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

JetZero

jetzero.aero

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 277 posts

Re: JetZero

#241

Post by jtwaleson »

CalRobert wrote: post #177
jtwaleson wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO you can remove the "good" and "except when". DB is 30% of the time a frustrating experience, which I've noticed makes me want to avoid it, even though I love trains. Trains in the rest of Western Europe are pretty great!

Fair, Deutsche Bahn is awful. Went to Berlin with them last November and instead of getting in at 9:00 PM we got in at 1 AM, which was especially horrible given we had a 6 and 8 year old with us.

They just cancelled a train from Amsterdam to Munich for me and never replied to my form for a refund. I called them about. Had to spend 600 extra for a sleeper instead.

Re: JetZero

#242

Post by articulatepang »

karmajunkie wrote: post #46
articulatepang wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But are you willing to pay 10-20% more for that joy? I personally would rather pay less money to fly, not get to see out the window, and spend those dollars on, say, a fancier meal at the destination. Or to have an extra day at the destination if my trip length is money-bound rather than time-bound. Or put those dollars towards an extra hour of childcare. Or … I have so many uses for dollars that give me more utility…

it’s cute you think that’s going to show up in lower ticket costs instead of the company’s profit margin.

We don't really have to guess: as jet engines became more fuel-efficient, inflation-adjusted prices for air tickets dropped. And as oil prices fluctuate, so do ticket prices. There's a bunch of noise in both these trends but the best explanation for them is that competition between airlines drives prices to roughly the cost of provision, of which 30% or so is fuel.

Re: JetZero

#243

Post by dr_dshiv »

cassepipe wrote: post #229
dr_dshiv wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought this was about being able to fly without harm to the environment— which it sounds like we could do if we master clouds.

Sure but you extrapolated to weather modification, the initial idea is to go around/avoid some area

…as a form of cloud control. If we are already doing it inadvertently, we may as well do it well.

Re: JetZero

#244

Post by dbspin »

port11 wrote: post #204
dbspin wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Insane take - this is just ensuring that the only people who get to enjoy travel are the rich. Nothing in our society is improved by taking a privilege that's widely enjoyed and restricting it to the wealthy or very wealthy.

It’s a privilege with most externalities _not_ taken into account, i.e. it’s hurting us all because we ignore its true cost and make it available in vast quantities. Since the global South will suffer the most from climate change, they might disagree with developed nations ‘subsiding’ flights.

The phrase the global south elides the fact that those countries are far higher in inequality than the West. Wealthy elites being the only ones able to travel isn't a solution to climate change, it's a recipe for a degree of social control we haven't seen in a century. We can fight climate change, and increase mobility, standard of living and freedom for all. There is an enormous amount of low hanging fruit here - from switching to renewables, to moving militaries off gas and oil, to switching cargo ships to renewable energy. Trapping humanity in their nation of birth shouldn't be the go to first step. The consequences of that degree of social control aren't being allowed for here.

Re: JetZero

#245

Post by eightysixfour »

jmward01 wrote: post #238
eightysixfour wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Aviation is in a massive rut and needs bold new designs and innovation. Why does it need bold new design and innovation? More people (can afford to) fly every year, more safely, and with broadly more consistency than they ever have. The success of the commercial aviation industry as a whole is breathtaking.

The 737 max is a great example of the rut we are in. In order to put more efficient engines on they needed more ground clearance. This has been the issue with 737 forever and why they have that odd flat scoop on the bottom of the engines. That isn't great for efficiency. It is because they can't redesign the wing without years long recertification. So, yet again, instead of redesigning the airframe to optimally place…

> To your argument of (paraphrase here) 'it is good enough why innovate'.

That's not my argument, you are putting words in my mouth. My argument is "you better have a good reason to argue the commercial air industry is stagnant because the industry's incremental progress over time has been incredible." Look at this chart: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft

That's crazy!

The issue with your 737 MAX story is the trade-offs they made - oversized engine without massive recertification or requiring airport retrofits - worked. It is an absurdly successful product despite the early engineering failures. It is the best selling Boeing aircraft of all time and the second best selling commercial airline of all time (to the a320).

Innovation for the sake of innovation isn't worth anything, the current commercial airline stack is deeply optimized and delivers low cost, safe travel to hundreds of millions of people globally. What, exactly, would you like to see innovation on? What trade-offs are you willing to make?

I spent a few years in the commercial airline industry. They have a ton of problems, very few of them would be solved with a revolutionary plane design.

Re: JetZero

#246

Post by xstas1 »

cassepipe wrote: post #191
iamwil wrote: post #103

What I really want, is a plane that can load passengers like containers--or like a rollercoaster car. Of course, it should be comfortable. I just mean that the passenger compartment should be modular. So you can put your luggage in and get settled while sitting in the airport, and then when the plane comes in, it just side-loads everyone all at once. Once landed, it just slides everyone off, and you can just I know t…

I just want to go to an hospital, get an injection, fall asleep and wake up on a bed at another hospital somewhere else.

This is actually the plot of the hit TV show Severance.

Re: JetZero

#247

Post by mmooss »

dash2 wrote: post #160
kubafu wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of us is avoiding more by choosing not to fly.

I hope I'm not overinterpreting, but I get the sense that you think that's morally better than simply avoiding contrails. If so then this is surely a mistake! While an individual who imposes heavy costs on himself to do something socially valuable is certainly demonstrating commitment to the cause, the best solution for society is the one with the lowest costs.

Actually, lots of people acting together regularly accomplish things - almost everything wortwhile is accomplished that way, probably back to our non-homo ancestors.

As a simple matter, it keeps my city clean - we all put garbage in the bins (yes there's a law, but no way could it be enforced if the great majority of people didn't do it already). More dramatically and recently, the protests in India.

> society

Society is us - you, me, everyone. Nobody else is coming to help us.

I'm responsible for what I do, for the consequences of my actions. It's embarassing to say it's someone else's job (especially when the someone else is 'society'), and therefore I'm not going to do anything.

Re: JetZero

#248

Post by mmooss »

dbspin wrote: post #174
johanvts wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just stop subsidizing flying, maybe even tax the fuel a fraction of the value it’s destroying and I bet most of flying will suddenly turn out to actually be completely avoidable.

Insane take - this is just ensuring that the only people who get to enjoy travel are the rich. Nothing in our society is improved by taking a privilege that's widely enjoyed and restricting it to the wealthy or very wealthy.

I'm very willing to subsidize universal access to food, shelter, education, healthcare ... not long-haul air travel.

Re: JetZero

#249

Post by mmooss »

> The Pathfinder team has built and flown five generations of scaled aircraft over 30 flights.

https://www.jetzero.aero/progress

Why so few? I'd expect them to be flying daily or as often as possible, to gather as much data as possible. The next step is a full-scale demonstrator. No doubt they have their reasons, but I wonder what they are?

Re: JetZero

#250

Post by trueno »

margalabargala wrote: post #193
trueno wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the misery it takes to make these types of comments lmao. behold lifes hidden fruits of simply scrolling past something that makes you irritable

Consider dropping spaces too. It'll make your comments even more Unique and Quirky! And it won't impact readability in a way you care about!

you ok man
Post reply on HN