Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

boom.aero

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 488 posts

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#351

Post by mbesto »

elinchrome wrote: post #195
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.

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?

$5k is fairly standard for a first class ticket purchased a few weeks out. It's also much cheaper than a private jet and would yield the same, or similar, or possibly better results.

Here's another interesting subtle side effect. People on this plane would see it as an exclusive networking "club".

I can easily see finance professionals and executives loving this the whole concept.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#352

Post by stuaxo »

Pyxl101 wrote: post #203
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.

Exciting work! I'd be glad if supersonic flight was a reality again. How do you plan to tackle the challenge of opposition to supersonic flight? Overland supersonic flight has been banned in US and Europe because the loud noise of sonic booms annoyed residents that the planes flew over. Coastal residents continued to object to supersonic flight. Is there a path to offering transcontinental flights again, and if not,…

I thought it was used because they didn't want the brits and french to have the market for these planes.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#353

Post by jasonwatkinspdx »

jandrese wrote: post #298
azernik wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not quite. According to [1], what they'll be flying is actually a one-third-scale prototype, which I'd imagine is a lot easier to build. And they've already been going for two years. The real issue that I'm not seeing addressed is capital. No investors listed anywhere. [1] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-21/this-aeros... EDIT: Forgot to actually include the link.

That link didn't make me feel much better. They're planning to "tweak an off the shelf engine for supersonic speed". When I hear off the shelf engines, I think turbofans, but no amount of tweaking is going to make a turbofan work at supersonic speeds. It's possible they can get some military grade afterburning turbojets from somewhere, but it's not something you can buy off of the shelf. Their webpage has a bunch of…

> but no amount of tweaking is going to make a turbofan work at supersonic speeds

Sure they can. It's the inlet's job to slow the flow to subsonic. Turbofans have been used on supersonic military aircraft since the 1960's. Go read about intake ramps. Then learn about diverterless supersonic intakes.

You're yelling scam pretty loud for someone that clearly doesn't know basics of the topic area.

Edit: My guess is the engine they're standing in front of is a JT8 of some flavor, which have been heavily used by both military and commercial aircraft.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#354

Post by rory096 »

bscholl wrote: post #267
schwarrrtz wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i think that depends on how badass the copilot is

Brian Shul is a steely-eyed missile man. :-)

Nitpick: Walt Watson is the back-seater in question — Brian Shul was just the guy on the stick (and the author of the story, of course).

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#355

Post by rdl »

bscholl wrote: post #277
btilly wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elon Musk says that eventually we will move to VTOL supersonic electric jets, but he is too busy with other projects to implement it. Have you thought about this idea, and in what time frame do you think someone might try to implement it? Elon's basic idea is that air-breathing jets are limited to altitudes at which oxygen tops out, and then are mostly fighting drag from nitrogen. Electric ones can go to higher altit…

schwarrrtz and azernik nailed it. Today's batteries don't store enough energy for long international flights. There are some battery technologies in the lab (Google Lithium-air batteries) that might make this feasible, but they're not ready yet. Yet alone proven safe to carry passengers. As fans of speed, we want to bring supersonics to market as quickly as possible. So, we're only using core technologies that have f…

Batteries do make sense on aircraft in place of APUs for backup and start and such, of course, just not thrust.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#356

Post by wallacoloo »

putzdown wrote: post #319
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.

Terrific premise; I hope you succeed. But advice: 1. "boom" is not the right name. Explosions. Annoying/scary sonic boom. These are not the associations you're looking for. Try "glide," "zip"—something along those lines. 2. In your very first team picture I see a grumpy-looking fellow with hands in pockets. A few images on he's still there, now joined by another grump with crossed arms. These people look disengaged a…

> "boom" is not the right name. Explosions. Annoying/scary sonic boom. These are not the associations you're looking for. Try "glide," "zip"—something along those lines.

I'd have to disagree. The way I associate these words causes me to think of something "revolutionary" when I hear "boom". i.e., it's shaking up the market. Contrary to that, "glide" and "zip" (I know these are just examples) sound more soothing and definitely not attention-grabbing. If the aim of the company were to provide luxurious flight, then maybe that would be fitting. But as I see it, the company really does mean to shake things up, in which case their name is already fitting.

Obviously, everyone has their own opinions, but I thought sharing an opposing perspective would be useful in showing that it's definitely not a one-sided topic.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#357

Post by dboreham »

ceocoder wrote: post #322
rsync wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What will your pilots do, just as a for instance, if ... say a lone Cessna asks tower for his ground speed ... and then a bit later a navy F-18 pilot also asks tower for his ground speed ? What will they do in that situation ?

specially if the F-18 pilot is making sure that every bug smasher from Mount Whitney to the Mojave knows what true speed is. I've read and re-read that story so many times, each reading results in a fresh batch of goosebumps. I'd love to read the book (Sled Driver, I think?), but it is over $500 on Amazon. I wish they either ordered another print OR published as an ebook.

Yikes! I have two copies, having thought that I'd lost mine years ago -- bought a new one -- then found the original again.

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#358

Post by privong »

bscholl wrote: post #208
Pyxl101 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exciting work! I'd be glad if supersonic flight was a reality again. How do you plan to tackle the challenge of opposition to supersonic flight? Overland supersonic flight has been banned in US and Europe because the loud noise of sonic booms annoyed residents that the planes flew over. Coastal residents continued to object to supersonic flight. Is there a path to offering transcontinental flights again, and if not,…

Thanks! We are very excited to be doing this. We're starting out focused on long flights that are mostly over water, like New York - London or San Francisco - Shanghai. Around an airport, our airplane will be about as quiet as other new aircraft. The sonic boom will also be much quieter—and we'll continue to make future iterations even quieter. It's hard to say exactly when, but I expect the supersonic overland ban w…

> It's hard to say exactly when, but I expect the supersonic overland ban will be reversed in the coming years.

Can you elaborate on this? Is there a significant lobbying effort for this or is it something the FAA is considering of their own volition, to stimulate activity in this area?

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#359

Post by la6470 »

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.

Is it possible to raise a plane to space and just enough to fly at Mach 3 without friction for the major part of the flight and then gently enter the earth atmosphere to glide down to the final destination?

Re: Boom (YC W16) – Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

#360

Post by elliotec »

bscholl wrote: post #271
rdl wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if you should just sell exclusivity per company. Imagine if Goldman Sachs were the only bank in NYC with supersonic transport for staff and customers for 5-10y. That might be worth more to them than $5k per seat on every flight. Maybe also to a law firm. Etc. Exclusivity within a vertical is worth huge practical and status advantages.

TBH we really don't want to lock people out. I was disappointed that I never got to fly Concorde, not even once, and we want to open this to everyone (eventually make it routine).

Thank you for that.
Post reply on HN