[HN Gopher] Ron Patrick's Street-Legal Jet Powered Volkswagen Be...
___________________________________________________________________
Ron Patrick's Street-Legal Jet Powered Volkswagen Beetle (2006)
Author : 1317
Score : 145 points
Date : 2023-10-05 13:45 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.ronpatrickstuff.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.ronpatrickstuff.com)
| ynoxinul wrote:
| Apparently the post is from 2006. I wonder if this contraption is
| still street-legal.
| K0balt wrote:
| It would be legal to run it on the factory engine, at which
| point the jet is just cargo. If you start the jet on a public
| road, it could be considered a public nuisance, reckless
| driving, etc.
|
| If a the vehicle presents a clear and present danger of any
| kind it is a-priory a ticketable offence at least. With the jet
| off, it poses no such danger.
| moate wrote:
| You can own a car, you can own a flamethrower, you can't fire
| your flamethrower out of your car while driving on public
| roads.
| psychlops wrote:
| I'm certain an officer could find all sorts of reasons to
| ticket that vehicle if inspired.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| And for California, don't forget "Exhibition of speed" which
| is a rather nasty ticket to end up with.
| gpderetta wrote:
| what I really want to know if he ever finished his scooter!
| avg_dev wrote:
| nice... does anyone remember a K Car with a supercar engine? that
| was not quite as crazy as this one, no jet engine, but it was
| nice. i can't seem to find it but i remember reading about this
| "sleeper car".
| [deleted]
| brucethemoose2 wrote:
| Crazy engine swaps are not uncommon. There are some Fiat 500s
| and such with v8 double motorcycle engines, wankels or even
| v12s and racecar v6s:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A52W20Z38Bw
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6SZuionhqQ
|
| A turbine _is_ relatively exotic, if only because they are even
| more impractical.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| IIRC someone put a turbocharged 7L smallblock V8 in the back
| of a Lotus Exige, though they had to lengthen the chassis to
| make it fit.
| whynotmaybe wrote:
| Even a snowblower with a HEMI...
|
| https://www.ign.com/articles/2005/06/22/that-thing-got-a-
| hem...
| brk wrote:
| This is a hacker classic. Would be curious to know what
| eventually became of it.
| JoblessWonder wrote:
| Can someone ELI20 how one would convert a turboshaft engine to a
| turbojet engine?
| mr_toad wrote:
| Basically you just remove the shaft.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| And put a nozzle on the exhaust.
| JoblessWonder wrote:
| Ah, that makes sense. Thank you!
| rmason wrote:
| How did Jay Leno not get this car on his TV show when he had it?
| He still is posting episodes to YouTube so it is still possible.
| latchkey wrote:
| _Discussions on similar submissions:_
|
| _Jet Powered Volkswagen Beetle_
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28349589 (August 29, 2021 --
| 2 points, 1 comments)
|
| _Ron Patrick 's Street-Legal Jet Powered Volkswagen Beetle
| (2006)_ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16513835 (March 4,
| 2018 -- 156 points, 60 comments)
|
| _Street-Legal Jet Powered Volkswagen Beetle_
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5384390 (March 15, 2013 -- 6
| points, 2 comments)
|
| _Street Legal Jet Powered Beetle (2006)_
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=831185 (September 18, 2009
| -- 76 points, 23 comments)
| dang wrote:
| Thanks! Here's a great subthread from one of those:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16524533
|
| (I just added it to https://news.ycombinator.com/highlights)
| latchkey wrote:
| @dang I wonder why we don't just generate these things at the
| bottom of every article? My extension does it already, but I
| feel like it would help a lot as a core feature.
| hansoolo wrote:
| Wouldn't help me unfortunately, as I am reading HN on an
| android app. But good idea.
| dang wrote:
| The lists that I post, and that most users post, are
| reviewed to include only the interesting threads. This
| makes them more valuable to readers, since the odds of
| going on a click trip to something boring are much lower.
