboard Air events that have a visible news logo.

Software controls?

There's supposed to be some software that controls the four jet engines and two Electric Ducted Fans? Sorry, but if the design and construction of the Flyboard Air is so flawed and unrealistic, I believe it would also be unrealistic to expect there's functioning software that can control the characteristics of the equipment. I say hoax.

Will Franky Zapata talk about the (alleged) hoax at the CHALLENGERS conference?

As ISF member esspee mentioned in an earlier post, the "Challengers" conference in Barcelona starting June 9th 2016, Frank Zapata will talk in a "Future of Transportation" presentation. Personally, I don't believe there will be any Flyboard Air exhibition of a flying prototype, but I believe Frank should mention why he demonstrated the Flyboard Air the (alleged hoax) way it was.
After i read your well thought out post i literally stood up and punched the air and under my breath shouted YES! ( i have flatmates)

hallelujah!


You literally made made my day man.

I cam to this forum because i wanted to find someone more knowledgeable and technical than me who would see what i see ( a hoax) but from a knowledgeable technical viewpoint.

Thanks again man. You are the *********** man!

Give your self a pat on the back. You put a lot of work into that post and it was excellent.



i will open a beer when this hoax hits the mainstream and I toast in your good name.

Last edited by esspee; 7th June 2016 at 01:34 PM.
esspee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 01:32 PM   #259
macdoc
Philosopher
 
macdoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Planet earth on slow boil
Posts: 7,964
The odds against multiple engine failure are high ...
He states he can take off with 3 engines...I imagine then he could do a controlled crash landing in water on two.

With 352 foot lb of thrust there is significant lift reserve.

•••

I read that a while back and the guy has perhaps less veracity than you and far less understanding of the physics. Enough with the confirmation bias crap.

Last edited by macdoc; 7th June 2016 at 01:36 PM.
macdoc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 01:35 PM   #260
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,222
Originally Posted by Ernie M View Post
I ALLEGE THAT FLYBOARD AIR IS A MODEL THAT DOESN'T FLY AND THE WHOLE THING IS A HOAX

<snipped pointless drivel>
And so all the thousands of witnesses who have seen this fly are witnessims?
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 01:47 PM   #261
esspee
black goo
 
esspee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by foophil View Post
Mentioned earlier was parachutes and flying higher up. That got me thinking. Parachutes aren't exactly lightweight. That would of course add a lot more weight to the human wearing it, possibly compromising whether the Flyboard could get off the ground at all, and if it could, how much it would impact its flying time to compensate for the added weight.

Then there is the whole regulations thing. I can't imagine the FAA (if this were done in the US for instance) being exactly happy that someone was flying a drone above 400m (the max altitude they allow I believe). Does France have similar laws regarding drones and their max altitude?

No doubt if I were a daredevil, I'd fly that thing as high as I could and jump off with a parachute at some point.
I personally have held in my hand an emegencyround parachute for an adult man made out of the new super lightwieght parachute material. it was for paragliders

Including parachute lines and an attachment riser the thing weighed only 700gms. And that was for landing on solid ground. It cost around $1000

over water , as franky flies) you could get away with a smaller and therefore lighter parachute as you are landing in forgiving water.

A suitable container for it would maybe weigh 200gms if made right.

The problem with parachutes is you need time to pitch them out befoer you hit the ground. This is why altitude helps. I would imagine such a parachute to be useless from anything less than 150ft over water given human reaction time to throw it out into clean air
esspee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 01:49 PM   #262
esspee
black goo
 
esspee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
And so all the thousands of witnesses who have seen this fly are witnessims?
Video editing software VFX
esspee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 01:51 PM   #263
Ernie M
Muse
 
Ernie M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 809
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
And so all the thousands of witnesses who have seen this fly are witnessims?
I don't think there ever were "thousands of witnesses" to an actual flying-on-its-own, Flyboard Air. Just carefully crafted performances with some confederates.

Please unsnip my pointless drivel!
__________________
paranormalstateillustrated.com

Taking a close look at what you see and hear
on a "Real Life. Drama." TV series.
Ernie M is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 01:58 PM   #264
esspee
black goo
 
esspee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by Ernie M View Post
I don't think there ever were "thousands of witnesses" to an actual flying-on-its-own, Flyboard Air. Just carefully crafted performances with some confederates.

Please unsnip my pointless drivel!
Don't fret - there will be more of us.

Our numbers will grow.
Our voices will grow louder as more join to speak the truth.
So loud that eventually the whole world will hear.

