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

Unpowered cargo gliders on tow ropes promise 65% cheaper air freight

newatlas.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 80 posts

Re: Unpowered cargo gliders on tow ropes promise 65% cheaper air freight

#21

Post by mitthrowaway2 »

sarchertech wrote: post #16
downrightmike wrote: post #2

What the US needs is to fix its rail system. eminent domain the whole thing, pay off the robber barons and just run it like it matters to get shit from here to there.

When it comes to freight rail, the US is in the top handful of countries in the world by pretty much any metric. We’re not great at passenger rail, but we beat all of Europe when it comes to the amount of freight shipped via rail per capita, and all of Europe except Switzerland based on the percentage of total freight transported by rail.

This is a myth oft-repeated on HN. US freight rail does cheaply transport a lot of tonnage, but it is a shadow of its former self, after a half-century of digesting the investments of the past. It's squeezed out efficiency by running longer and slower trains (that exceed the length of the rail sidings!) transporting bulk goods on predictable schedules between fixed points (like grain and coal), while slashing routes and reducing maintenance. It ships a lot of freight, but it does not do so effectively, quickly, nor safely, or flexibly.

Re: Unpowered cargo gliders on tow ropes promise 65% cheaper air freight

#22

Post by lebean »

bell-cot wrote: post #13

IANAAE (...not an aerospace engineer), but I smell a metric boatload of utterly delusional thinking here. > ...remarkably simple way to slash air cargo costs as much as 65% – by having planes tow autonomous, cargo-carrying gliders behind them, big enough to double, or potentially triple their payload capacity. A 65% cost reduction via tripling the payload would require that costs not increase, no? Are these huge carg…

I am barely smarter than a five year old and also think this is a disaster of an idea.

Re: Unpowered cargo gliders on tow ropes promise 65% cheaper air freight

#23

Post by serf »

downrightmike wrote: post #2

What the US needs is to fix its rail system. eminent domain the whole thing, pay off the robber barons and just run it like it matters to get shit from here to there.

> eminent domain the whole thing, pay off the robber barons

let's not frame the heaps of collateral damage that would result in as only affecting 'robber barons'.

Re: Unpowered cargo gliders on tow ropes promise 65% cheaper air freight

#24

Post by BirAdam »

cooper_ganglia wrote: post #15
mc32 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm, if we ever built the Alaska-Siberia overland railway connection (bridges + tunnels) it would become a possibility to make efficient from what is now an impossibility. It’s doable. Tunnels and bridges necessary would not be beyond what we have built elsewhere with current technology. The weather may be challenging in Winter though.

How is building a rail system for transporting freight to and from the U.S. that runs through Russian territory a good/feasible idea? Even if Russia agreed, Putin or whatever strong-man dictator they have next could suddenly decide it was a bad idea, and to block U.S. freight. Then we have no rail transport AND a grounded air fleet that would take time to get operational at the same output it is today.

When goods stop crossing borders, soldiers start crossing borders. The easiest way NOT to go to war is to have open trade.

Re: Unpowered cargo gliders on tow ropes promise 65% cheaper air freight

#25

Post by dr_dshiv »

ethagknight wrote: post #7
nvy wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Air freight is phenomenally inefficient compared to rail.

Rail is phenomenally inefficient crossing oceans compared to air freight

Clearly, we need more airship transport.

Re: Unpowered cargo gliders on tow ropes promise 65% cheaper air freight

#26

Post by kelnos »

bjterry wrote: post #20

The cargo a plane can carry isn't limited only by the volume of the interior, but also by the amount of weight that can be carried safely in the plane. Airlines try to balance the amount of dense and non-dense (a.k.a. volumetric) cargo to solve for the joint constraint by charging different prices for cargo depending on the greater of its weight cost vs. its volume cost. Even if it turned out to be practical to doubl…

The article is about having a completely separate plane (glider, really) that is towed by a conventional plane. The glider gets to ride in the powered plane's wake, and presumably the fuel cost to tow the cargo plane is less than the cost of flying two independent planes.

This isn't about making a larger conventional plane that has more volume to put cargo in.

Re: Unpowered cargo gliders on tow ropes promise 65% cheaper air freight

#27

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

downrightmike wrote: post #2

What the US needs is to fix its rail system. eminent domain the whole thing, pay off the robber barons and just run it like it matters to get shit from here to there.

We're like a couple years away from having the tech to just give all autonomous electric vehicles the leftmost lane on the interstates from 10pm-6am, then raise the speed limit to 90 or 100 mph. Let trucking companies drive these vehicles a few feet apart from each other for aerodynamics. If you could book a sleeper taxi in New York and be in Chicago in the morning, or San Francisco to Seattle, for cheaper than a flight, without destroying the environment, would you do it?

Re: Unpowered cargo gliders on tow ropes promise 65% cheaper air freight

#28

Post by kelnos »

bell-cot wrote: post #13

IANAAE (...not an aerospace engineer), but I smell a metric boatload of utterly delusional thinking here. > ...remarkably simple way to slash air cargo costs as much as 65% – by having planes tow autonomous, cargo-carrying gliders behind them, big enough to double, or potentially triple their payload capacity. A 65% cost reduction via tripling the payload would require that costs not increase, no? Are these huge carg…

> A 65% cost reduction via tripling the payload would require that costs not increase, no?

I think it's a cost reduction vs. shipping that 2x (or 3x) cargo using 2 (or 3) conventional planes, not somehow making it cheaper than a single plane with its normal amount of cargo (or a magic plane with 2x the capacity).

> Are these huge cargo gliders free to purchase/operate/maintain?

No, but they're presumably cheaper in those metrics than running a conventional plane. If it costs $50k to run a single conventional plane, but you can tack on one of these towed gliders and it only costs $15k more, that's cheaper than running 2 conventional planes at $100k.

> And hauling them around puts zero additional load on the engines of the air freighter that's towing them, to increase maintenance or fuel costs?

Certainly this will add a cost, but if the towed glider has essentially zero fuel cost, presumably you still come out ahead. And presumably the glider will have lower maintenance costs, since it lacks engines and presumably other stuff a powered, crewed conventional cargo plane would need.

Totally agree with you on the skepticism around safety and reliability, though.

Re: Unpowered cargo gliders on tow ropes promise 65% cheaper air freight

#29

Post by Glyptodon »

downrightmike wrote: post #2

What the US needs is to fix its rail system. eminent domain the whole thing, pay off the robber barons and just run it like it matters to get shit from here to there.

Just add a few more gliders and it'll be a sky train.

Re: Unpowered cargo gliders on tow ropes promise 65% cheaper air freight

#30

Post by etrautmann »

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #27
downrightmike wrote: post #2

What the US needs is to fix its rail system. eminent domain the whole thing, pay off the robber barons and just run it like it matters to get shit from here to there.

We're like a couple years away from having the tech to just give all autonomous electric vehicles the leftmost lane on the interstates from 10pm-6am, then raise the speed limit to 90 or 100 mph. Let trucking companies drive these vehicles a few feet apart from each other for aerodynamics. If you could book a sleeper taxi in New York and be in Chicago in the morning, or San Francisco to Seattle, for cheaper than a fli…

This is roughly equivalent to flying if the car is ICE
Post reply on HN