5 ms·

Is it a good time to pitch an aircraft manufacturing startup at Y Combinator?

by speedgoose 3y ago

flamedoge 3y ago
probably easier to ask Elon to start building airplanes
- nativeit 3y ago
  Yeah, because he’s the beginning and end of prudent reliability.
- andix 3y ago
  That was one of my first ideas, because it could actually work out. But it has the potential to become even more problematic than Boeing.
- avgDev 3y ago
  Great idea! After all Musk himself he knows more about manufacturing than anyone else.
- randmeerkat 3y ago
  > probably easier to ask Elon to start building airplanes I’m not sure if this is sarcasm or not, but I had the same thought. I can’t imagine that building an airplane is more complicated than self-landing rockets. He could integrate them with Starlink too so customers on the flight had actual wifi that works.
  - MichaelNolan 3y ago
    The reusable, self landing rocket is certainly more complicated in some ways. But airplanes, and their engines are probably more complicated in other ways. SpaceX’s rocket engines are an engineering marvel. But they only need to run for minutes at a time. Aircraft engines can run for hours at a time, and for 10s of thousands of hours before a major overhaul is needed. It’s a different kind of complexity. On the starlink side, customers will get that anyways. The existing plane operators will start using it for their internet.
- neuronexmachina 3y ago
  Apparently at the Monaco Grand Prix he was overheard mentioning to Tony Stark his idea for an electric jet.
  - speedgoose 3y ago
    Some years to catch: https://www.airbus.com/en/innovation/low-carbon-aviation/hybrid-and-electric-flight https://www.airbus.com/en/innovation/low-carbon-aviation/hyb...
wlesieutre 3y ago
They've got at least one already https://www.ycombinator.com/blog/boom-yc-w16-is-building-an-affordable-supersonic-aircraft https://www.ycombinator.com/blog/boom-yc-w16-is-building-an-...
- dgfitz 3y ago
  I was intriuged so I looked them up. Looks like they're going to start building. This is pretty neat. https://boomsupersonic.com/press-release/boom-supersonic-first-supersonic-airliner-manufacturing-facility https://boomsupersonic.com/press-release/boom-supersonic-fir...
  - andix 3y ago
    This is actually how Airbus got started. It's a spin off from the Concorde manufacturer.
    - javawizard 3y ago
      Or more accurately, it's a merger of the Concorde manufacturer with two other aerospace companies. Or even more accurately: it's complicated :)
    - jemmyw 3y ago
      Sure but also with the backing of two European governments who wanted to save their aerospace industry.
      - andix 3y ago
        Exactly what the US will be doing, if Boeing fails.
  - TremendousJudge 3y ago
    I've been reading about them for years. Rolls-Royce was going to make the engine (the most important and innovative part of the plane), they dropped out in 2022, and then they said they are going to make their own engine. That update you posted is from 2022. Latest update they've posted is from June 2023[0], and they only mention some contractors and that the engine doesn't exist yet. I think the whole thing is vaporware, they'll never make a single flight. [0] https://boomsupersonic.com/press-release/boom-supersonic-announces-significant-overture-program-advances https://boomsupersonic.com/press-release/boom-supersonic-ann...
belter 3y ago
Move fast and break things?
ramesh31 3y ago
>Is it a good time to pitch an aircraft manufacturing startup at Y Combinator? The exit plan for all aviation startups in the US is to sell out to Boeing or Lockheed (preferably with an acquihire), or be folded into their supply chain. Zero exceptions.
neither_color 3y ago
COMAC is already eyeing 10% of Boeing/Airbus' lunch and they've been working on it for years with state-level "help" that resulted in espionage arrests/convictions. Airplanes are extremely complicated.
- ethbr1 3y ago
  The most cyberpunk thing I've seen are the various aerospace "offices" around the Beijing airport. They're basically tiny bunkers, surrounded by fences and barbed wire.
  - pests 3y ago
    Interesting, more details?
addicted 3y ago
The U.S. needs a lot more rail. The government should go the EU way. Build the tracks but lease out the actual operations to private companies that can bid for track and station time. For example, I suspect if Amtrak was forced to compete with private firms for track time in the NorthEast corridor you’d see an explosion of service and a dramatic drop in prices. I suspect flights like Boston-NYC and DC-NYC would reduce dramatically. And maybe even more importantly there would be greater lobbying efforts from private firms to upgrade the tracks and improve the routes. Currently it’s very difficult for Amtrak to push for that because it’s quasi public nature means there is limited profit incentive and no opportunity to raise capital from the private sector. That would change if at least a couple of private firms could get going in the NorthEast corridor.
- t0mas88 3y ago
  In most of Europe flying is still nearly always cheaper than taking the train, even with good high speed rail connections. And short EU flights with low cost carriers are a lot cheaper than US domestic flights. The US doesn't have these ultra low cost carriers.
- panick21_ 3y ago
  No. The only way Europe is doing it that way is because all the national train companies exist and are simply not going away politically. So now they make it somewhat easier to operate train in the other countries. For the US, it makes sense to have a single main carrier for much of the core system. > For example, I suspect if Amtrak was forced to compete with private firms for track time in the NorthEast corridor you’d see an explosion of service and a dramatic drop in prices. That is most probably wrong. Train operations cost once all the infrastructure is paid for is really not that different government vs private. There is simply not that much to compete on. In fact some of the things that can be improved most, like ticketing and scheduling can be improve more for the costumer if there are less options. Europe has seen very little actual private companies that compete very well and make a significant difference. There are a few things you can differentiate on. Some budget trains just use shit old rolling stock for example. Just finding creative ways of paying people less. The reality is, most of the cost is in setting up infrastructure including signaling, maintaining that, then buying nice trains and training good people. Some private train companies have gotten some investment to buy some nice train sets, but nothing about that is all that amazing. If the government operator had the funds, they could do the same and run the same route. The reality is that competition on fixed rail infrastructure might be worth doing but its not some magical cost cutting tool. Politicians who want to offer their constituents good train service should the the ones lobbying. The reality is, if you have private rail companies, they will mostly lobby for ways to reduce work pay because that where they can compete against Amtrak.

