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

41–50 of 277 posts

Re: JetZero

#42

Post by nine_k »

calmbonsai wrote: post #24

Not this again. They’ve clearly hired a new PR firm Suffice it to say, from stable aeronautics at-edge, jet way footprint efficiency, ground support efficiency, airframe pressurization, cargo & passenger logistics, lifespan, and certification, there are many, many reasons “tube + wings” is the dominant airframe architecture for all non-military aircraft.

Halving the fuel consumption may be worth the trouble with all above.

Novel things always look unviable. First cars, first planes, first EVs all looked like dubious gimmicks sorely lacking the required infrastructure.

Re: JetZero

#44

Post by Bolwin »

EGreg wrote: post #7
xnx wrote: post #5

Big screens are an OK workaround for no passenger windows, but they still have to contend with severe structural pressurization challenges, strict emergency evacuation rules, and incompatibility with current airport gates.

No passenger windows is the correct way to go. The screens can actually show anything, not just replace a window.

Jeez way to ruin of the few remaining joys of flying. Lock everyone in a tin can. You will experience reality through screens only and you will enjoy it

Re: JetZero

#45

Post by hankbond »

carodgers wrote: post #27
azza2110 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No way. Looking out the window is one of the joys of flying. Picking out my house, seeing tiny cars on a remote highway, etc. Even 100+ MP cameras and high resolution screens won't come close to that level of detail.

Also the screen sizes they are showing have got to be exceedingly heavy.

I know every gram is accounted for in aerospace but OLEDs weighs so little, especially if you can just heatsink into existing metal structures nearby.

Re: JetZero

#46

Post by karmajunkie »

articulatepang wrote: post #32
azza2110 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No way. Looking out the window is one of the joys of flying. Picking out my house, seeing tiny cars on a remote highway, etc. Even 100+ MP cameras and high resolution screens won't come close to that level of detail.

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.

Re: JetZero

#47

Post by bruce511 »

azza2110 wrote: post #22
xnx wrote: post #5

Big screens are an OK workaround for no passenger windows, but they still have to contend with severe structural pressurization challenges, strict emergency evacuation rules, and incompatibility with current airport gates.

No way. Looking out the window is one of the joys of flying. Picking out my house, seeing tiny cars on a remote highway, etc. Even 100+ MP cameras and high resolution screens won't come close to that level of detail.

Only a small fraction of current flyers get window seats. And the view from the isle seat or middle row is non-existent.

And that's before we talk about night flights when there's nothing to see, flights over water when there's nothing to see and so on.

So yes, I'm sure some people like windows. But the majority have demonstrated that they're just fine flying without them.

Re: JetZero

#48

Post by eightysixfour »

jmward01 wrote: post #33

I wish them all the luck in the world. Aviation is in a massive rut and needs bold new designs and innovation. That being said, what makes this company different from the others that have come before? What makes their path to success more likely? The problem is likely less the technology and more the decade(s?) of burning money with no ability to sell anything because you have to certify everything. That cliff is so…

> 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.

Re: JetZero

#49

Post by Stevvo »

Hard to imagine it as a passenger aircraft any time soon, but if they manage to get the demonstrator built it looks like it could make a useful aerial refueling tanker.
Post reply on HN