Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes • Hacker News Board

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#211

Post by bscholl » Mon, Mar 21, 2016, 7:22 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #206

bscholl wrote: post #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.

Obviously, shortening an international flight provides the highest value for your first major route. How well can this scale down to domestic flights? Turning a 3-4 hour flight into a 60-90 minute flight, or a 90 minute flight into a 30 minute flight, appeals quite a bit. EDIT: your answer at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11330935 applies here. Do you have concrete plans to change those regulations? Do you hav…

Supersonics help most on long international flights. So that's the first focus. San Francisco - Los Angeles, so much time is spent on takeoff and landing that faster cruise doesn't help much. Hyperloop, self driving cars can help with these shorter trips.

As far as regulations, our first aircraft is much quieter than Concorde, and it will get quieter with future iterations. Altitude helps, but quieting the boom is mostly about nuances of aircraft shape.

Eventually, when you can get from San Fran to Tokyo faster than San Fran to New York, the rules will get updated.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#212

Post by JoshTriplett » Mon, Mar 21, 2016, 7:22 PM UTC

bscholl wrote: post #204

ADRIANFR wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is SFO-NYC a feasible route for Boom?

Unfortunately, there's a ban on supersonic travel over land in the US since the 1970s. When this is reversed, we can fly SFO-JFK in about 2:20.

What's the regulatory situation in countries other than the US? Europe, Asia, Canada, Mexico, South America?

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#213

Post by maho » Mon, Mar 21, 2016, 7:24 PM UTC

bscholl wrote: post #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.

I'm curious, since you posted a route and a ticket price: Will you be operating Boom as a new airline, or do you plan to sell your plane to other airlines?

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#214

Post by bscholl » Mon, Mar 21, 2016, 7:25 PM UTC

mmcclure wrote: post #202

elinchrome wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

> Do you actually think most anyone can afford $5000 round trip to London? I'm genuinely curious where you got "most anyone" from their marketing copy. I read it as "affordable for people flying business class," but that might be because I was thinking in the context of Concorde pricing. Edit: Derp, totally glossed over that part of the parent comment.

$5,000 isn't an "everyone every time" price, of course. But it's low enough for routine business travel. With more innovation (this is just V1!), we can improve fuel economy and reduce prices further.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#215

Post by bscholl » Mon, Mar 21, 2016, 7:28 PM UTC

maho wrote: post #213

bscholl wrote: post #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.

I'm curious, since you posted a route and a ticket price: Will you be operating Boom as a new airline, or do you plan to sell your plane to other airlines?

We're teaming with existing and new airlines to bring aircraft into service.

Posted ticket prices are based on what's profitable for airlines with the efficiency and performance of the airplane. Airlines will set the final prices, but we hope they will make tickets as affordable as possible!

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#216

Post by saryant » Mon, Mar 21, 2016, 7:28 PM UTC

rdl wrote: post #104

ckinnan wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I wonder if there's a market for premium private air terminals, or even entire airports.

That's what private planes are for.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#217

Post by skywhopper » Mon, Mar 21, 2016, 7:30 PM UTC

This is cool but I would love to see research and investment going into making planes big enough and (more importantly) efficient enough just to comfortably sit in.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#218

Post by fudged71 » Mon, Mar 21, 2016, 7:30 PM UTC

meritt wrote: post #21

Fastest jet in the world still doesn't solve tarmac delays at JFK.

What are the odds that VC's funneling cash into Boom would build dedicated airports for these? :)

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#219

Post by bscholl » Mon, Mar 21, 2016, 7:34 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #212

bscholl wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, there's a ban on supersonic travel over land in the US since the 1970s. When this is reversed, we can fly SFO-JFK in about 2:20.

What's the regulatory situation in countries other than the US? Europe, Asia, Canada, Mexico, South America?

It's complicated and unclear, unfortunately. We'll have to see how things unfold when the airplanes are flying.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#220

Post by sjm-lbm » Mon, Mar 21, 2016, 7:37 PM UTC

jessaustin wrote: post #188

sjm-lbm wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least one real-world test was conducted about how people acclimate to sonic booms[1] with an eye towards seeing how people would take SST airliners. It didn't go very well. In general, it seems that enough people do think it a hardship to kick up a fuss that will keep SSTs from being a reality over the US for awhile. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_sonic_boom_tests

You're right, it has been awhile since the mid-60s. If we were talking about flying F-104s and B-58s, that would be very relevant information. As I understand it, Boom are developing a new aircraft. They're probably aware of that test and indeed lots of other information about supersonic flight. This whole "engineering vs physics" question reminds me of the misunderstandings people have of modern radio technology. Ye…

I do generally agree with you, but I'm not really talking about engineering or physics, I'm talking about social acceptance.

If - via engineering, physics, magic or whatever - sonic booms can be minimized to the point of being indistinguishable from general background noise (or even only as intrusive as current subsonic airliners), I could be convinced that an SST project has a bright future. Until then, I don't think that they will - your first post mentioned that "the whole house shaking" didn't really seem to be hardship when it happened during the day; I'm merely commenting that there are some studies that indicate society as a whole isn't so accepting.