9 ms·

> That's to be expected - press releases focus on super-optimistic specs and timelines. No, this isn’t normal at all. Some optimism is expected but promising c

> That's to be expected - press releases focus on super-optimistic specs and timelines. No, this isn’t normal at all. Some optimism is expected but promising commercial operation a couple years out when they weren’t even close to anything like it is simply lying. We shouldn’t be giving companies a pass for this stuff

lumost 5y ago
The optimistic timeline may have been based on "if we get the money and customers we expect, and they don't have any special requirements". When the above isn't true you're likely to see a slower rollout. The company is projecting the optimistic form of their current plan to attract investors/customers who will help make that timeline a reality.
theptip 5y ago
2020 was not normal for the travel industry. Would not be surprising if they went into hibernation, and/or all of their order book was paused while covid uncertainty persisted.
- rjzzleep 5y ago
  Boom supersonic isn't travel industry. It's silicon valley engineering.
  - ghaff 5y ago
    No it's actual real engineering. They're located in Denver.
  - theptip 5y ago
    The title of TFA is "United Airlines will buy 15 planes from Boom Supersonic". I would describe United Airlines as in the travel industry.
cglace 5y ago
What do you propose “we” do?
qayxc 5y ago
> No, this isn’t normal at all. Hm. Significant delays and missed timelines aren't normal you say? Let's see (aerospace only): • all SpaceX projects so far (USA) • Virgin Galactic's space tourism plans (USA) • Boeing's 787 and 777X (USA) • HAL's Sukhoi-30-, Jaguar Darin III-, and Tejas LCA projects and production (India) • BAE Systems Plc/TAI TF-X project (UK/Turkey) • EADS's MRH-90, Tiger, and A400M (EU) • Airbus A380 (EU) • Comac’s C919 project (China) • ... TBH, it'd be easier to list projects that actually finished on schedule and didn't face significant delays, such as the Airbus A350XWB. And most of the companies listed aren't even money-starved start-ups that required investor attention and media hype. It's almost as if developing, testing, and certifying cutting edge aerospace projects is kind of hard and just as easy to predict and schedule as large software projects...
- iab 5y ago
  Interesting comment about the XWB. The hype-driving is obviously necessary - nothing is ever more than ~5 years away, because that is the limit of VC/consumer patience.
  - rjzzleep 5y ago
    Worked out quite well for Theranos didn't it?
    - iab 5y ago
      The exemplar of the wrong mix of engineering and hubris
    - simplicio 5y ago
      Theranos isn't really the same thing though, they didn't pretend that they were on the verge of a breakthrough, they said they had already had the breakthrough and the tech was working and deployed. That's less "hype" and more just straight up "fraud". Boom Supersonic is obviously overly optimistic in their deadlines, but they at least aren't pretending that they're meeting them when they aren't.
projectileboy 5y ago
I agree that it is wrong to give companies a pass on this behavior, but, with respect, this is in fact pretty normal in the aviation industry. In fact, given the ambitions of Boom, I’d argue they’re doing quite a bit better than any of us might have expected.
ekianjo 5y ago
> No, this isn’t normal at all. When you want to sell, you should be overly optimistic in your presentation. When you have sold, you can now explain the real picture and explain that actually... everything will take 3 times longer than when you were trying to sell.
- tohmasu 5y ago
  You have inadvertently highlighted how thin the line is between (some) business and fraud.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    How is it fraud if they actually deliver a product, but late? Wouldn't fraud be never delivering a product after taking money for it? Granted, the IF in the first sentence is still looming over them. I hate super positve PR propaganda too, and a skeptical eye should always be applied. Fraud is still used when talking about Tesla, yet they clearly have developed products. Yes deadlines were missed. I'm willing to give Boom a bit of leeway.
    - jorams 5y ago
      Delivery time is a feature of the product you are selling. Say I'm looking for a bike. Person A is selling one I like and promises to deliver after two weeks. Person B is selling one I like a bit less, but promises to deliver after one week. I might now choose to buy from person B, even if I like the bike a bit less. If I buy from person B and they deliver after three weeks, there's a problem. Why did it take three times as long? Did they ever intend to deliver after one week? Should they have known they wouldn't be able deliver after one week? They got the order based on a feature they didn't deliver. If that was intentional, that's fraud.
oivey 5y ago
“Could be ready” falls pretty short of making a promise. I’m not sure what giving them a pass really entails. If they’re late to market it costs them money. Are you going to boycott using their product if it is good but late?
mshumi 5y ago
Unfortunately, aerospace isn't an industry where you can say "fuck it, ship it"
- dylan604 5y ago
  737Max disagrees with that sentiment.
  - leoc 5y ago
    Talk about the exception that proves the rule, though!
    - dylan604 5y ago
      300+ deaths seems like a very tough lesson to learn to prove the rule, though. Sorry, you comment struck me as rather macabre. This isn't a software update that caused people a temporary bit of inconvenience.
      - bobthepanda 5y ago
        Aviation has very high visibility of fatal crashes but a low overall rate. The car fatality rate is much higher but we treat it as routine because they are lower severity events at much higher frequency.
      - leoc 5y ago
        TBH I'm not sure what you think I was saying.
      - chrisseaton 5y ago
        That was the point of the person you replied to. You’re in agreement.
risyachka 5y ago
>> We shouldn’t be giving companies a pass for this stuff You don't have to. It it not a government project. The only pass that matters is their ivestor's. And most of the time as long as the progress is made and the outcome overweights the delay, everyone will be happy to wait. Same with cures and vaccines. Who cares if they are delayed? It is not on purpose. Would you rather have it delayed or never?
- lmm 5y ago
  > The only pass that matters is their ivestor's. Which relies on the company's public statements being honest. Normalising unrealistic timeline announcements hurts everyone.

