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

291–300 of 632 posts

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

#291

Post by lkschubert8 »

apantel wrote: post #284
reaperducer wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot fathom a life with Tesla owners flying over where my kids and I bbq. The same kinds of people who speed, watch videos, and do dangerous stunts while they drive are going to speed, watch videos, and do dangerous stunts while they fly. Uber made everyone an amateur taxi driver. AirBnb made everyone an amateur innkeeper. Now the "tech" industry wants to make everyone an amateur pilot? No thanks.

The better of the amateurs are as good as professionals. I’ve been very well-taken care of in AirBnb’s, and I’ve been driven around well in Ubers.

I don’t think their concern is the ceiling of any of those domains, but the floor.

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

#292

Post by jdprgm »

Guessing you guys have already read it but here is a good related book for others in the thread: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/42036377-where-is-my-fly...

Project sounds like an ambitious exciting idea and i'd take the pessimism/skepticism as a positive sign that you are on the right track. It feels like something has changed in tech for a lot of people with regards to tackling really ambitious projects compared to years past.

I'm curious how the relative difficulty of fully automated driving would compare to fully automated flying. I'm no pilot but it seems in a lot of regards flying might actually be easier with regards to the number of possible scenarios cars can be faced with.

I imagine trying to compare the risk between flying and driving is pretty interesting. I would think in flying risk is significantly more dependent on the individual vs the tremendous risk in driving posed by every other car on the road. That and I would guess the accident vs fatal accident balance is completely different.

Considering we fairly easily are willing to give basically any 16 year old a car license and just accept a rather high risk rate with driving I wonder how much the gap between driving and flying could be closed. That and the financial gap as well -- from a raw materials perspective could we in theory have a honda civic of the sky that a significant percentage of Americans (say 30-40%) could find accessible?

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

#293

Post by callalex »

lbrito wrote: post #126
stetrain wrote: post #27

> In the US, trips that are 50-300 miles are almost all done by car because that distance is too short for commercial airlines and too far for public transportation. A bit off-topic but this is a political problem, not a technical one. Trips of 50-300 miles are certainly within the operating range of fast and efficient rail travel as demonstrated in multiple places around the world outside of the US.

Was about to post the same. Passing no judgement on this particular project, which must have been the result of honest hard work and dedication, but it's truly bizarre that people in the US would rather double down on the failed personal vehicle concept rather than embracing public transit, as more developed countries have.

Most people in the USA are too shy/prudish to say it but I think this is a conversation that needs to be opened:

Americans are so resistant to public transportation because the public seriously sucks to deal with. There will be no popular utilization of public transit until we implement strong economic safety nets and extensive support/mandatory detention of people that are mentally ill. Those problems are much harder to overcome while maintaining an American standard of personal liberty than even the complications surrounding building rail. As a native of San Francisco and the surrounding area I have tried for decades to utilize public transit. The infrastructure isn’t great, but it’s also not terrible or anything. But in years where my job/living situation have me using public transit every day, my rate of exposure to human excrement or someone who wouldn’t even be aware that they physically harmed me was greater than once a week. In phases of my life where I’m driving everywhere that rate is practically zero. That stress takes a toll on my health that I have a natural instinct to avoid.

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

#294

Post by Onavo »

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"

Do you plan to increase your plane's range by the way? The current range is lower than most Skyhawks and DA-40s.

Also you should offer radio altimeters and ring laser gyros as an upgrade.

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

#295

Post by nradov »

aeternum wrote: post #248
danielschonfeld wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Civilian drones are fairly new. There are century old GA aircraft still flying around. I'm sure the FAA would love to require them all to carry radios and transponders but it's technically and politically difficult to impose new requirements on old certified aircraft. Some owners can barely afford to fly as it is so they'll resist any new mandates.

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

#296

Post by lsh123 »

My $0.02:

- The stick-and-rudder skills aren’t hard and not the main reason people die. It’s the decision making that kills.

- The “faster to fly” than drive for me starts at about 3 hrs drive (wind, preflight time, takeoff / climb / landing time, deviations by ATC, etc). My indicated airspeed is roughly your true btw.

- Looks and feels like Cirrus with AI. I am missing barn doors for luggage and dogs; 200 kts cruise; 6 hrs with tip tanks; and gross to actually do it. I’ll stick with my Bonanza.

- Main problem you will face is insurance. It will be expensive if even obtainable for low experienced pilots.

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

#297

Post by lovecg »

echoangle wrote: post #217
TylerE wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stall speed is a misnomer. Stalls occur due to exceeding the critical angle of attack and can happen at ANY speed.

I think that was his point. To calculate if you are going to stall in a final, you need to know your weight and flap setting to see if you will exceed the critical angle of attack when doing the turn, exactly because the speed isn’t constant.

No, you just need an angle of attack sensor. These are increasingly available for small GA planes.

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

#298

Post by calmbonsai »

bozhark wrote: post #143
bambax wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed! Learning how to fly alone is the easy part. The hard part is all the rest. Also, this is inconsistent: > large commercial airplane technology has developed to the point that the planes practically fly themselves > We think stick and rudder skills are definitely a necessity for airline pilots flying hundreds of people on board for the extremely rare cases where emergencies do happen and many people's lives are…

The airline design industry seriously needs some sexy He ain’t wrong there

Take a look at older designs from the '60s and all the Experimental aircraft.

It's not that the industry doesn't know or can't do "sexy" (e.g. Cirrus custom leather and carbon fiber interiors and paint colors such Mykonos Blue), but that anything related to the airframe, avionics, or powerplant MUST be FAA certified so that exponentially (I'm not kidding) adds to its cost and time-to-market.

With such high fixed costs and high liability, manufacturers are forced be very conservative to earn very slim margins.

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

#299

Post by shekispeaks »

This is commendable, people who travel 50-300 miles do not use an Aeroplane because you need a car on the other end regardless, so I rather take my car.

For example, SF to Tahoe is demonstrated as a route I could fly, but I need a car on the other end for sure. I could rent a car which is a pain.

I could arrange a driver service, but at that point I could get driver to drive me from San Francisco.

It is too expensive for folks who want to fly themselves and save money, it is not a great deal better for those who can hire drivers.

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

#300

Post by calmbonsai »

How are you going to address the insurance, ownership costs, and FAA certifications for this?

Atm, the real barriers to entry in the market are the insanely high regulatory and liability compliance costs--not flight aides, pilot training, or folks with the desire to fly.

- Look at the long path that Cirrus had to take with it's "Safe Return" auto-landing feature.

- Look at the decades-long adoption curve of even basic/obvious tech like 100LL avgas.

- Look at Bye Aerospace's struggles bringing a simple "go-kart" electric training aircraft to market

I'm not optimistic for ANY substantive innovation in this space without a serious overhaul of the regulatory environment.

Post reply on HN