3 ms·

YouTube channel Real Engineering released a video recently on aviation startup Hermeus, which is developing a ramjet ultimately intended for commercial air trav

YouTube channel Real Engineering released a video recently on aviation startup Hermeus, which is developing a ramjet ultimately intended for commercial air travel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyKtxsdI0z8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyKtxsdI0z8 The thumbnail is a bit click-bait, but the video itself has a lot of depth. They give Hermeus space to present itself in a very positive light. As a non-expert having watched the video, it does seem at least plausible that this company may yet succeed. They mention fuel costs in passing, but they don't talk about carbon emissions. That's probably fair, since carbon is a much broader issue than just aviation. It's probably more productive to focus on shutting down coal plants than stifling innovation in air travel. But it's worth bearing in mind that positive things like hypersonic air travel do have a cost.

hef19898 3y ago
What people always underestimate is the amount of time, and money, it takes to get anything developed, built and certified in aerospace. And that is for even small modifications done on existing design by the major players. Starting from scratch, already a new design is hard enough not to talk about a new company, is even harder. Just timeline wise, realistically you talk about around 5 years for something new, start to finish. That's millions upon millions for existing companies, if everything goes well. And hardly ever goes well, delays and tecjnical issues are common. Again, for proven tech don eby established companies. Something like a commercial ramjet engine developed by a start-up is not even the same solar system: there we talk, realistically, billions and closer to a decade, if it works technically. And then you need a market for that engine, which means demand (doubtfull, but who knows) and more importantly, an aircraft. And the last bit again is aroubd a decade and another couple of billions. Engine and aircraft development can, and has, been done in parallel. It still takes longer so, as both development projects depend on each other, the A400M would be a recent example of that approach. If Hermeus doesn't have a development partner for the airframe, realistically, if everything (!) goes well, we talk about at least 15-20 years from now. Not sure if VC funding is the right model for stuff like this.
- Ekaros 3y ago
  5 years is pretty sort. Looking at A220, which I think took closer to 10 years. Which I think is realistic timeline for new modern design, not just modernising old one. A350 and 777X also show similar timelines... That is from planning to deliveries. And these are the players with experience building to specific segment of market... Throw in enough novel ideas and it might double...
  - hef19898 3y ago
    Easily. And aerospace began to move fast again since the A380, B777, B787, A350 and such. The decades before were a lot slower. At least now ypu don't have to mix people pulled back from retirement with new grads to get a team that has the collective experience of a programm start to finish anymore.
panick21_ 3y ago
Real Engineering always gets access to companies because he presents everybody in an overly positive light. He never actually does the negative stuff, except for company he doesn't get invited into.

hef19898 3y ago

What people always underestimate is the amount of time, and money, it takes to get anything developed, built and certified in aerospace. And that is for even small modifications done on existing design by the major players. Starting from scratch, already a new design is hard enough not to talk about a new company, is even harder. Just timeline wise, realistically you talk about around 5 years for something new, start to finish. That's millions upon millions for existing companies, if everything goes well. And hardly ever goes well, delays and tecjnical issues are common. Again, for proven tech don eby established companies. Something like a commercial ramjet engine developed by a start-up is not even the same solar system: there we talk, realistically, billions and closer to a decade, if it works technically. And then you need a market for that engine, which means demand (doubtfull, but who knows) and more importantly, an aircraft. And the last bit again is aroubd a decade and another couple of billions. Engine and aircraft development can, and has, been done in parallel. It still takes longer so, as both development projects depend on each other, the A400M would be a recent example of that approach. If Hermeus doesn't have a development partner for the airframe, realistically, if everything (!) goes well, we talk about at least 15-20 years from now. Not sure if VC funding is the right model for stuff like this.

Ekaros 3y ago
5 years is pretty sort. Looking at A220, which I think took closer to 10 years. Which I think is realistic timeline for new modern design, not just modernising old one. A350 and 777X also show similar timelines... That is from planning to deliveries. And these are the players with experience building to specific segment of market... Throw in enough novel ideas and it might double...
- hef19898 3y ago
  Easily. And aerospace began to move fast again since the A380, B777, B787, A350 and such. The decades before were a lot slower. At least now ypu don't have to mix people pulled back from retirement with new grads to get a team that has the collective experience of a programm start to finish anymore.

panick21_ 3y ago

Real Engineering always gets access to companies because he presents everybody in an overly positive light. He never actually does the negative stuff, except for company he doesn't get invited into.