Victory will be ours!
Enjoy the moment!
esspee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 02:03 PM   #265
crescent
Illuminator
 
crescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,058
A quick google search turned up an article in Popular Mechanics - they say their writer witnessed one of the recent demonstrations in person:

Watch This Real Hoverboard Set the Guinness Distance Record

Quote:
​Franky Zapata's Flyboard Air flew nearly 7,500 feet this weekend. We were there, and we talked to him after the record-setting ride.
So if it is a hoax, they have managed to trick both Guinness and Popular Mechanics.

Last edited by crescent; 7th June 2016 at 02:10 PM.
crescent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 02:09 PM   #266
esspee
black goo
 
esspee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
I quick google search turned up an article in Popular Mechanics - they say their writer witnessed one of the recent demonstrations in person:

Watch This Real Hoverboard Set the Guinness Distance Record



So if it is a hoax, they have managed to trick both Guinness and Popular Mechanics.
The plot thickens.
esspee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 02:14 PM   #267
crescent
Illuminator
 
crescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,058
Originally Posted by esspee View Post
The plot thickens.
Now I am curious. This reminds me of the Directly Downwind Faster than the Wind controversy of a few years ago. Have you ever heard of that?

Blackbird (land yacht)

Really good gearheads and engineers can do some amazingly counter-intuitive things.
crescent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 02:14 PM   #268
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,222
Originally Posted by Ernie M View Post
I don't think there ever were "thousands of witnesses" to an actual flying-on-its-own, Flyboard Air. Just carefully crafted performances with some confederates.

Please unsnip my pointless drivel!
Actually there were thousands witnesses at the Monaco event on Le Meridian Beach Plaza, some of whom have posted their own cellphone video of the event on youtube.

My cousin lives in Marseilles, France, and he is Formula 1 nut, he goes to Monaco for the F1 every year. I emailed him last night and asked him whether he saw it. He didn't, but two of his friends who travel with him every year were at Le Meridian during the demonstrations and they saw it personally. A local radio station was also there and they were reporting it live on the radio. He also said that lots of people who witnessed it were talking about it the next day.

Snippets of the flight also made it to TV in New Zealand (SkyTV) during the live coverage of the Monaco Grand Prix.
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 7th June 2016 at 02:16 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 02:17 PM   #269
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,025
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
So if it is a hoax, they have managed to trick both Guinness and Popular Mechanics.
esspee's position is not that they have been tricked, it's that they are conspirators who are intentionally lying. They never saw a guy fly on this thing.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 02:22 PM   #270
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,025
Ernie M and esspee differ on something. Ernie thinks that eyewitnesses are there but they are shills pretending that they are watching something real but know that it is a hoax event. esspee thinks that audiences have been added to videos and pictures using CGI and there is really nobody watching.

Ernie also thinks that there are wires holding the guy up in the air, while esspee thinks the guy has never been up in the air on the thing.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 02:24 PM   #271
crescent
Illuminator
 
crescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,058
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Actually there were thousands witnesses at the Monaco event on Le Meridian Beach Plaza, some of whom have posted their own cellphone video of the event on youtube.
Perhaps equally important, I have not seen anyone from the area saying anything like "Wait a minute, I was at Le Meridian Beach Plaza the day this supposedly happened, and I didn't see anything!" Nobody from the area seems to be coming forward and denying that anything happened that day. Instead, there are a number of people confirming that it did happen.
crescent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 02:24 PM   #272
esspee
black goo
 
esspee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
esspee's position is not that they have been tricked, it's that they are conspirators who are intentionally lying. They never saw a guy fly on this thing.
I have been very careful in this thread to say hoax OR deception whever possible.

I am not a magician or illusionist, but i know they exist.

therefore its possible that some well meaning people who saw it were deceived somehow.

it is possible for people deceived by a hoax to bare witness to it while still remaining innocent of 'being in on it' or being conspirators.
esspee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 02:29 PM   #273
esspee
black goo
 
esspee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Actually there were thousands witnesses at the Monaco event on Le Meridian Beach Plaza, some of whom have posted their own cellphone video of the event on youtube.

My cousin lives in Marseilles, France, and he is Formula 1 nut, he goes to Monaco for the F1 every year. I emailed him last night and asked him whether he saw it. He didn't, but two of his friends who travel with him every year were at Le Meridian during the demonstrations and they saw it personally. A local radio station was also there and they were reporting it live on the radio. He also said that lots of people who witnessed it were talking about it the next day.

Snippets of the flight also made it to TV in New Zealand (SkyTV) during the live coverage of the Monaco Grand Prix.
I won't lie.

This is the best evidence against my position that i have received so far.

You are making my path of believing this is a hoax VERY rocky!

