Live data from Hacker News

Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

boom.aero

191–200 of 488 posts

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#191
post #3

Sorry but is "Boom" really a good name for an aircraft company? I get it's supersonic, but my first association was an exploding airplane.

Well it hasn't hurt "Bomb ba dear" :-) (that is the pronunciation I've heard for Bombardier) So no, name is probably not an issue. Getting a passenger plane to market without any other supporting business, that is much much harder than explaining the name. Not a lot of people can raise funds for 10 years of expensive runway (no pun intended).

Bomb bar dee eh

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#192
Hi - I'm Blake, Founder/CEO at Boom. After watching no tangible progress in supersonics since Concorde was shut down, I started Boom because I want supersonic flight in our lifetime. Not just as a private jet, but something most anyone can afford to fly.

Will try to answer as many questions here as I can.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#193
post #68

It describes their values as something like 'fly long distance in the morning, do a bunch of meetings there, and be back before the end of the day'. Does it make sense to travel 20,000km on one day to make a bunch of meetings, spending 15,000$? I feel that better tele-presence just makes more sense.

You have just described a huge fraction of my adult life. Take my word for it, being there in person is still the only way to close critical business deals.

Its also not just closing a single deal but also creating the relationship for the next X deals.

(Note: I'm sure parent understands this.)

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#194
post #68

It describes their values as something like 'fly long distance in the morning, do a bunch of meetings there, and be back before the end of the day'. Does it make sense to travel 20,000km on one day to make a bunch of meetings, spending 15,000$? I feel that better tele-presence just makes more sense.

It's hard to buy your client a beer over tele-presence.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#195

Hi - I'm Blake, Founder/CEO at Boom. After watching no tangible progress in supersonics since Concorde was shut down, I started Boom because I want supersonic flight in our lifetime. Not just as a private jet, but something most anyone can afford to fly. Will try to answer as many questions here as I can.

How does the environmental impact per passenger compare to a modern passenger jet?

Do you actually think most anyone can afford $5000 round trip to London?

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#196
post #68

It describes their values as something like 'fly long distance in the morning, do a bunch of meetings there, and be back before the end of the day'. Does it make sense to travel 20,000km on one day to make a bunch of meetings, spending 15,000$? I feel that better tele-presence just makes more sense.

It's hard to buy your client a beer over tele-presence.

Again, seems like a much simpler problem to solve rather than super-sonic passenger aircraft.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very skeptical this little company can go all the way with this. Look at how hard it is to get a new automobile company up and running. Tesla almost went completely bankrupt more than once. I do think there is a need and market for faster than sound air travel. We have the technology to even minimize the sonic booms for over land travel. Still, it would take an enormous amount of capital to get a new company up and r…

Yes, we've taken a lot of inspiration from what Elon has accomplished at SpaceX and Tesla. Supersonics are technically challenging and capitally intensive. But the world should have faster travel—and it doesn't look like the big aerospace companies are about to make it happen. (I'm a founder at Boom)

Ofcourse everybody is a little skeptical but I think it's great that you took the first step!

I hope in 10 years or so we say: yeah 10 years back we laughed at Boom but now they are booming business.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#198

Hi - I'm Blake, Founder/CEO at Boom. After watching no tangible progress in supersonics since Concorde was shut down, I started Boom because I want supersonic flight in our lifetime. Not just as a private jet, but something most anyone can afford to fly. Will try to answer as many questions here as I can.

Is SFO-NYC a feasible route for Boom?

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#199

Hi - I'm Blake, Founder/CEO at Boom. After watching no tangible progress in supersonics since Concorde was shut down, I started Boom because I want supersonic flight in our lifetime. Not just as a private jet, but something most anyone can afford to fly. Will try to answer as many questions here as I can.

[deleted]

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#200
post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt the cost would be low enough to support demand. Transonic (approximately Mach 0.80 - 1.2) flight uses significantly more fuel than subsonic flight does. Business jets like the Gulfstream G550 burn more fuel at M0.9 than regional Boeing 717(MD-95) at M0.75 with 4 times more passengers. The F-22 Raptor can supercruise at M1.6, with half the range compared to cruise at M0.85 similar to other fighters. If Boom ca…

The Boeing 747 has one of the lowest cost/passenger mile (CPM) of any aircraft, and cruises at Mach 0.85. Different aircraft have been optimized for different speeds, and while it is true that a supersonic aircraft will likely have a higher fuel cost than a comparable subsonic aircraft, the difference may not be as large as we currently think. There has never been a supersonic passenger aircraft built with modern tur…

The 747 efficiency drops off sharply above M0.85 cruise. I remember reading that the VC-25 (747-200 based) 100% thrust cruise speed is around M0.96 with considerable range penalty. The 747-400 has newer engines but pretty close 100% cruise speed. This is above the approved Mmo for the 747 and not authorized operationally.

Test pilots have reported that a Gulfstream G550 airframe can handle supersonic flight, and the BR710 turbofan engines can handle it. The limit is the engine intake design.

With an optimized intake, its entirely possible the fuel consumption at M2.2 would be comparable to ~M0.98

Post reply on HN