|
| Rather than autogenerating them, I think what we'll do is
| add software support for the community to collaborate on
| the 'related 'list for a post. And it needn't just link to
| related HN threads - it can be related URLs on the same
| story, for example.
|
| When we'll actually get to this is another question of
| course...
| latchkey wrote:
| Good points. Previously [0], in your list, it doesn't
| include the number of points, as well as the calendar
| day, which is something that my generator includes and
| helps prevent click trips.
|
| To filter further, the list could just include posts with
| some points + comments ratio math. Also filter out
| similar posts within a short timeframe, if two posts
| happen within a week of each other, pick the one with the
| better ratio math.
|
| No need to involve the community in moderation a second
| time, since they've already involved themselves with
| points/comments to begin with.
|
| [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37768936
| xrd wrote:
| This should be retitled "Now I'm going to finish adding jet
| engines to my wife's scooter."
| mindslight wrote:
| The scooter seems like it could be a poor idea due to
| asymmetric thrust, and I have to wonder if he just mocked it up
| in jest. It does look pretty awesome though.
| [deleted]
| grecy wrote:
| I'm a little shocked there's no 1/4 mile time.
|
| Surely when you strap a jet engine to a Beetle you need to find
| out how fast it goes!
| dotancohen wrote:
| Quick, not fast. Low 1/4 times are mostly associated with
| acceleration, not speed.
| omginternets wrote:
| How on earth is it street legal to emit a high-pressure plume of
| jet exhaust behind you?
| nikanj wrote:
| 'Murica
| dzdt wrote:
| Its street legal to drive using the standard motor with the jet
| engine OFF.
| aidos wrote:
| > That doesn't stop me from the occasional blast on the
| highway though.
| skeaker wrote:
| Something being road-illegal doesn't stop you from doing it
| anyways...
| omginternets wrote:
| Oooh, it's a hybrid!
| dylan604 wrote:
| "Hmmm, the car has two engines making the car a hybrid so
| maybe we can drive in the commuter lanes along with the
| Toyota Priuses. "
| omginternets wrote:
| Imagine being the cop who has to argue over the ticket
| with that guy ^^
| [deleted]
| ceejayoz wrote:
| "I'm... gonna park a little further back."
| [deleted]
| dylan604 wrote:
| There's a paragraph and photo of this very thing in the
| TFA
| mindslight wrote:
| We live in a society where things are legal by default. Why
| would adding a jet engine to a car be a priori illegal? If he
| harms somebody or otherwise causes damage, that itself is
| what's illegal and he'd be liable regardless of motor vehicle
| regulations. If this mod became a larger trend, especially
| consumer-available, then regulations would be implemented to
| head it off. But for a few lone instances it's not particularly
| necessary.
| shortcake27 wrote:
| 20 years ago in Australia my car got canaried because I had
| LPG and a pod filter, which was illegal because you were only
| allowed 1 modification to the intake system. I am 100%
| confident that if I strapped a jet to the car, it would be
| illegal. As it should be. If you want to do extremely
| dangerous modifications, do it on your own property. Not a
| public road where you risk killing a family of 5.
| mindslight wrote:
| You're speaking from an Australian perspective about _what
| is_ , to make an otherwise unsupported argument about what
| _should be_ in the US. I 'll be one of the first to point
| out problems and blindspots from the American conception of
| "freedom", but in this case it seems highly appropriate.
| You yourself even got bit by overregulation for something
| seemingly reasonable and forward-looking, and yet you're
| still reflexively defending it!
|
| In my estimation your example "family of 5" is at much more
| risk from widespread unnecessarily-high bro-dozer trucks
| than a single engineer personally adding a jet engine to
| his car while seemingly being very in touch with the
| dangers of operating it. In fact given the severe disparity
| in other vehicle crash survivability statistics between
| coupes and trucks, I've got to wonder if this car isn't
| still _individually safer_ than a casually-driven pickup
| truck.
