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

Airbus-owned Voom brings its on-demand helicopter service to the US

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 47 posts

Re: Airbus-owned Voom brings its on-demand helicopter service to the US

#11

Post by justapassenger »

tschwimmer wrote: post #4

Not sure the target market is for this since it's between airports. The Palo Alto to SFO one doesn't really help you get into the city because much of the traffic you'd have to drive through is between SFO and downtown. I guess they couldn't get rights to land somewhere downtown (after a bit of research it actually looks like there are no active heliports in SF except one at UCSF in the Dogpatch. Color me unsurprised…

> The Palo Alto to SFO one doesn't really help you get into the city because much of the traffic you'd have to drive through is between SFO and downtown

I don't think they target PASF traffic. This looks more like a last mile connection for people who want to get to Palo Alto, from outside of bay area. Given how many VCs are there, there's some potential market for it.

Re: Airbus-owned Voom brings its on-demand helicopter service to the US

#12

Post by myrandomcomment »

tschwimmer wrote: post #4

Not sure the target market is for this since it's between airports. The Palo Alto to SFO one doesn't really help you get into the city because much of the traffic you'd have to drive through is between SFO and downtown. I guess they couldn't get rights to land somewhere downtown (after a bit of research it actually looks like there are no active heliports in SF except one at UCSF in the Dogpatch. Color me unsurprised…

SFO or SJC to PA are useful is your office is in PA/Menlo.

Re: Airbus-owned Voom brings its on-demand helicopter service to the US

#13

Post by evanlivingston »

jessriedel wrote: post #9
holy_city wrote: post #2

I'm an LA resident and there's not many kinds of businesses I think should be categorically banned, but helicopter transit is one of them. It's a public nuisance. I will regularly need to interrupt phone conversations to let a helicopter pass over, which is sometimes impossible when they decide to hover (though this is usually police helicopters).

It would be better to set a price per minute, depending on decibels and population density of the area.

Why would that be better?

Re: Airbus-owned Voom brings its on-demand helicopter service to the US

#14

Post by myrandomcomment »

jngreenlee wrote: post #6
tschwimmer wrote: post #4

Not sure the target market is for this since it's between airports. The Palo Alto to SFO one doesn't really help you get into the city because much of the traffic you'd have to drive through is between SFO and downtown. I guess they couldn't get rights to land somewhere downtown (after a bit of research it actually looks like there are no active heliports in SF except one at UCSF in the Dogpatch. Color me unsurprised…

Off topic but you may find this interesting: https://www.jsx.com/destinations I hope we see more of this type of alternative options...opt-out of TSA (until its so big it gets attention), P2P, nimble, small-scale.

Need to fly the in-laws who are old up to the Bay Area for Xmas. Just checked the schedule for this. No flights flying on the 23rd. Alaska air it is.

Re: Airbus-owned Voom brings its on-demand helicopter service to the US

#15

Post by jimbob45 »

jessriedel wrote: post #9
holy_city wrote: post #2

I'm an LA resident and there's not many kinds of businesses I think should be categorically banned, but helicopter transit is one of them. It's a public nuisance. I will regularly need to interrupt phone conversations to let a helicopter pass over, which is sometimes impossible when they decide to hover (though this is usually police helicopters).

It would be better to set a price per minute, depending on decibels and population density of the area.

This would be my first instinct as well. If you don't like something, tax it and get yourself a new high-speed rail transit system for free.

Re: Airbus-owned Voom brings its on-demand helicopter service to the US

#16

Post by lozaning »

The pricing for this actually looks much more reasonable than I'd have expected. Last (and only time) I chartered a helicopter it was back to Hong Kong from Macau, and it ran me ~$850.00 USD. Palo Alto to Napa is "only" like $275 with these people.

Re: Airbus-owned Voom brings its on-demand helicopter service to the US

#17

Post by holy_city »

jessriedel wrote: post #9
holy_city wrote: post #2

I'm an LA resident and there's not many kinds of businesses I think should be categorically banned, but helicopter transit is one of them. It's a public nuisance. I will regularly need to interrupt phone conversations to let a helicopter pass over, which is sometimes impossible when they decide to hover (though this is usually police helicopters).

It would be better to set a price per minute, depending on decibels and population density of the area.

I don't think that making a luxury service more expensive will discourage use, unless we can make each flight cost tens of thousands of dollars.

I'd rather just ban assholery than create a steep asshole tax. It doesn't bother me that a few rich people will have to wait in traffic like everyone else (or better - stop traveling for cross-town meetings and take a phone call!).

Leave low altitude flight to emergency services.

Re: Airbus-owned Voom brings its on-demand helicopter service to the US

#18

Post by beering »

justapassenger wrote: post #11
tschwimmer wrote: post #4

Not sure the target market is for this since it's between airports. The Palo Alto to SFO one doesn't really help you get into the city because much of the traffic you'd have to drive through is between SFO and downtown. I guess they couldn't get rights to land somewhere downtown (after a bit of research it actually looks like there are no active heliports in SF except one at UCSF in the Dogpatch. Color me unsurprised…

> The Palo Alto to SFO one doesn't really help you get into the city because much of the traffic you'd have to drive through is between SFO and downtown I don't think they target PA SF traffic. This looks more like a last mile connection for people who want to get to Palo Alto, from outside of bay area. Given how many VCs are there, there's some potential market for it.

Still, PAO is not close to Stanford nor Sand Hill offices if you have to drive through congestion to get there. It would be faster to Uber from SFO to Palo Alto via 280 once you factor in getting on/off your shared helicopter ride.

Re: Airbus-owned Voom brings its on-demand helicopter service to the US

#19

Post by tschwimmer »

justapassenger wrote: post #11
tschwimmer wrote: post #4

Not sure the target market is for this since it's between airports. The Palo Alto to SFO one doesn't really help you get into the city because much of the traffic you'd have to drive through is between SFO and downtown. I guess they couldn't get rights to land somewhere downtown (after a bit of research it actually looks like there are no active heliports in SF except one at UCSF in the Dogpatch. Color me unsurprised…

> The Palo Alto to SFO one doesn't really help you get into the city because much of the traffic you'd have to drive through is between SFO and downtown I don't think they target PA SF traffic. This looks more like a last mile connection for people who want to get to Palo Alto, from outside of bay area. Given how many VCs are there, there's some potential market for it.

Checking Google Maps:

1) SFO to Downtown PA: 30 mins 2) Palo Alto Airport to Downtown PA: 15 minutes

for $250 one way? Better be some pretty good VCs/Lawyers to pay an extra ~$400 round trip.

Re: Airbus-owned Voom brings its on-demand helicopter service to the US

#20

Post by vkou »

jessriedel wrote: post #9
holy_city wrote: post #2

I'm an LA resident and there's not many kinds of businesses I think should be categorically banned, but helicopter transit is one of them. It's a public nuisance. I will regularly need to interrupt phone conversations to let a helicopter pass over, which is sometimes impossible when they decide to hover (though this is usually police helicopters).

It would be better to set a price per minute, depending on decibels and population density of the area.

That price would either be insultingly low to anyone impacted by the horrific noise, or so high as to make running such a business uneconomic.

Just ban the bloody things outright.

Post reply on HN