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

Boom Supersonic to break sound barrier during historic test flight today

space.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 124 posts

Re: Boom Supersonic to break sound barrier during historic test flight today

#61

Post by JumpCrisscross »

ceejayoz wrote: post #25
nom wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 2-3 hour reduction in flight time is appealing for approximately everyone who needs to fly.

Concorde would probably struggle in the post-9/11 airport security world; the days of showing up at the airport just before the flight are long gone for most folks. A 2-3 hour reduction in flight time is appealing on its own , but probably not at a significant price increase.

> days of showing up at the airport just before the flight are long gone for most folks

I show up 20 minutes before boarding, often later, at my small-town airport. For international flights out of JFK, I’ll show up 2 to 3 hours before, but there is still a world of difference between a lounge you can walk around and shower in and even the most luxurious lay-flat suites.

NYC > SFO is 2 hours at Mach 1.7; if I’m not checking a bag that’s an entire day returned both ways.

Re: Boom Supersonic to break sound barrier during historic test flight today

#62

Post by kachapopopow »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #57
kachapopopow wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supersonic flight will never be more efficient than traditional flights. And sorry I meant that I don't want any super sonic plane company to be successful.

> Supersonic flight will never be more efficient than traditional flights Efficient by what metric? Fuel use? That’s the new master of our existence, our six-proton czar? If there is one way to kill sympathy and support for climate-change action, it’s by not only insisting but actually hoping that living standards don’t improve (or regress) because it reduces emissions. Instead of seeing a new super-premium air-trave…

I'm the last person you'd use climate change as an argument, I'm generally just frightened by the amount of problems that the governments will have to ignore before they can have their first commercial flight bleeding into ground flights.

It's the typical cyclist versus cars problem. I like cycling and I don't like driving and nothing will change that.

Re: Boom Supersonic to break sound barrier during historic test flight today

#63

Post by short_sells_poo »

Earw0rm wrote: post #20
short_sells_poo wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. If time didn't matter, people would use trains instead of short distance flights. And many do! Many European cities that are a 2 hour flight apart also have an ~8-9 hour train connection, which is much less hassle and stress than the flight, but people who have to travel a lot will care about the time savings of even a few hours because it adds up over time. Lots of people have to regularly travel between Europ…

"have to" being, to some extent, a function of these flights being priced at a heavy discount relative to their environmental impact.

That's a fair statement. I'm not well versed enough in commercial aviation to be able to judge how much flights would cost with externalities priced in.

Re: Boom Supersonic to break sound barrier during historic test flight today

#64

Post by kachapopopow »

rob74 wrote: post #55
kachapopopow wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reasons why planes don't fly faster is efficiency.

I'm aware of that, but if your selling point is speed, you'll have to sacrifice the efficiency, CO2 emissions be damned...

CO2 emissions aren't the problem, mostly the cost of operation making these that much more inaccessible to even the 1%.

Re: Boom Supersonic to break sound barrier during historic test flight today

#65

Post by JumpCrisscross »

wkat4242 wrote: post #47
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> tickets will be tens of thousands of dollars So about what a Golden Era international flight cost, inflation adjusted [1]. Not bad. [1] https://www.travelandleisure.com/airlines-airports/history-o...

It's what a private jet charter costs now. I bet rich execs prefer that despite the longer flying time. Getting direct to your destination, not having to rub shoulders with random people, stuff like that. It's also what killed the Concorde. Not enough comfort for the price.

> what a private jet charter costs now

No, it’s not. A domestic non-transcontinental charter costs about as much as a top-of-the-line international first-class ticket (~$25k).

Re: Boom Supersonic to break sound barrier during historic test flight today

#66

Post by kachapopopow »

agloe_dreams wrote: post #59
kachapopopow wrote: post #3

[flagged]

This whole 1% focus is just silly. The Concorde was expensive because everything around it was expensive, not just the nature of high speed flight. They built 20 planes total and never actually capitalized on large scale cost savings. The planes also used afterburner and burned a ton of fuel doing it. There is nothing stopping current transcontinential flights from being supersonic. Heck, the time savings can lead to…

The planes are now flying slower than ever in the name of efficiency. Large container boats are sailing slower than ever for the same reason.

