Boom XB-1 Baby Boom

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boom_XB-1_Baby_Boom

by curtis • 7 years ago

20 20 7 years ago

en.wikipedia.org

Are supersonic aircraft for rich people compatible with a world battling radical climate change?

Supersonic passenger jets are likely to burn three to four times as much fuel per business-class passenger as standard passenger jets.

redorb• 7 years ago

Looks like a 2 person tester for super sonic flight, not a private jet for 2 people. The difference is they could produce a commercial level super sonic jet someday and that is cool.

new_realist2• 7 years ago

Yes, I'm well aware that it's a demonstrator for an eventual all-business-class supersonic passenger jet, which will pollute carbon into the atmosphere like there's no tomorrow. I don't think that's particularly cool.

sempron64• 7 years ago

Self-flagellation by restricting technological capability is not the solution to climate change. It's not expected that flights on this aircraft will address the mass market. With regards to climate change this will be a drop in the bucket.

Solving global climate change requires rethinking energy generation, ground and sea shipping, transportation, heating, and addressing deforestation. It will not be solved by banning plastic straws, sorting your garbage, or even driving an electric car (though switching to electric cars is a very good step towards electric trucks, and will have a noticeable impact, unlike this niche airliner).

Don't ban niche things just because they contain something that is immoral at scale. EVERYTHING is immoral at scale, including eating food or breathing. We need to address and manage our problems to allow humanity to live, not die by a thousand self-hating cuts. Optimization is always addressed by looking at the 80%, not the 20%.

Maybe once this jet is in the air, if fuel expenditure is at all a concern, we can figure out how to address the efficiency concerns once we have the rest of the problems of aerodynamics and the infrastructure to manufacture this sorted out.

reitzensteinm• 7 years ago

Putting a price on carbon is by no means self flagellation and may well ruin the economics of the venture.

dannykwells2• 7 years ago

This reads like an advertisement. Why has it not been flagged by Wikipedia? What is notable at all about a single prototype test aircraft from a unknown start up?

ardy42• 7 years ago

On first look, it appears that it's only been edited by aircraft enthusiast Wikipedians with diverse edit histories.

hairytrog2• 7 years ago

Aircraft enthusiasts known as Boom employees? lol

dannykwells2• 7 years ago

I made no claim of foul play. It's just a poorly written article about something that is not notable.

xiphias2• 7 years ago

Boom is one of the early hardware startups in the world of software startups, so it's quite notable actually. The only problem it has it that it's doing something hard.

andr• 7 years ago

What is Boom's economic argument for supersonic passenger flight? Fuel is already #1 cost of airlines and pricing is very competitive, to the point that some airlines would rather cut service than raise prices. It sounds like the conditions that led to the demise of the Concorde have only exacerbated.

i_am_proteus• 7 years ago

They predict that there is demand for the service at a price that would make operation profitable.

seanmcdirmid2• 7 years ago

Having the plane in the air for less time can lead to lesser costs also: you don’t need to pay your pilots or flight attendants for as many hours, and can fit more flights in using the same plane per week. If the fuel cost and maintenance costs aren’t too much higher, it could be a big win beyond just getting passengers to where they are going faster (like track and carriage utilization for HSR).

hairytrog2• 7 years ago

I'm pretty sure flight time is not the dominant labor cost. It's docking and going in and out of the airport and pre/post-flight prep.

Boom XB-1 Baby Boom

Related Stories