9 ms·

I love that a small company is and can challenge the big guys faster flight. For risks, aside from generally achieving the promised goals is there a big risk B

I love that a small company is and can challenge the big guys faster flight. For risks, aside from generally achieving the promised goals is there a big risk Boeing or Airbus copy this and have better sale channels to take over this as soon as the concept is proven. Boom development seems to have happened really quickly. I imagine the resources of the bigger companies can throw with their fiance and general engineer/production systems at this quickly if boom proves the concept.

SOLAR_FIELDS 9y ago
For the end consumer in this realm there is only victory, regardless of what happens to Boom. If 4 hour transatlantic flights become a viable option again I frankly don’t care who succeeded or failed to get to that point. I do enjoy watching companies like Boom, because this is the kind of underdog chutzpah that the word “courage” is supposed to describe.
- rtpg 9y ago
  4 hours combined with airport waits ends up becoming something like 6 hours right? Is there a big difference in practicality between 6 hours and 10 hours? Feels like you still lose the day to travel for the most part.
  - dgudkov 9y ago
    Yes, there is. If it's 6 hours you can make it two way for a meeting in one day without breaking your sleeping schedule. If it's 10 hours, you can't.
    - pc86 9y ago
      You can if you sleep on the return flight (or sleep on the first flight and have time in your schedule to shower/change after you land). The advantage is not with when you sleep, it's with where. With 6 hour flights you can sleep in your bed at home. You can't do that with the 10 hour flights unless you break your sleep schedule.
  - Moto7451 9y ago
    If you have your routine down, fly during the work week (most business travel), and have precheck you can pretty reliably have your wait down to 45 minutes. I fly a lot and usually breeze through the airport.
    - rtpg 9y ago
      Is that possible for international flights? My impression is that you're kinda forced to get there super early. But maybe I'm doing this wrong. I'm also used to doing international flights from cities where the airport is super far away. For example Charles De Gaulle is still a 45 minute train ride away from a lot of useful stuff. DFW's a bit out there too. The dream is obstensibly Shinkansen-style "get there in the morning, leave in the evening and be back before bedtime" flows. Is that doable with smaller international flights already?
      - psergeant 9y ago
        Depends on the airport. 100% possible at LCY, which is also only 20m from Canary Wharf.
        SOLAR_FIELDS 9y ago
        It really does. I can reasonably go to Houston Hobby or Austin Bergstrom and with Precheck expect to be at the gate within 15 minutes of when I walked in the door (assuming no checked baggage). DFW or O'Hare or George Bush is an entirely different ballgame.
      - karthikb 9y ago
        SFO - less than 60 minutes from SOMA to seat with (1) precheck, (2) no check in bags.
    - chrisseaton 9y ago
      Sometimes I go through the airport in 45 minutes or even a lot less, but I still get there three hours early because the risk of not getting through in 45 minutes, and the problems it causes if I don't, are too great. Getting through in 45 minutes four times out of five doesn't help me if I miss my flight and all my travel plans are ruined the other one time out of five.
  - rorykoehler 9y ago
    I fly internationally regularly for work. I get to the airport early have a coffee and get some work in. Then on the plane i connect to the wifi and continue to work. This way i don't lose any time. It's just a regular work day except I've crossed a sea and continent.
    - alex_young 9y ago
      Are you arguing for or against the viability of this idea? I genuinely cannot tell.
      - rorykoehler 9y ago
        I'm giving another perspective to inter-continental air travel and the idea that travel time is lost time. To clarify I'd take a shorter flight if available purely for my spinal health but it's possible to make international travel work. Timezones are a bigger concern than travel time.
  - dx034 9y ago
    Yes, a big difference. Currently, if you're based in London and have meetings in NYC you can fly out in the morning and take the evening flight back but won't be at home for the night. With a 4 hour flight (preferably out of London City where you can arrive 25 min before departure) you can fly out in the morning and be back at night. That way they can at least get some time to spend with their families. Some people would spend a lot of money for that.
    - achamayou 9y ago
      LCY has a short runway and particularly strict noise limits, it’s not especially obvious that fast aircraft would be able to operate from it.
      - pasta 9y ago
        When an aircraft is fast in the air it doesn't mean it has to be fast at the runway. For example the takeoff and landing speed of a F16 is almost the same as any other commercial plane (~270 km/h).
        dzhiurgis 9y ago
        You are comparing apples to oranges. Takeoff speed of similarly sized plane to F16, Cessna is around 100km/h. Concorde's take off speed was 400 km/h. Delta wings don't have same amount of lift, hence higher speeds.
        pasta 9y ago
        I was only replying to the fact that you cannot tell by top speed what runway is needed and what sound it makes.
        TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
        Similar? The F16 is about twice as long (49 feet / 15 meters) a Cessna (28 feet / 8.3 meters) and weights about 8.5 times as much unloaded: Cessna 2200lb / 1000kg and the F16 18,900lb / 8,570kg.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
jpatokal 9y ago
Airbus/Boeing are not known for quick delivery. It took >8 years to get the 787 from launch announcement to a customer, and that's after who knows how many years of internal studies and research.
nether 9y ago
I think the revenue from this would be a drop in a bucket compared to what Boeing pulls from conventional subsonic jetliners. Also, their entire engineering paradigm favors slow & conservative development. See how ULA has struggled to catch up to scrappy SpaceX.

