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

Regent – Electric coastal travel

regentcraft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 333 posts

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#131

Post by wolfram74 »

wthalheimer wrote: post #96
nradov wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wave heights in the 8-13ft range are common along the US west coast (Northeast Pacific Ocean) and that doesn't shut down commercial aviation at coastal airports. https://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/station_page.php?station=46042 But still there are many more protected waters where a WIG vehicle could be viable.

The specific tolerance within that 8-13ft range is driven by wave period. Long period waves lets us operate more towards that 13ft end because you can contour the waves.

Do you have plans for a larger next gen model? It would have even more clearance if it had a corresponding increase in wingspan, right?

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#133

Post by schoen »

wthalheimer wrote: post #88
mark242 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Could it make the Catalinas from California coastline? Yes -- but there is probably no business case where that makes sense. Presumably your launch points are San Pedro/Long Beach, Dana Point, or maybe Redondo. In all three cases, if you want to get to Avalon within 15 minutes, you're paying for the helicopter service. If you're okay with taking an hour, you're paying for the existing boat shuttles, which take a wh…

Depends on the price. All electric means we operate for about half the cost of an aircraft (and about 1/10th of a helicopter). Combine that with similar speeds to aircraft, convenience of not having to use an airport, and zero emissions - and the use case becomes very attractive. We have some prospective customers eyeing Catalina, but that's actually on the short end of our range at ~25 miles vs our 180 mile max. Shu…

If that became popular enough, would you eventually need something akin to air traffic control for those waterways? I'm not sure existing water navigation rules and protocols would be a good match for these gliders, because they might not be operated by experienced sailors, because their altitude is also a potential collision-avoidance factor, but most of all because of their speed.

I imagine other waterway users being frightened, but also having enough demand for coastal transportation in Southern California, specifically because of the speed, that you end up potentially operating dozens of these at a time in the same region.

(It looks like you answered part of that in a different part of the comments, but I'm still curious about the big picture.)

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#134

Post by jasonwatkinspdx »

qingcharles wrote: post #79
lastofthemojito wrote: post #63

I was initially skeptical, but seeing Mokulele Airlines (an airline serving Hawaii) flash by on the carousel made me consider that this might have at least some real-world uses. It's insane to me that the vast majority of inter-island travel in Hawaii (an archipelago where generally each island is visible from the next) is via jet aircraft. You have to spend hours (especially if you're checking bags) getting to the a…

Crazy. Suspended due to "the potential to bring drugs and homeless people to Kauaʻi".

This is a perennial favorite of transportation NIMBYs.

Where I live extending the light rail the last little bit over the river to Washington state is a no brainer, but it's been paralyzed by decades of opposition from suburbanites in Vancouver Wa. My friend's dad is/was one of the key activists. He'd stand in planning meetings and no joke scream about how "criminals" were gonna ride the train up, break into someone's house, steal their tv, then ride the train back. Lots of saying "crime train" over and over again.

We have solid data that building transit lines actually decreases crime. This man is a credentialed civil engineer. He rejected that evidence without consideration every time we put it in front of him.

I have zero respect for these people. If you talk to them for just a few seconds it becomes readily apparent the root is just straight up racism, but they don't wanna own it overtly.

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#135

Post by dancottrell »

wthalheimer wrote: post #119
simonw wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you considered having swappable batteries, so you can skip the recharging time entirely?

Definitely considered. Swapping means specialized training, specialized equipment (these batteries are thousands of lbs), and mass storages of batteries to be on-hand at your docks. All drive the cost higher. So far our customers have not indicated that the charge times cause them problems, and the cost savings are significant in charge vs swap. Plus, this way seagliders can potentially utilize the same charging infr…

Additionally, swapping adds overhead mass to provide that sort of modularity and invites wear and tear on connectors and seals. All things we remove or reduce by integrating the system and utilizing onboard charging.

