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

211–220 of 333 posts

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#211

Post by fayylov »

dmurray wrote: post #201
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…

> 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. Why jets? In the Caribbean, where distances are longer, turboprop aircraft are standard for island hopping and I thought these made more economic sense for short distances.

[dead]

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#212

Post by mjamesaustin »

yard2010 wrote: post #208
jtsuken wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 air…

While I agree it's nonsense, I'm curious what would change without harming the personal security of everyone involved? I mean this system has many flaws but no one can steal a plane again and crash it into innocent people right?

Modern airport security is beyond useless. It's hugely wasteful and ineffective. https://www.vox.com/2016/5/17/11687014/tsa-against-airport-s...

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#213

Post by skrebbel »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #134
qingcharles wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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'…

I don’t completely follow, this is people living in a Portland suburb lobbying against getting a public transport connection? How is less infrastructure better?

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#214

Post by thecopy »

lelanthran wrote: post #207
KennyBlanken wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read on - what they were really afraid of was the dirty/smelly poors coming onto their precious island. You see the same BS with bike paths through residential neighborhoods. Despite studies showing that bike paths increase property values, residents bitch and moan about safety/crime. They basically figure that poor/non-white people will bike into their neighborhood and rape/pillage/burn everything. So you get a bunc…

> Despite studies showing that bike paths increase property values, Citation needed. This is an extraordinary claim; you are going to need more than one single study done on a tiny sample with no control variables.

Is it really extraordinary or unbelievable? Easier access to infrastructure which is quiet and environmentally friendly should reasonably not decrease property values?

I would definitely be more interested in a property with bike infrastructure, although that is just one tiny sample with no control variables:)

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#215

Post by beefield »

yard2010 wrote: post #208
jtsuken wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 air…

While I agree it's nonsense, I'm curious what would change without harming the personal security of everyone involved? I mean this system has many flaws but no one can steal a plane again and crash it into innocent people right?

As someone who carries a 20 cm metal rod through airport security every time and has not seen a single warning light ever popping up because of that, it is quite difficult for me to understand how the airport security is supposed to add safety against anyone who is willing to spend any time working around it - and who is motivated.

(For the curious, there is a titanium plate in my body due to an accident)

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#216

Post by macintux »

yard2010 wrote: post #208
jtsuken wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 air…

While I agree it's nonsense, I'm curious what would change without harming the personal security of everyone involved? I mean this system has many flaws but no one can steal a plane again and crash it into innocent people right?

That risk is effectively zero now due to locking cabin doors, to the point where actual pilots are the only ones who deliberately crash planes.

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#217

Post by lelanthran »

thecopy wrote: post #214
lelanthran wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Despite studies showing that bike paths increase property values, Citation needed. This is an extraordinary claim; you are going to need more than one single study done on a tiny sample with no control variables.

Is it really extraordinary or unbelievable? Easier access to infrastructure which is quiet and environmentally friendly should reasonably not decrease property values? I would definitely be more interested in a property with bike infrastructure, although that is just one tiny sample with no control variables:)

> Is it really extraordinary or unbelievable? Easier access to infrastructure which is quiet and environmentally friendly should reasonably not decrease property values?

Well, yes, when you're talking about residential areas. Home owners don't want a wall of strangers around their home all the time - it makes it difficult to spot the ones with ill-intent.

I mean, if that wasn't true, homes in gated communities wouldn't be more expensive than standalone houses.

> I would definitely be more interested in a property with bike infrastructure, although that is just one tiny sample with no control variables:)

You'd think that (I certainly did), but the price for homes in gated communities are far far higher than the equivalent in non-gated.

Which is why I want to see this hypothetical study that shows that residential areas closed to non-residents are cheaper than residential areas open to the public.

Because, a simple look at home prices shows this to be wildly untrue.

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#219

Post by molsongolden »

skrebbel wrote: post #213
jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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'…

I don’t completely follow, this is people living in a Portland suburb lobbying against getting a public transport connection? How is less infrastructure better?

This isn’t uncommon in suburbs. Some people care more about preventing easy access to their community than they do about having easy access to other communities.

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#220

Post by jasonwatkinspdx »

AYBABTME wrote: post #190
jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This man is factually a racist. I am not simply labeling him that because we disagree as you insinuate, having no actual information on the situation. And no, I see zero reason to tolerate what is clearly bad faith behavior.

In the text you shared, you imply that other readers should come to the conclusion that he's a racist because he's against public transit due to fear of crime being imported. But you made no connections as to how his claims of crime import were related to a race component. So it's understandable that readers might not find your "racist" labeling justified based on the facts that you shared. He might be a racist but b…

No, that is explicitly not what I said. I said if you talk to this person even briefly, you will quickly realize the actual basis of his objection is racism. It is not subtle.

What is your expectation of me here, to pull out some sort of video proof to convince you, the skeptical hnews reader?

Sometimes this place is extremely tiresome.

Just go do some googling and you'll realize how common this sentiment is. And it's nothing new. Read about Robert Moses and why he made bridges too low for buses.

Post reply on HN