Is it a good time to pitch an aircraft manufacturing startup at Y Combinator?

flamedoge 3y ago

probably easier to ask Elon to start building airplanes

nativeit 3y ago
Yeah, because he’s the beginning and end of prudent reliability.
andix 3y ago
That was one of my first ideas, because it could actually work out. But it has the potential to become even more problematic than Boeing.
avgDev 3y ago
Great idea! After all Musk himself he knows more about manufacturing than anyone else.
randmeerkat 3y ago
> probably easier to ask Elon to start building airplanes I’m not sure if this is sarcasm or not, but I had the same thought. I can’t imagine that building an airplane is more complicated than self-landing rockets. He could integrate them with Starlink too so customers on the flight had actual wifi that works.
- MichaelNolan 3y ago
  The reusable, self landing rocket is certainly more complicated in some ways. But airplanes, and their engines are probably more complicated in other ways. SpaceX’s rocket engines are an engineering marvel. But they only need to run for minutes at a time. Aircraft engines can run for hours at a time, and for 10s of thousands of hours before a major overhaul is needed. It’s a different kind of complexity. On the starlink side, customers will get that anyways. The existing plane operators will start using it for their internet.
neuronexmachina 3y ago
Apparently at the Monaco Grand Prix he was overheard mentioning to Tony Stark his idea for an electric jet.
- speedgoose 3y ago
  Some years to catch: https://www.airbus.com/en/innovation/low-carbon-aviation/hybrid-and-electric-flight https://www.airbus.com/en/innovation/low-carbon-aviation/hyb...

wlesieutre 3y ago

They've got at least one already https://www.ycombinator.com/blog/boom-yc-w16-is-building-an-affordable-supersonic-aircraft https://www.ycombinator.com/blog/boom-yc-w16-is-building-an-...