| gafferongames wrote:
| As an Australian-American living in the US I can confirm
| that the Australian concept of law (aka Nanny State)
| would ensure that this modification is illegal by
| default. Think of the children.
| civilitty wrote:
| Children don't really fit in the intake so it shouldn't
| be a problem
| historyTeach123 wrote:
| He didn't modify the car's original factory system. He
| simply added onto it, he added a second independent system.
|
| Tbh I kinda agree this is a bit ridiculous to assume it's
| safe to drive on the road though.
| cortesoft wrote:
| In California, you have to register your car and have it pass
| a smog test. How would this pass that?
| btilly wrote:
| Just drive on the gasoline engine.
| lawlessone wrote:
| I am not in the US, but where i am afaik anything that
| modifies the car like this would have to go through some sort
| of recertification process.
|
| It would be perfectly legal on private property but not
| public roads
| throwaway20304 wrote:
| Well not sure where you are, but where in EU I am, you can
| modify the insides of your car (people attach entire
| apartments to the insides of their cars...), and there's
| nothing wrong about stuff sticking outside - you just need
| to attach a red flag if it's over 1.5m out of the car
| (maybe red flame would be enough?).
|
| The modified rear door might be a problem, but where I am
| you could simply keep the original open, or detach it.
| olyjohn wrote:
| In this case the law has already been written. It's not a
| CARB-approved, nor EPA compliant engine. You're not allowed
| to run it on the street. The law is written so that
| everything you do to a car's emission system is illegal by
| default. To make any engine modifications in California, the
| part must be CARB approved and have a compliance sticker on
| it. Engine swaps in California are legal, as long as the
| engine being swapped is at least as new as the engine in the
| vehicle and meets the same regulatory requirements. Which
| means you swap in another EPA/CARB approved engine, but not a
| jet engine.
| Miserlou57 wrote:
| My buddy (a car guy) from Mountain View told me he could hear
| this thing on 280 late at night every now and then. Anyone else?
| Aurornis wrote:
| Awesome project, but are there any actual videos of it running
| the jet engine?
|
| He says the jet engine moves 11,000 CFM of air, but that air can
| only come through the windows and the sunroof. Pulling 183 cubic
| feet of air per second through those little openings while
| sitting in the drivers seat isn't going to work. Just try to do
| the math on how fast that air would have to be moving through
| those windows.
|
| Cool show piece though.
| samtho wrote:
| This not a typical low-bypass, cigar-type turbofan jet engine
| you see on airplanes, rather, it's a modified turboshaft jet
| engine used for helicopters, intended to provide longitudinal
| rotational energy. The air it moves from the intake is a
| fraction of what it produces as the combustion process itself
| results in gasses being chemically formed. There is no
| propeller or fan on this engine - it's closer to a rocket than
| what we think of as a jet.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Yes, there's video online.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCqxWhKe_tA
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zNdkXwFQ3c
|
| (Noise warning, for obvious reasons.)
| avg_dev wrote:
| I see
|
| > I don't know how fast the car will go and probably never
| will. The car was built to thrill me, not kill me. That
| doesn't stop me from the occasional blast on the highway
| though.
|
| but I am unsure if that means he has never driven it using
| the jet engine, or whether the engine even will power the car
| or just kinda runs on its own. I'm curious to see it go at
| all under jet engine power.
|
| Edit: maybe this is it
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-ipYAl3o40
| jefftk wrote:
| That videos's an original Beetle, not a New Beetle.
| dmurray wrote:
| I think he means he's used it plenty, but hasn't tried to
| max out the speed.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| That's my reading as well.
|
| I have a vague memory of this site or an interview
| previously saying he got up to 130 mph once, before
| deciding he'd rather not find out what speed a VW Beetle
| lifts off the pavement.
