People do pay 5K for just a meeting?
No, the company does.
Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes
151–160 of 488 posts
Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes
#152There are many reasons why Boeing and Airbus have not entered the supersonic market, the most important being that there is simply very limited appetite for supersonic travel other than for novelty purposes. It's much more economical to build big, subsonic airliners but increase the comfort and level of service.
The Concorde is the most uncomfortably small aircraft that I've ever been aboard. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone over 5'9"/180lbs...though I guess that's a non-issue now (except for as a museum attraction).
My dad flew it once because he got "bumped up" from First class on the flight he normally took. His reaction was more or less "meh." First on the 747 was more comfortable and arriving a few hours earlier meant he had to grab dinner in London when he arrived rather than having a nice meal in First on the plane.
Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes
#153Pretty amazing that materials science (lighter, carbon-fiber aircraft; hotter, more efficient/powerful turbines) has made this economic. Concorde never was. NYC-LON seems like the one market where this enables something fundamentally new (well, Concorde did); single-day business trips between two major business centers which were otherwise a full day apart. Transpacific flights would be nice, too, but cutting an alre…
> I personally would generally prefer an F cabin + great Ka-band Internet for 14h, vs. a coach/Concorde sized seat for 7h. Agreed. I spent 5 of the most uncomfortable hours of my life on an airplane from JFK to San Diego, being 6'1 and not particularly slim. Thereafter, I upgraded my seats on that flight to Economy Plus. I guess I could stand a 2 hour flight like that, but not too much more. Getting me there faster,…
I can almost guarantee that you will not be cramped in these planes. They're selling it as an alternative to business class.
Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if the "no booms over land" rule will always remain in force. When I was a child, the planes from Whiteman AFB broke that rule quite often. It was interesting to hear the boom over the phone when speaking with a school friend who lived say eight miles away, and then immediately hear the whole house shaking when the plane got to my end of the circuit. It would have been annoying at night, I suppose, but durin…
You may not have minded your entire house shaking, but most would probably quickly grow to resent such unnecessary disruption. It's a good way to kick everyone in a large region out of their zone. If this was a constant occurrence, work may quickly cease, or become greatly diminished.
Sure, but these were 1980s-era fighter/trainer jets flying at probably 1000 ft., and it only shook the whole house when they flew pretty close. Other times one might only hear the boom when outside. I think a passenger craft of recent design of recent materials, flying at 40k ft. could do much better, even before routing to avoid populated areas. I don't think anyone, even those who live on ranches in the Dakotas, really has a right not to hear a noise during the daytime.
Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes
#155The airline industry, stagnant since the 1960's is ripe for disruption.
Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes
#156Pretty amazing that materials science (lighter, carbon-fiber aircraft; hotter, more efficient/powerful turbines) has made this economic. Concorde never was. NYC-LON seems like the one market where this enables something fundamentally new (well, Concorde did); single-day business trips between two major business centers which were otherwise a full day apart. Transpacific flights would be nice, too, but cutting an alre…
> Transpacific flights would be nice, too, but cutting an already absurdly long flight in half doesn't make as big a difference.
As someone who travels to the south pacific every year (mostly in economy seating), I strongly disagree. 15h flights are no picnic, in any class. I'll stand if it would get me there in 6-7h - that is a dream.
Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes
#157Pretty amazing that materials science (lighter, carbon-fiber aircraft; hotter, more efficient/powerful turbines) has made this economic. Concorde never was. NYC-LON seems like the one market where this enables something fundamentally new (well, Concorde did); single-day business trips between two major business centers which were otherwise a full day apart. Transpacific flights would be nice, too, but cutting an alre…
If they could make it quiet enough to go over land, transcontinental US flights would be great; LA/NY in 2.5 hours would likely have a pretty high demand. [edit] As someone who flies LA/DC fairly regularly I do have to mention my favorite record of the SR-71 doing that flight in under 65 minutes.
Yes- due to the time change, heading east from coast to coast is practically a day away as well.
Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes
#158Excellent job of trolling us.
Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes
#159And the environmental impact is... what? Amazing that this is not a consideration, especially since we are now in emergency territory: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/21/global-wa... It's great for you to leave SF in the morning, go to Sydney to watch the opera and be back in SF by midnight. But is the environmental impact of you doing that worth it for everyone else?
Absolutely worth it. We live in the future. If you can fly half way around the world to watch an opera and be home by midnight, do it. Riding your bicycle to work isn't going to save the planet, neither is reconsidering a flight. Environmental concerns should be that of multi-national corporations and governments. The 1% flying around the world isn't killing the planet. It's industrial output from cattle and energy p…
Riding a bicycle to work arguably does a lot more to save the planet than flying on a more fuel efficient airplane, if for no other reason than the indirect benefits of taking a car off the road.
Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes
#160Fastest jet in the world still doesn't solve tarmac delays at JFK.
Correct-- the real problem with air travel isn't the flight time but the terrible and inefficient process on the ground with security, customs, baggage claim. I'd much prefer a longer flight in a slower, less aerodynamic plane that was safer and roomier.
Roomier classes in planes (as well as private air terminals for private planes) are all things that pretty much exist today; you just need to be willing and able to pay a huge premium for them. (Both because the costs are higher and they're priced for a less-sensitive clientele.)