SOLAR_FIELDS 9y ago

For the end consumer in this realm there is only victory, regardless of what happens to Boom. If 4 hour transatlantic flights become a viable option again I frankly don’t care who succeeded or failed to get to that point. I do enjoy watching companies like Boom, because this is the kind of underdog chutzpah that the word “courage” is supposed to describe.

rtpg 9y ago
4 hours combined with airport waits ends up becoming something like 6 hours right? Is there a big difference in practicality between 6 hours and 10 hours? Feels like you still lose the day to travel for the most part.
- dgudkov 9y ago
  Yes, there is. If it's 6 hours you can make it two way for a meeting in one day without breaking your sleeping schedule. If it's 10 hours, you can't.
  - pc86 9y ago
    You can if you sleep on the return flight (or sleep on the first flight and have time in your schedule to shower/change after you land). The advantage is not with when you sleep, it's with where. With 6 hour flights you can sleep in your bed at home. You can't do that with the 10 hour flights unless you break your sleep schedule.
- Moto7451 9y ago
  If you have your routine down, fly during the work week (most business travel), and have precheck you can pretty reliably have your wait down to 45 minutes. I fly a lot and usually breeze through the airport.
  - rtpg 9y ago
    Is that possible for international flights? My impression is that you're kinda forced to get there super early. But maybe I'm doing this wrong. I'm also used to doing international flights from cities where the airport is super far away. For example Charles De Gaulle is still a 45 minute train ride away from a lot of useful stuff. DFW's a bit out there too. The dream is obstensibly Shinkansen-style "get there in the morning, leave in the evening and be back before bedtime" flows. Is that doable with smaller international flights already?
    - psergeant 9y ago
      Depends on the airport. 100% possible at LCY, which is also only 20m from Canary Wharf.
      - SOLAR_FIELDS 9y ago
        It really does. I can reasonably go to Houston Hobby or Austin Bergstrom and with Precheck expect to be at the gate within 15 minutes of when I walked in the door (assuming no checked baggage). DFW or O'Hare or George Bush is an entirely different ballgame.
    - karthikb 9y ago
      SFO - less than 60 minutes from SOMA to seat with (1) precheck, (2) no check in bags.
  - chrisseaton 9y ago
    Sometimes I go through the airport in 45 minutes or even a lot less, but I still get there three hours early because the risk of not getting through in 45 minutes, and the problems it causes if I don't, are too great. Getting through in 45 minutes four times out of five doesn't help me if I miss my flight and all my travel plans are ruined the other one time out of five.
- rorykoehler 9y ago
  I fly internationally regularly for work. I get to the airport early have a coffee and get some work in. Then on the plane i connect to the wifi and continue to work. This way i don't lose any time. It's just a regular work day except I've crossed a sea and continent.
  - alex_young 9y ago
    Are you arguing for or against the viability of this idea? I genuinely cannot tell.
    - rorykoehler 9y ago
      I'm giving another perspective to inter-continental air travel and the idea that travel time is lost time. To clarify I'd take a shorter flight if available purely for my spinal health but it's possible to make international travel work. Timezones are a bigger concern than travel time.
- dx034 9y ago
  Yes, a big difference. Currently, if you're based in London and have meetings in NYC you can fly out in the morning and take the evening flight back but won't be at home for the night. With a 4 hour flight (preferably out of London City where you can arrive 25 min before departure) you can fly out in the morning and be back at night. That way they can at least get some time to spend with their families. Some people would spend a lot of money for that.
  - achamayou 9y ago
    LCY has a short runway and particularly strict noise limits, it’s not especially obvious that fast aircraft would be able to operate from it.
    - pasta 9y ago
      When an aircraft is fast in the air it doesn't mean it has to be fast at the runway. For example the takeoff and landing speed of a F16 is almost the same as any other commercial plane (~270 km/h).
      - dzhiurgis 9y ago
        You are comparing apples to oranges. Takeoff speed of similarly sized plane to F16, Cessna is around 100km/h. Concorde's take off speed was 400 km/h. Delta wings don't have same amount of lift, hence higher speeds.
        pasta 9y ago
        I was only replying to the fact that you cannot tell by top speed what runway is needed and what sound it makes.
        TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
        Similar? The F16 is about twice as long (49 feet / 15 meters) a Cessna (28 feet / 8.3 meters) and weights about 8.5 times as much unloaded: Cessna 2200lb / 1000kg and the F16 18,900lb / 8,570kg.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

jpatokal 9y ago

Airbus/Boeing are not known for quick delivery. It took >8 years to get the 787 from launch announcement to a customer, and that's after who knows how many years of internal studies and research.

nether 9y ago

I think the revenue from this would be a drop in a bucket compared to what Boeing pulls from conventional subsonic jetliners. Also, their entire engineering paradigm favors slow & conservative development. See how ULA has struggled to catch up to scrappy SpaceX.