dgfitz 3y ago
I was intriuged so I looked them up. Looks like they're going to start building. This is pretty neat. https://boomsupersonic.com/press-release/boom-supersonic-first-supersonic-airliner-manufacturing-facility https://boomsupersonic.com/press-release/boom-supersonic-fir...
- andix 3y ago
  This is actually how Airbus got started. It's a spin off from the Concorde manufacturer.
  - javawizard 3y ago
    Or more accurately, it's a merger of the Concorde manufacturer with two other aerospace companies. Or even more accurately: it's complicated :)
  - jemmyw 3y ago
    Sure but also with the backing of two European governments who wanted to save their aerospace industry.
    - andix 3y ago
      Exactly what the US will be doing, if Boeing fails.
- TremendousJudge 3y ago
  I've been reading about them for years. Rolls-Royce was going to make the engine (the most important and innovative part of the plane), they dropped out in 2022, and then they said they are going to make their own engine. That update you posted is from 2022. Latest update they've posted is from June 2023[0], and they only mention some contractors and that the engine doesn't exist yet. I think the whole thing is vaporware, they'll never make a single flight. [0] https://boomsupersonic.com/press-release/boom-supersonic-announces-significant-overture-program-advances https://boomsupersonic.com/press-release/boom-supersonic-ann...

belter 3y ago

Move fast and break things?

ramesh31 3y ago

>Is it a good time to pitch an aircraft manufacturing startup at Y Combinator? The exit plan for all aviation startups in the US is to sell out to Boeing or Lockheed (preferably with an acquihire), or be folded into their supply chain. Zero exceptions.

neither_color 3y ago

COMAC is already eyeing 10% of Boeing/Airbus' lunch and they've been working on it for years with state-level "help" that resulted in espionage arrests/convictions. Airplanes are extremely complicated.

ethbr1 3y ago
The most cyberpunk thing I've seen are the various aerospace "offices" around the Beijing airport. They're basically tiny bunkers, surrounded by fences and barbed wire.
- pests 3y ago
  Interesting, more details?

addicted 3y ago

The U.S. needs a lot more rail. The government should go the EU way. Build the tracks but lease out the actual operations to private companies that can bid for track and station time. For example, I suspect if Amtrak was forced to compete with private firms for track time in the NorthEast corridor you’d see an explosion of service and a dramatic drop in prices. I suspect flights like Boston-NYC and DC-NYC would reduce dramatically. And maybe even more importantly there would be greater lobbying efforts from private firms to upgrade the tracks and improve the routes. Currently it’s very difficult for Amtrak to push for that because it’s quasi public nature means there is limited profit incentive and no opportunity to raise capital from the private sector. That would change if at least a couple of private firms could get going in the NorthEast corridor.

t0mas88 3y ago
In most of Europe flying is still nearly always cheaper than taking the train, even with good high speed rail connections. And short EU flights with low cost carriers are a lot cheaper than US domestic flights. The US doesn't have these ultra low cost carriers.
panick21_ 3y ago
No. The only way Europe is doing it that way is because all the national train companies exist and are simply not going away politically. So now they make it somewhat easier to operate train in the other countries. For the US, it makes sense to have a single main carrier for much of the core system. > For example, I suspect if Amtrak was forced to compete with private firms for track time in the NorthEast corridor you’d see an explosion of service and a dramatic drop in prices. That is most probably wrong. Train operations cost once all the infrastructure is paid for is really not that different government vs private. There is simply not that much to compete on. In fact some of the things that can be improved most, like ticketing and scheduling can be improve more for the costumer if there are less options. Europe has seen very little actual private companies that compete very well and make a significant difference. There are a few things you can differentiate on. Some budget trains just use shit old rolling stock for example. Just finding creative ways of paying people less. The reality is, most of the cost is in setting up infrastructure including signaling, maintaining that, then buying nice trains and training good people. Some private train companies have gotten some investment to buy some nice train sets, but nothing about that is all that amazing. If the government operator had the funds, they could do the same and run the same route. The reality is that competition on fixed rail infrastructure might be worth doing but its not some magical cost cutting tool. Politicians who want to offer their constituents good train service should the the ones lobbying. The reality is, if you have private rail companies, they will mostly lobby for ways to reduce work pay because that where they can compete against Amtrak.