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#136

Post by pnpnp »

oh_sigh wrote: post #89
qingcharles wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crazy. Suspended due to "the potential to bring drugs and homeless people to Kauaʻi".

Not at all. It seems they suspended it because of neverending lawsuits regarding environmental impact. Chopping up whales was apparently a big concern, so I suppose a ground effect service might alleviate some of those concerns(just kidding, I'm sure the environmental lawsuits were really just about control and not a genuine care for the environment)

That’s a great point, and also kind of insane to think about.

The area around Maui has TONS of whales part of the year… many of them breaching.

I wonder how high these things fly vs how high a humpback can jump out of the water. I think the rule is 1/2 of your wingspan to be in ground effect, but it has been a long time since I’ve studied the exact numbers.

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#137

Post by lchengify »

Have you looked at the Seattle area / PNW as a use case at all? I imagine the geography would be perfect for a solution like this.

Seattle has a pretty extensive ferry system that they are in the process of electrifying [1]. It's great for what ferries are, but I would love more options between islands. Some of the less popular options are limited seasonally, I imagine this is a matter of economics.

Also I can tell you that the ferries to / from Victoria Island fill up fast and require reserving slots in advance if you have a car. It's also a 3-ish hour ride that can be very unpleasant if you hit bad weather. I've often driven the long way around rather than do that trip.

[1] https://wsdot.wa.gov/construction-planning/major-projects/fe...

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#138

Post by jtsuken »

lastofthemojito wrote: post #63

I was initially skeptical, but seeing Mokulele Airlines (an airline serving Hawaii) flash by on the carousel made me consider that this might have at least some real-world uses. It's insane to me that the vast majority of inter-island travel in Hawaii (an archipelago where generally each island is visible from the next) is via jet aircraft. You have to spend hours (especially if you're checking bags) getting to the a…

To skip TSA nonsense you just need to skip TSA nonsense. Outside of the US airtravel is still relatively similar to rail. You have to be on time, you have to handle the baggage, but you can walk through xray and security within minutes and only need to show the ticket on your phone.

An electric wing-in-ground-effect aircraft still looks like an airplane and might still fall under the same regulations as any other airplane.

In any case TSA objectively does not add much security[1] and does cause issues e.g. for people who have names with similar spellings to those on a no-fly-list [2].

But that aside, the technology is great for short distance travel. Climbing to 2-5 thousand foot to travel some 50 miles is clearly insane.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_Security_Admini...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List#False_positives

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#139

Post by dancottrell »

w10-1 wrote: post #120

What's the legal authority permitting "seagliders" to carry passengers but escape aviation regulations? Or to use navigable waterways at high speed when other maritime users are severely restricted in speed? I doubt any historical exceptions would stand up to significant use. What's the real benefit? Actual ground effect is strong but very, very limited - to about the width of the wing. The (wallowing) demo flight is…

In addition to the other points mentioned, an electric propulsion system has many fewer moving parts than an IC system, less vibe as well and less harsh thermal considerations. There are no fluids to replace or maintain or plumb through the vehicle (no leaks to chase either), so reliability is arguably increased and its also an easier system to maintain.

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#140

Post by schoen »

baron816 wrote: post #14
lacker wrote: post #10

It would be pretty fantastic if this could go San Francisco to Los Angeles. A traditional plane flight takes so long at the airport, it ends up barely worth it. High speed rail in California would also be great, but they've been working on it for 15 years already, and at this rate, it doesn't look like the project will finish in the next 50 years.

Yeah a high speed ferry of Fisherman’s Wharf > Monterey > SLO > SB > LA > SD would be incredible. I’d pay a nice premium for that.

It seems like if they didn't have to deal with San Francisco Bay, these speeds could get them to Monterey in a bit over half an hour (!!).

But I bet navigating safely across the Bay and under the Golden Gate Bridge (probably in "hull" mode) could end up being a comparable amount of time in its own right. Having all that other marine traffic around in all directions (and maybe stricter noise restriction) is a big limitation.

Post reply on HN