| sokoloff wrote:
| Give 6 sq ft for openings, that's around 30 linear feet per
| second. ~30 feet per second is ~20 miles per hour. That's a
| stiff breeze, but it doesn't seem outrageous.
| [deleted]
| ralfd wrote:
| Comments from 2018:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16513835
| smohnot wrote:
| He had it listed on Craigslist a few years ago... for $550k.
| Anyone know the current status of it?
|
| https://www.autoevolution.com/news/get-yourself-the-iconic-j...
| stergios wrote:
| It's still sitting in his shop. RP is not going to sell it.
| KennyBlanken wrote:
| I think it's more that like most modded / custom car owners,
| he thinks that it's reasonable to set an asking price
| according to the following formula:
|
| (Cost of car) + (Cost of Mods) + (My time x some magical
| hourly rate) = reasonable asking price
|
| The more sane of them add in a multiplier, like say .5 to .8.
| Or leave out their time.
|
| Reality is:
|
| What 1 person among the people who hear about the sale will
| pay = reasonable asking price
| historyTeach123 wrote:
| [flagged]
| hrichards wrote:
| Seems like a good time to ask this question that has been bugging
| me forever, since all the HN jet nerds will be drawn to this
| thread:
|
| Why hasn't anyone made a hybrid car that uses a gasoline-powered
| turbine generator to charge its batteries instead of a piston
| engine?
|
| I'd imagine that hooking up such an engine directly to the
| drivetrain like in a Prius would be difficult, but surely a small
| turbine with one hell of a muffler running a generator (similar
| to a natural gas power plant), both running only at their peak
| efficiency RPMs, would yield a very efficient car that could
| still use the extant gasoline infrastructure.
|
| I'm sure there are very interesting reasons, either due cost,
| noise, reliability, or durability, that this idea hasn't taken
| off, and I'm very interested to hear y'all's thoughts on the
| subject. Or maybe there has been progress in this area, and I'd
| love to see some links!
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Sounds like you just described a hybrid, only needs a larger
| tank.
| usrusr wrote:
| I've been wondering about this very same question a lot myself
| and accidentally stumbled across the answer just a few days
| ago: Efficiency of turbines smaller than grid scale is simply
| not anywhere close to what piston engines can do at e.g. car
| size. Even at naval scale, turbines only win in use cases where
| power density is more important than fuel efficiency.
| Helicopters are deep in the (specific) camp of power density
| beats efficiency because carrying a heavier but more efficient
| engine would easily eat the fuel savings. Fixed wing aircraft
| gain range by climbing high, but up there both efficiency and
| power density of piston engines decreases dramatically with
| decreasing air density, so they are also in the camp of power
| density over efficiency (turbines are also affected, but not
| quite as much).
|
| Note that despite all this, the Otto Aviation 500L that is all
| about fuel efficiency at high altitudes uses a piston engine
| (they probably put a lot of effort into their turbocharger,
| those can lessen the impact of thin air)
| KennyBlanken wrote:
| The bit about the naval use and efficiency isn't quite
| accurate.
|
| The issue isn't that they're not efficient. It's that they
| are only efficient at high power level, and the minimum power
| level they're efficient at (and even their minimum power
| level, period) - is quite high. To compare: Britain's current
| aircraft carrier has four diesels that total 40MW...combined
| those diesels equal one of its two 40MW turbines.
|
| This minimum power level is why jet airplanes have an APU,
| and often taxi with just one engine running, with the second
| started up with enough time to get up to operating
| temperature for takeoff.
|
| Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_MT30
|
| ~40MW, minimum efficient power level 25MW.
|
| 25MW, even if it's very efficient in terms of turning
| kerosene into shaft power, means the ship is moving really
| fast, and thus there's enormous fuel consumption and drag.
