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

51–60 of 277 posts

Re: JetZero

#51

Post by JumpCrisscross »

briandw wrote: post #17
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.

In a conventional aircraft you sit on the roll axis. In a blended wing body design you can have off-axis motion that can increase motion sickness. Rather than rolling with the longitudinal axis of the aircraft, you move up and down when the aircraft banks. Not necessarily a deal breaker, but an additional difference to deal with.

> In a blended wing body design you can have off-axis motion that can increase motion sickness

This sounds fixable in avionics and training. (Shallow, gradual banks.)

Note, too, that a larger lifting body needs to bank less to execute the same turn as a craft with more loading.

Re: JetZero

#52

Post by userbinator »

SilverSlash wrote: post #23
chasing wrote: post #21

Feels like no windows is almost a deal-breaker? No? Do humans handle small enclosed spaces with no way to look outside well? The mock-up image looks like a small two-or-three seat compartment, which seems like it would be awful. Maybe an open space would be less claustrophobic, but still. Imagining just a normal jetliner today with no windows feels... not great. And I'm not sure having a giant flat screen wrapped aro…

I don't mind no windows at all if they have "digital windows" as substitutes. You're already 40,000ft in the air I think windows aren't really gonna help your claustrophobia. Not like you can open the door and walk out for a bit.

I get motion sickness when sitting sideways or backwards on a car. People tend to become nauseous when they sense motion but don't see it, or what they see doesn't align with their other senses. Even the small amount of lag that a "digital window" would likely have, will make things much worse.

Re: JetZero

#54

Post by jrk »

karmajunkie wrote: post #46
articulatepang wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Commercial air travel is extremely competitive and has very low margins.

Re: JetZero

#55

Post by a34729t »

DrewADesign wrote: post #8
rgmerk wrote: post #2

I wish them well but a startup building an airliner seems like an utterly impossible task.

Eh, if SpaceX did rockets… I wouldn’t be surprised if they could be very nimble compared to the big ones.

Bullshit i cant hear you. Commcercial airliners are sold at a loss and are basically giant jobs programs. Modern jetliners are enormously efficient already; there has been a continuous race over the last century to this end.

Re: JetZero

#56

Post by NegativeLatency »

deadbabe wrote: post #37
briandw wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a conventional aircraft you sit on the roll axis. In a blended wing body design you can have off-axis motion that can increase motion sickness. Rather than rolling with the longitudinal axis of the aircraft, you move up and down when the aircraft banks. Not necessarily a deal breaker, but an additional difference to deal with.

Just gimbal the seats.

Doesn’t fix translation?

Re: JetZero

#57

Post by fugaziboutit »

deadbabe wrote: post #37
briandw wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a conventional aircraft you sit on the roll axis. In a blended wing body design you can have off-axis motion that can increase motion sickness. Rather than rolling with the longitudinal axis of the aircraft, you move up and down when the aircraft banks. Not necessarily a deal breaker, but an additional difference to deal with.

Just gimbal the seats.

New commercial seating design: Oops, All Pinch Points!

Re: JetZero

#59

Post by jandrewrogers »

thadk wrote: post #38
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.

Would dropping airplane windows lower radiation exposure somewhat, especially on those polar routes?

No, virtually all the radiation with the exception of UV is passing straight through the airframe. The protection an aircraft body offers is negligible.

Re: JetZero

#60

Post by Robdel12 »

This reeks of Vern Raburn and Eclipse Aviation all over again, haha. That failed terribly. SV’s ego is pretty funny sometimes. Eclipse even tried to develop their own avionics.
Post reply on HN