Re: Boom Supersonic to break sound barrier during historic test flight today

#67

Post by JumpCrisscross »

kachapopopow wrote: post #62
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Supersonic flight will never be more efficient than traditional flights Efficient by what metric? Fuel use? That’s the new master of our existence, our six-proton czar? If there is one way to kill sympathy and support for climate-change action, it’s by not only insisting but actually hoping that living standards don’t improve (or regress) because it reduces emissions. Instead of seeing a new super-premium air-trave…

I'm the last person you'd use climate change as an argument, I'm generally just frightened by the amount of problems that the governments will have to ignore before they can have their first commercial flight bleeding into ground flights. It's the typical cyclist versus cars problem. I like cycling and I don't like driving and nothing will change that.

> first commercial flight bleeding into ground flights

?

> I like cycling and I don't like driving and nothing will change that

Nothing has to. If you started advocating for banning cars, on the other hand, you’d expect to see an anti-cycling lobby crop up.

Re: Boom Supersonic to break sound barrier during historic test flight today

#68

Post by ceejayoz »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #61
ceejayoz wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Concorde would probably struggle in the post-9/11 airport security world; the days of showing up at the airport just before the flight are long gone for most folks. A 2-3 hour reduction in flight time is appealing on its own , but probably not at a significant price increase.

> days of showing up at the airport just before the flight are long gone for most folks I show up 20 minutes before boarding, often later, at my small-town airport. For international flights out of JFK, I’ll show up 2 to 3 hours before, but there is still a world of difference between a lounge you can walk around and shower in and even the most luxurious lay-flat suites. NYC > SFO is 2 hours at Mach 1.7; if I’m not c…

Boom isn’t gonna be at small town airports anytime soon.

The lounge thing, IMO, is also a challenge for Boom. It’s gonna be a cramped plane. The folks shelling out that sort of coin for a flight expect certain amenities on it.

Re: Boom Supersonic to break sound barrier during historic test flight today

#69

Post by jauntywundrkind »

tjpnz wrote: post #54

I think a lot of people here are missing the point. The idea isn't to just replicate Concorde's flights across the Atlantic Ocean - or any stretch of water for that matter. Their plan would be to have this thing flying over land. The noise issue will be solved either through some feat of engineering or political lobbying. The cynic in me believes it will be mostly the latter.

I super do not want even a muffled supersonic boom crashing over my house!

It would definitely breed some significant resentment against the rich to have my house even gently shaking day by day.

My gut tells me this is in no way a solvable problem. But I too fear that after it's built, it'll be the LLM story of "yes we had to illegally access & use every book & piece of art in existence to train this, but now that we've built it, how could we turn back?"

Re: Boom Supersonic to break sound barrier during historic test flight today

#70

Post by DanielHB »

As someone who travels cross-atlantic semi-occasionally my price threshold for a 50% shorter flight is 25% increased cost. This is coming from a relatively well off middle-aged software engineer.

It is hard to think that this tech will ever be common besides a few "high status" (NY->London) routes like the concord was. It is my understanding that fuel costs increase as speed increases so there is no way this could ever be cheaper than non-hypersonic flights. But of course there is a market even if it is very limited, just like there was one for the concord. I expect this tech might displace some of the private plane market.

To me it seems more likely that we will see short-haul smaller electric aircraft take over for even cheaper costs with more stops along the way. Think like NY -> Açores -> London or LA -> Hawaii -> Japan.

edit: reading about this it seems the fuel-efficiency calculation is not as simple as I thought, there are some savings to be had in fuel by going above sound-speed. It seems the lowest fuel-efficiency happens at just below speed of sound. I am no expert in the subject though.

Post reply on HN