| anjel wrote:
| Celebrity and Cunard built a few Cruise ships that use
| turbines to generate power to its electric motor
| propulsion.[1] They regret the endeavor owing to cost of
| operation.[2]
|
| [1]https://www.ge.com/gas-power/industries/cruise-lines
|
| [2]https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1202425
| xattt wrote:
| I don't have the source at hand, but a gas turbine is
| ridiculously inefficient for variable loads. At idle, fuel
| consumption can be ~35% of what it is at full power.
|
| It would only need to charge for short time, and subsequently
| shut off. When a charge top-up is required, startup would be
| another rigamarole.
|
| Now, rotary engines, that's a different story...
| playworker wrote:
| https://www.mazda.co.uk/cars/mazda-mx-30-r-ev/
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > Why hasn't anyone made a hybrid car that uses a gasoline-
| powered turbine generator to charge its batteries instead of a
| piston engine?
|
| Because turbine engines have some pretty serious downsides.
| Compared to a piston engine, they guzzle fuel [1], they're
| pretty complex to repair (which is one of the problems Ukraine
| is facing), they spin at absurd RPMs which means that they need
| some serious housing to not turn into a shrapnel dispenser in
| case of an engine failure or accident, and they produce an
| awful lot of hot exhaust gas at high velocity that needs to be
| dissipated somewhere - down isn't OK because it will melt the
| asphalt, sideways is not OK because it will melt or injure
| anyone and anything next to the car, and upwards carries
| serious risks as well (e.g. if you're in a tunnel).
|
| [1] https://www.augsburger-allgemeine.de/politik/panzer-
| vergleic...
| historyTeach123 wrote:
| [flagged]
| jabl wrote:
| As mentioned in a sibling comment, turbines don't scale down
| very well. Boundary layer friction gets relatively worse for
| smaller turbines, and AFAIU small turbines have relatively
| larger inefficiency due to air leaking past between the blades
| and the casing, etc.
|
| There's a couple of companies working on recuperated turbine
| engines for small aircraft in the few hundred kW range, remains
| to be seen whether any of these will succeed.
| iancmceachern wrote:
| The military has made several "micro turbine generators" Here
| is a report on one:
|
| https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA515623
|
| My guess the answer to your question would be cost.
| h2odragon wrote:
| i think even the tiny, model jet engines used in radio control
| planes are both very hot, and move lots of air. both of which
| are hard to tame to the point of making them comfortable to
| coexist with on a city street in large herds.
|
| I still want one. direct the exhaust forward, dump in a little
| extra fuel, and instant snowblower / flamethrower. Makes that
| pesky crosswalk crowd just melt away.
| jacquesm wrote:
| And turns it into a skating rink five minutes later. You want
| the snow to go away, not to change into liquid water on a
| sub-zero stone substrate.
| h2odragon wrote:
| Excellent point, but i must rebut: (a) i'm already on my
| way by then, and (b) FIRE! </beavis>
| rainbowzootsuit wrote:
| It's a(t least one) thing. Test run before the snow gets too
| deep:
|
| Jet Powered Blower
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcEkt5vQTVQ
| clucas wrote:
| Having an ICE that drives a generator (alternator?) to power a
| traction motor(s), without being mechanically linked to the
| drivetrain, is how diesel locomotives operate. I believe the
| concept also has been (is being?) explored for linehaul trucks.
| But I'm not sure what constraints there are on passenger
| vehicles though... I'm also curious.
|
| If I had to guess, I would bet that the constraints are more
| commercial than physical... hybrids are already very efficient,
| so the market for such a vehicle would probably not justify the
| engineering costs. But that's just a guess!
| linkjuice4all wrote:
| Union Pacific tried using turbines in the 50s[0] but fuel
| consumption was an issue (I think they had to keep the
| turbine idling and maybe throttling wasn't as easy?). Also
| mentioned in the wiki article was the low-grade fuel they
| were used was able to be used for plastic manufacturing
| instead of just burning it.
