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

231–240 of 333 posts

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#231

Post by pbmonster »

aidenn0 wrote: post #165
wthalheimer wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of those "let me connect you with our sales team" questions ;) Operating cost is about half that of an aircraft though. 100% battery electric propulsion system!

How does operating cost compare to a high-speed cat ferry?

It's not even close to the same market. This thing seats 12. A cat ferry can seat more than a thousand people and a couple of hundred cars on top of that.

You probably want the comparison to a helicopter - because that's the same market: Can take off directly from the city, skips TSA security, seats 12.

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#232

Post by notahacker »

zo1 wrote: post #205
wthalheimer wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of those "let me connect you with our sales team" questions ;) Operating cost is about half that of an aircraft though. 100% battery electric propulsion system!

But why? Does the price vary and you don't want customers to know they got different deals? Or you don't want competitors to know?

It's the norm in commercial aviation for prices to vary according to order size and timing, delivery slots and whether the buyer is an airline or a leasing company (i.e. Boeing publishes a "sticker price" but its customers don't actually pay it)

In this case, you've got the added complication the aircraft is still a work in progress, and so what's actually negotiated is likely to depend heavily on timing of payments and cancellation clauses.

I am curious about whether the pricing ballpark is in the "new turboprop" or the "operating economics make it cost-effective to replace ancient piston operated aircraft in a relatively short timescale" range though. That could be a big deal for some low-use routes and in markets like Indonesia and the Philippines.

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#233

Post by cj »

rwmj wrote: post #224
arcticbull wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Same if you have Pre and Clear. I usually get to the airport 30-40m early. That said I'm usually at the train station 10m before departure with bags.

Why don't all the bad actors just apply for the same programme?

Clear doesn't let you skip security. It basically just allows you to cut to the front of the line for a fee. You still have to go through the x-ray machines, etc.

TSA Pre actually does reduce security requirements (e.g. you can keep your shoes on...) in exchange for, I've always assumed, a mini-background check when you apply for the program.

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#235

Post by heavyset_go »

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 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.

It also becomes readily apparent that they also want to be patted on the back and told that they're good and noble people for "protecting the community" from the scourge of undesirables potentially riding public transit near them.

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#236

Post by doctor_eval »

petre wrote: post #171
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…

Heh, I was just trying to picture Some Puerto Rican Guy on a bike, cycling into rich white neighbourhoods. https://southpark.fandom.com/wiki/Some_Puerto_Rican_Guy The only criminals on a bike that I'm aware of are bicycle thieves.

> The only criminals on a bike that I'm aware of are bicycle thieves.

And, to be fair, it's only easy to identify them after it's too late.

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#237

Post by nonethewiser »

molsongolden wrote: post #219
skrebbel wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

So it would make their community more accessible to everyone, including criminals?

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#238

Post by LeanderK »

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'…

this is so blatantly wrong that i loose every respect for these people. It really makes me angry. It's just so selfish. I really don't understand how you can make things worse for everyone, just because you don't want things to change, "city-people" invade you precious suburb or something. In the end gas-guzzling cars pester the environment and use up the precious few emissions we have left in order not to get wrecked by climate change.

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#239

Post by nonethewiser »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #220
AYBABTME wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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'…

What did he say that convinced you he’s racist?

Re: Regent – Electric coastal travel

#240

Post by nonethewiser »

oska wrote: post #191
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.

This comment and your other one above don't really add anything to the discussion here. They comprise an attack on an individual and, as you say, we can't have an informed opinion because we don't know the individual. So it just boils down to you calling someone you know a racist based on a one-sided anecdote.

That about sums it up. Doesnt seem like a particularly balanced source either
Post reply on HN