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

41–50 of 89 posts

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#41

Post by Retric »

justinclift wrote: post #35
Retric wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Helicopters can reach people in this location just fine in a reasonable time, and more importantly bring people back. Limiting your comparison to a 400,000+$ experimental jet suit vs walking is deceptive. If cost that much of an issue, a paraglider costs 1/10th as much and are likely much safer to operate. Or if getting a single person on site is all you need, tiny helicopters cost as low as 50k new.

There are plenty of cases here in Australia, including recently, where people have fallen off a cliff and can't be reached by rescuers for hours or perhaps until the next day. When that happens, it seems to be because the location (bottom of cliff) has extensive bush covering around it. That being said, I know nothing at all about any of the above cases. There may have been bad weather involved too, which would proba…

The geography of the area is such that a person can walk to these people in 90 minutes. A jet suit with a slightly different design might be a meaningfully better option for rescuing people climbing el capitan or the bottom of ravines, but that’s not what is being considered here.

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#42

Post by skykooler »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #25
AndrewLiptak wrote: post #10

I've seen Richard Browning fly this in person — he did a demo a couple of years ago at San Diego Comic-Con. It's unreal to watch, but it's definitely something I can see not being all that widespread: it takes a lot of training to acclimate to it. Browning's been doing a bunch of demos lately: it feels like they're trying to figure out the best use, whether that's military applications, rescue, or others. This isn't…

> I've seen Richard Browning fly this in person — he did a demo > Browning's been doing a bunch of demos lately How many other people have been trained to fly this thing? It's telling if it's no-one, that would mean that it's likely prohibitive to insure the danger.

I've seen a few videos of youtubers (Colin Furze, the Hacksmith) taking classes to learn to fly it; it looks like it doesn't take more than a few days to learn, but a massive amount of physical strength to fly.

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#43

Post by xoa »

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…

>Seems to me like little more than a cheap publicity stunt for fundraising.

Having volunteered as a first responder in the White Mountains of New England and with a few friends who dealt with mountain rescues, particularly winter mountain rescues, I strongly disagree with you. There are plenty of places where there are significant numbers of people hiking/climbing/skiing/snowboarding, a vertical range of Yes, no doubt this will need significant refinement (just like helicopters). There may be much better possible designs, as well as numerous improvements to be made in terms of auto control. Heck, rather then suits maybe one of those flying platforms or a big drone someone can hang from make more sense. But the idea of getting a few rescuers with some basic kit to an accident high up on a mountain in a matter of minutes with the ability to do an aerial survey/search as they come in? There is nothing gimmicky about it. Minutes let alone hours save people.

>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.

Wilderness rescue is inherently risky, but for that matter so is medical work in general. The goal is certainly to have a large net improvement in overall wellness, so they don't want people, particularly not First Responders which means relatively little training, rush into dangerous situations and cause more trouble for everyone. But somebody using something like this, or doing wilderness rescue at all, is going to be trained beyond that level. And intelligent weighing of risks based on level of training and equipment is core to the entire mission.

>Then I suppose we will be expected to all feel sorry and cry for the terrible loss of this heroic first responder ... despite the idiotic risks they took.

Get the hell over yourself. Holy crap.

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#44

Post by Retric »

itsoktocry wrote: post #30
Retric wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Helicopters can reach people in this location just fine in a reasonable time, and more importantly bring people back. Limiting your comparison to a 400,000+$ experimental jet suit vs walking is deceptive. If cost that much of an issue, a paraglider costs 1/10th as much and are likely much safer to operate. Or if getting a single person on site is all you need, tiny helicopters cost as low as 50k new.

> Helicopters can reach people just fine in a reasonable time Try to imagine a world where helicopters work in some rescue situations, but not so well in others.

Clarified, as reach people in this area just fine. It might be interesting to look at this kind of jet suit for rock climbers, but this specific design doesn’t seem capable of that.

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#45

Post by dogma1138 »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #39
dogma1138 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A hovercraft doesn’t fly not because the wing in ground effect but because it doesn’t have 6 degrees of freedom which constitutes flying. A sub or a torpedo can fly through the water just like an airplane or a missile do through air.

Does an ekranoplan "fly" then ?

Can it move in 6 degrees of freedom?

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#46

Post by simion314 »

I am wondering if you could use this technology to create a hovercraft like vehicle that anybody could drive around, maybe pickup the victim. If the flight altitude and speeds are low a computer could handle all the tricky parts and the driver would just point the direction, in case of problems it would land in a few seconds (maybe this exists already but are not popular)

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#47

Post by elil17 »

treetoppin wrote: post #37

Pretty cool usage scenario, since everyone can imagine a flying hero coming in to save the day. That being said, this feels like a solution looking for a problem. I am sure there are specific areas of responsibility that would benefit from a rapidly deployable single medic carrying a small triage kit with no patient return capability, but they are probably few and far between (especially when you factor in the above…

I agree that a jet pack isn’t as useful as a helicopter, but they are way, way cheaper. Medical helicopters cost millions of dollars and require expensive fuel and highly trained pilots. Jetpacks cost $100-300k, use a fraction of the fuel, and can be flown with a sports pilot license (much easier to acquire and maintain).

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#49

Post by Retric »

wil421 wrote: post #28
Retric wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Helicopters can reach people in this location just fine in a reasonable time, and more importantly bring people back. Limiting your comparison to a 400,000+$ experimental jet suit vs walking is deceptive. If cost that much of an issue, a paraglider costs 1/10th as much and are likely much safer to operate. Or if getting a single person on site is all you need, tiny helicopters cost as low as 50k new.

A medivac out of the Grand Canyon can cost $15k. If you could use a $400k jet pack to stabilize someone until a ground crew gets there it could be a win for everyone.

Multi million dollar helicopters large enough to remove people from the grand cannon plus a crew cost 15k per flight. A single person helicopter’s cost as low as 50k brand new and thus less per flight than this thing.

Re: Great North Air Ambulance trials paramedic jet suit

#50

Post by NoOneNew »

itsoktocry wrote: post #30
Retric wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Helicopters can reach people in this location just fine in a reasonable time, and more importantly bring people back. Limiting your comparison to a 400,000+$ experimental jet suit vs walking is deceptive. If cost that much of an issue, a paraglider costs 1/10th as much and are likely much safer to operate. Or if getting a single person on site is all you need, tiny helicopters cost as low as 50k new.

> Helicopters can reach people just fine in a reasonable time Try to imagine a world where helicopters work in some rescue situations, but not so well in others.

Rain? High winds? I doubt a 250 pound dude in a jetpack is going to fair any better than 15,000 pound copter.

Tight areas... maybe. But if the tree canopy is too tight, I don't see how a dude with a jetpack is truly going to navigate that efficiently. They'll just find a near by clearing to land and hoof over... which, the same can be said of someone in a copter. Though, the one from the copter can ruck 70+ pounds of life saving medical equipment because they're not carrying jetpack equipment.

Forest Fires? I mean, what advantage do they have to smokejumpers? All that extra jetpack gear means less firefighting gear on them.

Look, it's cool. It's awesome. I also want to be the first person to get a DUI in a jetpack. But for the price of a cheap helicopter and going to a scenario such as a fell (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fell)... a less complex helicopter that can ACTUALLY carry gear seems like the smarter investment for a search/rescue department.

Post reply on HN