|
| The bigger difference between locomotive applications and GPs
| question is around charging batteries as opposed to running
| motors or directly turning the wheels. Efficiency of the
| smaller turbine is mentioned in another comment - but I have
| to imagine you'd also see some loses going from turbine to
| generator to battery and then to electric motor.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Pacific_GTELs
| thebutcher wrote:
| I think someone is making this, or maybe I misunderstood your
| question. The Ariel Hipercar uses a jet engine to power it's 4
| electric engines. I think it's just used as a range extender,
| and last I saw they didn't have it working yet. It's been a
| while since I checked up on the car.
|
| EDIT: I just read this article from 2023 that says the turbine
| engine still isn't working:
| https://www.evo.co.uk/ariel/206120/ariel-hipercar-prototype-...
| TuesdayNights wrote:
| Arnold Schwarzenegger's Hummer from the early 2000's is setup
| like this -- 100mpg with bio-diesel. I think this is the
| original article I read about his car's creator, Johnathan
| Goodwin, from years ago.
|
| https://www.autoblog.com/amp/2007/10/20/biodiesel-turbine-su...
| Scene_Cast2 wrote:
| To add to the discussion - the M1 Abrams tank uses a turbine. I
| don't know how that's linked up to the tracks though.
| ithkuil wrote:
| Interestingly, that engine has good power to weight ratio,
| has a better noise profile (higher pitched noise, that
| doesn't transmit far, albeit louder locally), can operate
| with a variety of fuels, and can handle arctic conditions.
|
| The downside is that it consumes 50% more fuel than a
| comparable diesel engine.
| efitz wrote:
| Former M1 Abrams crewman (19K). It has an automatic
| transmission.
| shagie wrote:
| I recently stumbled into a couple of YouTube videos on turret
| design for tanks.
|
| * What actually IS an "Oscillating" turret?
| https://youtu.be/46k7uhPHpLY
|
| * What happened to Rear-Mounted Turrets?
| https://youtu.be/g5DOf2eZW3Y
|
| At 4:24 in the rear mounted turret video it touches on the
| aspects of modern transmission.
| usrusr wrote:
| "The car has two engines: the production gasoline engine in the
| front driving the front wheels and the jet engine in the back."
|
| Careful wording to give the impression that the drive shaft of
| the helicopter turbine would be connected to the rear wheels,
| without actually claiming that it is. So it's a car with a large
| flame thrower in the back, minor The Boring Company vibes.
|
| Well possible that the author might have had more fun writing
| than building/driving. (I do love the incredulous tone of "#1
| Does this mean I'm the right hands?")
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| It produces thrust in the normal way a jet engine aircraft
| does... with high exhaust velocity. From the videos you can see
| shock diamonds, so it is producing supersonic exhaust.
| alright2565 wrote:
| I don't think so. In another part he mentions
|
| > This is a helicopter turboshaft engine that was converted to
| a jet engine
|
| I can't see a way to get rotary power out of this engine after
| the modifications.
| ben7799 wrote:
| For a stunt car like this there's not a huge need or desire to
| have it powering the wheels at all.
|
| The direct air thrust will push the car just fine, doesn't need
| a transmission, has zero issues with wheel spin or traction,
| and so then doesn't require re-engineering the wheels/tires and
| then the suspension and/or chassis to handle 1350hp.
| generalizations wrote:
| > You have to give the California Department of Motor Vehicles
| (the DMV) credit for creativity on this one. A DMV insider has
| disclosed to me that the DMV has made a formal request to a
| federal agency to rule if my Beetle constitutes a threat to
| national security based on what could happen if it got into the
| wrong hands. This raises three questions in my mind: #1 Does this
| mean I'm the right hands? #2 If someone with the name "b_laden13"
| is the highest eBay bidder for my Beetle can I refuse his offer
| even if he has the prestigious eBay Red Shooting Star feedback
| rating (the highest)? #3 Would this affect my eBay rating?
|
| Wonder if they ever found a way to give the guy a ticket.
| literarylover wrote:
| [dead]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-10-05 23:00 UTC)