Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 89 posts

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#11

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

unwind wrote: post #7

Like other commenters, I agree that this is roughly equal parts awesome (because flying suits are awesome, and also because rapid response from medical professionals in the field is too), equal parts silly/gimmicky/unlikely. Also, why is the BBC feeling a need to put quotes around "fly" in the article? If a person is, like, lifting off from the ground, and moving through the air in a controlled fashion driven by jet…

> If a person is, like, lifting off from the ground, and moving through the air in a controlled fashion driven by jet engines, isn't that pretty exactly flying?

It depends, are they reaching a height where the Wing-in-ground effect is negligible? If they have to stay below that, then no, not really flying. Unless you'd say that a hovercraft or ekranoplan also flies.

Or they could just be staying low because it might be insanely dangerous if the operator loses control at even slight altitude.

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#12

Post by mehrdadn »

microcolonel wrote: post #9
mehrdadn wrote: post #6

This looks awesome. How does it compare to a helicopter though? Are helicopters not available for these situations?

They go over that. The idea is that the air ambulance can't necessarily land that close to the patient, the jetsuit can allow the medic to cover severe terrain rapidly between the helicopter and the patient; ditto for terrestrial ambulances trying to reach patients over difficult terrain.

Thanks for the info, makes sense! Can I ask where they go over this? I've already read the article and watched the video multiple times but somehow I'm still not seeing where they discuss this.

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#13

Post by mehrdadn »

unwind wrote: post #7

Like other commenters, I agree that this is roughly equal parts awesome (because flying suits are awesome, and also because rapid response from medical professionals in the field is too), equal parts silly/gimmicky/unlikely. Also, why is the BBC feeling a need to put quotes around "fly" in the article? If a person is, like, lifting off from the ground, and moving through the air in a controlled fashion driven by jet…

I'm guessing it's probably because being just above the ground is something people might refer to as "hovering".

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#15

Post by mehrdadn »

ed_elliott_asc wrote: post #8
mehrdadn wrote: post #6

This looks awesome. How does it compare to a helicopter though? Are helicopters not available for these situations?

It doesn’t mention pricing but I would imagine these would be significantly cheaper than a helicopter. If each mountain rescue team could have their own then that would really help.

I think right now they're like $440,000 [1] which is comparable with cheap helicopters (if not more expensive), but far lower than the average helicopter.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAJM5L9hhBs&t=6m14s

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#16

Post by MaxBarraclough »

arethuza wrote: post #5
traceroute66 wrote: post #2

Seems to me like little more than a cheap publicity stunt for fundraising. I thought the number one rule for First Responders was not to cause injury (on the scene or en-route) to yourself or bystanders and not to cause further injury to the casualty. A "paramedic jet suit" just seems to be waiting for an opportunity for the paramedic to become a statistic as they fly head-first into rocky substance. Then I suppose w…

That was my first impression as well - but I suspect people probably said the same thing the first time they saw a helicopter!

> I suspect people probably said the same thing the first time they saw a helicopter!

Odds are that they would have been right - early helicopters probably weren't safe enough to use as ambulances.

Well-run modern air ambulances are very safe edit: perhaps not, see replies (twin-engine helicopters with very experienced pilots) and can serve hundreds of patients per year, generally only serving very urgent cases of course. [0]

My question for the jet-pack folks is why not use a helicopter? Presumably the suit is a great deal cheaper, but are there any other advantages? Curiously the article doesn't mention helicopters at all, but in the video, they did their interview in front of one.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London%27s_Air_Ambulance_Chari...

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#17

Post by nradov »

microcolonel wrote: post #9
mehrdadn wrote: post #6

This looks awesome. How does it compare to a helicopter though? Are helicopters not available for these situations?

They go over that. The idea is that the air ambulance can't necessarily land that close to the patient, the jetsuit can allow the medic to cover severe terrain rapidly between the helicopter and the patient; ditto for terrestrial ambulances trying to reach patients over difficult terrain.

Helicopters don't necessarily have to land either. They already have the capability to lower a medic and litter using a winch while hovering.

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#18

Post by ColinWright »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #16
arethuza wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was my first impression as well - but I suspect people probably said the same thing the first time they saw a helicopter!

> I suspect people probably said the same thing the first time they saw a helicopter! Odds are that they would have been right - early helicopters probably weren't safe enough to use as ambulances. Well-run modern air ambulances are very safe edit: perhaps not, see replies (twin-engine helicopters with very experienced pilots) and can serve hundreds of patients per year, generally only serving very urgent cases of co…

> ... why not use a helicopter?

Mentioned elsewhere in this thread:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24626472

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#19

Post by adwww »

nradov wrote: post #17
microcolonel wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They go over that. The idea is that the air ambulance can't necessarily land that close to the patient, the jetsuit can allow the medic to cover severe terrain rapidly between the helicopter and the patient; ditto for terrestrial ambulances trying to reach patients over difficult terrain.

Helicopters don't necessarily have to land either. They already have the capability to lower a medic and litter using a winch while hovering.

I don't think the charity provided air ambulances in the UK have winches. They would have to call in a coast guard or military helicopter for that.

It sounds like this organisation would like to have more capability in house.

Although, I'm not sure if the extra capability would be worth the risks from flying an experimental jetsuit...

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#20

Post by nradov »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #16
arethuza wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was my first impression as well - but I suspect people probably said the same thing the first time they saw a helicopter!

> I suspect people probably said the same thing the first time they saw a helicopter! Odds are that they would have been right - early helicopters probably weren't safe enough to use as ambulances. Well-run modern air ambulances are very safe edit: perhaps not, see replies (twin-engine helicopters with very experienced pilots) and can serve hundreds of patients per year, generally only serving very urgent cases of co…

The first really widespread use of early helicopters in any capacity was as air ambulances for the US military during the Korean War.
Post reply on HN