lumost 5y ago

The optimistic timeline may have been based on "if we get the money and customers we expect, and they don't have any special requirements". When the above isn't true you're likely to see a slower rollout. The company is projecting the optimistic form of their current plan to attract investors/customers who will help make that timeline a reality.

theptip 5y ago

2020 was not normal for the travel industry. Would not be surprising if they went into hibernation, and/or all of their order book was paused while covid uncertainty persisted.

rjzzleep 5y ago
Boom supersonic isn't travel industry. It's silicon valley engineering.
- ghaff 5y ago
  No it's actual real engineering. They're located in Denver.
- theptip 5y ago
  The title of TFA is "United Airlines will buy 15 planes from Boom Supersonic". I would describe United Airlines as in the travel industry.

cglace 5y ago

What do you propose “we” do?

qayxc 5y ago

> No, this isn’t normal at all. Hm. Significant delays and missed timelines aren't normal you say? Let's see (aerospace only): • all SpaceX projects so far (USA) • Virgin Galactic's space tourism plans (USA) • Boeing's 787 and 777X (USA) • HAL's Sukhoi-30-, Jaguar Darin III-, and Tejas LCA projects and production (India) • BAE Systems Plc/TAI TF-X project (UK/Turkey) • EADS's MRH-90, Tiger, and A400M (EU) • Airbus A380 (EU) • Comac’s C919 project (China) • ... TBH, it'd be easier to list projects that actually finished on schedule and didn't face significant delays, such as the Airbus A350XWB. And most of the companies listed aren't even money-starved start-ups that required investor attention and media hype. It's almost as if developing, testing, and certifying cutting edge aerospace projects is kind of hard and just as easy to predict and schedule as large software projects...

iab 5y ago
Interesting comment about the XWB. The hype-driving is obviously necessary - nothing is ever more than ~5 years away, because that is the limit of VC/consumer patience.
- rjzzleep 5y ago
  Worked out quite well for Theranos didn't it?
  - iab 5y ago
    The exemplar of the wrong mix of engineering and hubris
  - simplicio 5y ago
    Theranos isn't really the same thing though, they didn't pretend that they were on the verge of a breakthrough, they said they had already had the breakthrough and the tech was working and deployed. That's less "hype" and more just straight up "fraud". Boom Supersonic is obviously overly optimistic in their deadlines, but they at least aren't pretending that they're meeting them when they aren't.

projectileboy 5y ago

I agree that it is wrong to give companies a pass on this behavior, but, with respect, this is in fact pretty normal in the aviation industry. In fact, given the ambitions of Boom, I’d argue they’re doing quite a bit better than any of us might have expected.

ekianjo 5y ago

> No, this isn’t normal at all. When you want to sell, you should be overly optimistic in your presentation. When you have sold, you can now explain the real picture and explain that actually... everything will take 3 times longer than when you were trying to sell.

tohmasu 5y ago
You have inadvertently highlighted how thin the line is between (some) business and fraud.
- dylan604 5y ago
  How is it fraud if they actually deliver a product, but late? Wouldn't fraud be never delivering a product after taking money for it? Granted, the IF in the first sentence is still looming over them. I hate super positve PR propaganda too, and a skeptical eye should always be applied. Fraud is still used when talking about Tesla, yet they clearly have developed products. Yes deadlines were missed. I'm willing to give Boom a bit of leeway.
  - jorams 5y ago
    Delivery time is a feature of the product you are selling. Say I'm looking for a bike. Person A is selling one I like and promises to deliver after two weeks. Person B is selling one I like a bit less, but promises to deliver after one week. I might now choose to buy from person B, even if I like the bike a bit less. If I buy from person B and they deliver after three weeks, there's a problem. Why did it take three times as long? Did they ever intend to deliver after one week? Should they have known they wouldn't be able deliver after one week? They got the order based on a feature they didn't deliver. If that was intentional, that's fraud.

oivey 5y ago

“Could be ready” falls pretty short of making a promise. I’m not sure what giving them a pass really entails. If they’re late to market it costs them money. Are you going to boycott using their product if it is good but late?

mshumi 5y ago

Unfortunately, aerospace isn't an industry where you can say "fuck it, ship it"

dylan604 5y ago
737Max disagrees with that sentiment.
- leoc 5y ago
  Talk about the exception that proves the rule, though!
  - dylan604 5y ago
    300+ deaths seems like a very tough lesson to learn to prove the rule, though. Sorry, you comment struck me as rather macabre. This isn't a software update that caused people a temporary bit of inconvenience.
    - bobthepanda 5y ago
      Aviation has very high visibility of fatal crashes but a low overall rate. The car fatality rate is much higher but we treat it as routine because they are lower severity events at much higher frequency.
    - leoc 5y ago
      TBH I'm not sure what you think I was saying.
    - chrisseaton 5y ago
      That was the point of the person you replied to. You’re in agreement.

risyachka 5y ago

>> We shouldn’t be giving companies a pass for this stuff You don't have to. It it not a government project. The only pass that matters is their ivestor's. And most of the time as long as the progress is made and the outcome overweights the delay, everyone will be happy to wait. Same with cures and vaccines. Who cares if they are delayed? It is not on purpose. Would you rather have it delayed or never?

lmm 5y ago
> The only pass that matters is their ivestor's. Which relies on the company's public statements being honest. Normalising unrealistic timeline announcements hurts everyone.