3 ms·

Such a well written summary I think it should pretty much be a footnote to any of the super sonic / hyper sonic / quad-copter-automated-flying-thingy forward lo

Such a well written summary I think it should pretty much be a footnote to any of the super sonic / hyper sonic / quad-copter-automated-flying-thingy forward looking statements. I think projects like Boom are perfectly fine for rich billionaires to throw money at in their spare time, because they still run into physics and logistics. In doing research for a project, I came across some Annual Reports for the company Sabre. Some might recognize the name, as they were an in-house tech / logistics / travel operations company for American Airlines that got spun off into its own entity years back. Point being, they have a vested interest in air travel, and over and over, the CEO was concerned and frustrated by the lack of modernization in flight systems and overall system improvements. A very consistent theme, and I can't disagree with him. Looking at it another way, the scale of persons affected by system upgrades and improvements drastically overshadows those who would, uh, gain from supersonic travel. Just makes sense.

anovikov 10y ago
manned quad-copter is fine. i am sure it can be man-rated with tolerable expenses and will quite soon become a useful way of within-city transportation. supersonic passenger plane is in completely different league...
- ajarmst 10y ago
  Crew-rated is radically different from passenger-rated in basic safety requirements. The problem with quad copters is that they're unstable in flight after the loss of only one engine, and lack sufficient mass in the propellors to effectively autorotate. That makes nearly any propulsion or control system failure in a crewed quad copter a probable hull-loss and crew-loss event. Even test pilots have problems with flying under those conditions. The problem isn't lifting a human to a useful height and velocity---the Romans solved that with catapults. The problem is being able to reasonably assure them that you can return them to earth safely, reliably, and sufficiently inexpensively.
  - 6stringmerc 10y ago
    My logic was more from an insurance perspective related to a point you brought up - re: transportation improvements will likely be related to population dense environments. Looking at the quad copters I have some doubts regarding navigation and/or performance during a catastrophic failure where others might be put at risk. That's not an unreasonable concern for life and property. As you noted, again, there are high thresholds regarding crew and passenger parameters. I think those also extend to functional operations. For commercial aviation, there is a good 50+ years of accident records and ways that companies have paid out for tragedies and whatnot. Adding in a new component - the quad copter model - is most definitely outside of the norm and I think will be viewed as high risk at first, even if there are great financial rewards to be reaped down the line pending success.
  - elmar 10y ago
    at the moment the electrical quad copter bigest problem is the lack of autonomy 15 minutes max time.

anovikov 10y ago

manned quad-copter is fine. i am sure it can be man-rated with tolerable expenses and will quite soon become a useful way of within-city transportation. supersonic passenger plane is in completely different league...

ajarmst 10y ago
Crew-rated is radically different from passenger-rated in basic safety requirements. The problem with quad copters is that they're unstable in flight after the loss of only one engine, and lack sufficient mass in the propellors to effectively autorotate. That makes nearly any propulsion or control system failure in a crewed quad copter a probable hull-loss and crew-loss event. Even test pilots have problems with flying under those conditions. The problem isn't lifting a human to a useful height and velocity---the Romans solved that with catapults. The problem is being able to reasonably assure them that you can return them to earth safely, reliably, and sufficiently inexpensively.
- 6stringmerc 10y ago
  My logic was more from an insurance perspective related to a point you brought up - re: transportation improvements will likely be related to population dense environments. Looking at the quad copters I have some doubts regarding navigation and/or performance during a catastrophic failure where others might be put at risk. That's not an unreasonable concern for life and property. As you noted, again, there are high thresholds regarding crew and passenger parameters. I think those also extend to functional operations. For commercial aviation, there is a good 50+ years of accident records and ways that companies have paid out for tragedies and whatnot. Adding in a new component - the quad copter model - is most definitely outside of the norm and I think will be viewed as high risk at first, even if there are great financial rewards to be reaped down the line pending success.
- elmar 10y ago
  at the moment the electrical quad copter bigest problem is the lack of autonomy 15 minutes max time.