"but two of his friends who travel with him every year were at Le Meridian during the demonstrations and they saw it personally. A local radio station was also there and they were reporting it live on the radio. He also said that lots of people who witnessed it were talking about it the next day."


that is the evidence i have been searching for, and you alone have provided it.
You have delivered a huge body blow to the kidneys and it has left me reeling.

I will have to retire to my quarters and meditate on this now before i return to the battle.

I admit, I have no comeback against your testimony....(yet....)

<bows in respect>

Last edited by esspee; 7th June 2016 at 02:31 PM.
esspee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 02:32 PM   #274
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,025
Originally Posted by esspee View Post
I have been very careful in this thread to say hoax OR deception whever possible.

I am not a magician or illusionist, but i know they exist.

therefore its possible that some well meaning people who saw it were deceived somehow.

it is possible for people deceived by a hoax to bare witness to it while still remaining innocent of 'being in on it' or being conspirators.
You were quite firm that Franky didn't fly the machine - because the machine doesn't fly - it's a fake prop.

You were also firm about Guinness being a lying conspirator.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 02:34 PM   #275
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,025
Originally Posted by esspee View Post
I won't lie.

This is the best evidence against my position that i have received so far.

You are making my path of believing this is a hoax VERY rocky!

"but two of his friends who travel with him every year were at Le Meridian during the demonstrations and they saw it personally. A local radio station was also there and they were reporting it live on the radio. He also said that lots of people who witnessed it were talking about it the next day."


that is the evidence i have been searching for, and you alone have provided it.
You have delivered a huge body blow to the kidneys and it has left me reeling.

I will have to retire to my quarters and meditate on this now before i return to the battle.

I admit, I have no comeback against your testimony....(yet....)

<bows in respect>
You are supposed to say that smartcooky has provided an anecdote and you are still awaiting confirmation.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

Last edited by William Parcher; 7th June 2016 at 02:36 PM.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 02:35 PM   #276
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,102
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
My cousin lives in Marseilles, France,and he is Formula 1 nut, he goes to Monaco for the F1 every year. I emailed him last night...
But we only have your word for that - how do we know you even have a cousin in France? I bet you are in on it!
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 02:46 PM   #277
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,222
Originally Posted by esspee View Post
I have been very careful in this thread to say hoax OR deception whever possible.

I am not a magician or illusionist, but i know they exist.

therefore its possible that some well meaning people who saw it were deceived somehow.

it is possible for people deceived by a hoax to bare witness to it while still remaining innocent of 'being in on it' or being conspirators.
On such a large scale, and more importantly, with many hundreds of high rise hotels (packed to capacity for the F1 weekend) and apartments close by with clear, unobstructed view of the beach? No way.

This hoax claim falls over for the same reasons that the brainless no-planer claims fall over with truthers.

There are exactly ZERO people coming forward who were at Ground Zero that day, saw the impacts on the towers, and saying that they were not planes.

There are exactly ZERO people coming forward who were at Le Meridien Beach Plaza that day and say that nothing of the sort happened.
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 03:03 PM   #278
esspee
black goo
 
esspee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
You were quite firm that Franky didn't fly the machine - because the machine doesn't fly - it's a fake prop.

You were also firm about Guinness being a lying conspirator.
Guinness? Yes.

IN some way in on it. That has been my position from the start - SOMEHOW in on it. I will not shy away from admitting i stated that.

Other people and organisations? my position is they were fooled by press releases or something else i have not noticed yet.



BTW i just had to go for walk outside to ponder this whole thing from a blank perspective again. It did not help.
I trust my instinct better than I trust my alert mind any day, and right now - i will admit, my awake mind is spinning out!. So much conflicting evidence now!

I may have to actively NOT think about this entire topic for a while before clarity resumes and an answer pops into my head.

I may be gone from this thread until that time.

But i will be back.
esspee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 03:08 PM   #279
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,025
Mandela Effect: Thousands of people think that they saw a guy flying over water. They never did.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2016, 03:09 PM   #280
esspee
black goo
 
esspee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Ernie M and esspee differ on something. Ernie thinks that eyewitnesses are there but they are shills pretending that they are watching something real but know that it is a hoax event. esspee thinks that audiences have been added to videos and pictures using CGI and there is really nobody watching.

Ernie also thinks that there are wires holding the guy up in the air, while esspee thinks the guy has never been up in the air on the thing.

Not true, i think some of the people must be real as in 'in on it'. And some of the footage must have been shot of him in the air - but maybe from a crane or a helicopter or a huge drone.

If i did not state that in this thread i apologise, i have also been discussing this quite a bit on youtube in comments sections.
esspee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:55 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.