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

Launch HN: Airhart Aeronautics (YC S22) – A modern personal airplane

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 632 posts

Re: Launch HN: Airhart Aeronautics (YC S22) – A modern personal airplane

#241

Post by K0balt »

Honestly, I love the idea of a more modern GA airplane… but I think that for most people, stick and rudder skills are the least of their worries. Don’t get me wrong, people do stupid stuff all of the time, but I think the real improvements that you can bring are in the flight planning and monitoring software. A moving map with range heatmap at present conditions, warnings as options get closed out, airfields within glide range under present conditions, audible warnings and stick shaker if you do some kind of stupid cross control fuckery or need to lower the nose of the aircraft, etc. Sort of a co-pilot system that keeps you up to date with options, conditions, checklists, vectors, etc.

Most accidents are a result of bad planning, and even an overweight or poorly functioning aircraft could be detected early in the takeoff roll with accelerometers. If you had a system that could keep up on realistic plans under the circumstances of the flight, it could go a long way towards improving flight safety.

Re: Launch HN: Airhart Aeronautics (YC S22) – A modern personal airplane

#242

Post by jhugo »

Zak wrote: post #205

This reminds me of programming languages designed with an English-like syntax in the hope that people would be able to develop software without learning to code. It also reminds me a bit of the Ercoupe, an airplane designed in 1937 with the ailerons and rudders mechanically coupled so that pilots would have fewer controls to operate and reduced ability to put the airplane into uncoordinated flight. Neither approach h…

The crash you reference was most likely caused by a pilot choosing to fly too low (they performed the flyover at 30ft instead of 100ft) and striking trees which had not been marked on charts provided to them. The pilot did try to blame the fly-by-wire system, but it wasn't very convincing.

Re: Launch HN: Airhart Aeronautics (YC S22) – A modern personal airplane

#244

Post by Animats »

Nice. It's certainly do-able. NASA funded efforts in this direction from 1994 to 2001, with their Advanced General Aviation Transport Experiments (AGATE) consortium. [1] Around 2011, they tried again.[2]

There were two main goals - better avionics capable of handling large numbers of small aircraft in busy airspace, and small jet engines for small aircraft. The Cirrus Vision Jet is partly an outgrowth of that effort. It is capable of finding an airport and landing automatically in an emergency. Plus it has a back-up parachute. It costs $2.3 million, though.

Cost, as usual, will be the problem. Many have set out to build modern low-cost general aviation aircraft. Some nice high-cost aircraft have resulted.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_General_Aviation_Tran...

[2] https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20110000757/downloads/20...

Re: Launch HN: Airhart Aeronautics (YC S22) – A modern personal airplane

#246

Post by nullindividual »

imoverclocked wrote: post #132
namdnay wrote: post #112

> We want people who don’t think about airplanes as a mode of transportation to start flying It really depresses me that in 2024 we have some of the smartest, most privileged people in the world deciding that this is what they’re going to dedicate their life to Shouldn’t we be doing exactly the opposite? Getting people to stop flying

Private Pilot here (so obviously biased.) This is an excellent question to ask. There are good reasons to fly. Some places in the US are only accessible through flight (I'm looking at you, Alaska.) Some places require insane amounts of time to commute/manage because of a lack of infrastructure. Some common low-flight hour jobs (eg: pipeline monitoring) are only feasible through flight. There are currently good reason…

> Some places in the US are only accessible through flight (I'm looking at you, Alaska.)

And how is software going to handle the random side-of-the-river 'runway'?

Re: Launch HN: Airhart Aeronautics (YC S22) – A modern personal airplane

#248

Post by aeternum »

danielschonfeld wrote: post #236
aeternum wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excellent points, it's really these other aspects that get pilots into trouble. For example it's crazy that most pilots are still taught to calculate W&B using printed charts and approximate takeoff performance. I think you could save more general aviation lives with a fairly minimal system. A gas gauge sensor that calculates whether you have enough fuel to get to your destination + reserve. Avionics where you input…

While some base to final stall accidents are as simple as you make it sound a good chunk of them happen when you try to come OUT of the turn at an already slow speed increasing the angle of attack on one wing alone. The stall and subsequent spin catches the pilot entirely surprised unaware of why they’re even stalling and with very little escape bandwidth. The FAA has been trying for better angle of attack instrument…

Right but I don't know of any GA stall/spin warning system that takes into account pilot input. Even simple sensors are lacking, for example accelerometers are nearly free yet GA planes give you no warning that you're in a skid.

Similarly given yoke input, bank angle and speed you could warn of an impending stall well before it actually happens with a few position encoder sensors. As you point out, the current system relies on pilots recognizing a stall which is a foolish thing to rely on and almost all GA stall warning sensors are only on one of the wings and require actual airflow disruption to work. In many cases that is already too late or the other wing could stall first. The calculation doesn't even have to be perfect since most pilots want plenty of margin of safety on a base to final turn. I'd much rather have a false alarm + go-around than an inadvertent spin.

The collision thing is also ridiculously irrational. The FAA requires drones over half a pound to continually transmit their location yet somehow considers it sufficiently safe for planes to fly without a radio nor transponder around most of the airports in the US relying only on pilots looking out the window.

It's just disappointing that the vast majority of GA accidents could be completely avoided with slightly better avionics.

Re: Launch HN: Airhart Aeronautics (YC S22) – A modern personal airplane

#249

Post by nullindividual »

n_ermosh wrote: post #103
Onavo wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just want to say I love what you are doing, you are solving a problem close to my heart. This is the sort of hard tech company that YC (and SV) should invest more in, not silly SaaS and ChatGPT wrappers. That being said, after fly by wire, would you be interested in tackling the GA engine economics problem? They are closely linked. If you solve that, the TAM for your product expands massively, and your exit opportu…

Yes, lowering all operating expenses by moving to more efficient engines and greener propulsion systems is on our roadmap as "the next problem"

Will those that purchase your highly polluting engine get a free on-the-house upgrade to this nebulous green future that likely won't happen?

How are you planning to offset the enormous amount of pollution you want to create in the mean time? Are you purchasing carbon credits? Planting trees?

Re: Launch HN: Airhart Aeronautics (YC S22) – A modern personal airplane

#250

Post by ArpanRau »

Former pilot (now paragliders) and founder/engineer here-

I'm not sold that this approach - eliminating the need for coordinated flying- really removes the big barriers to flying. I'm surrounded by aviation lovers who don't fly PPL, and the big barriers are cost, time, and fear.

The Ercoupe tried this exact approach in the 30s in one of the big GA booms and it just wasn't borne out.

I'd love to see more GA pilots, but this won't get us there as quickly as say, comprehensive medical reform or a production aircraft that's cheaper than $50/hr to fly would.

Post reply on HN