Boom Supersonic raises $100M, aims for 2019 test flights

Yikes, when did HN become so full of haters? This is easily one of the most exciting startups out there at the moment. It would be a game changer for so many people living in Europe and Asia who would love to live outside the US and commute to the US regularly for work.<p>Is it the everyman&#x27;s plane? Certainly not. But it essentially makes living in Tokyo&#x2F;Hong Kong&#x2F;Singapore&#x2F;Sydney and working in SF much closer to living in New York and working in SF (which a lot of senior executives and investors do). Imagine if Australia East Coast was a 6hr flight and 5hr time difference to SF. New York is a 6hr flight and a 3hr time difference to SF. Seems a lot different all of a sudden doesn&#x27;t it?<p>Focussing on gas is the complete wrong way of looking at this. Humans and our ideas are the ultimate resource, not gas. When we work together we solve problems, and the weapon engineer who had to relocate back to HK to raise kids near family can often be the difference between a breakthrough we all benefit from and nothing at all. Having these senior people able to work locally can enable them to seed their hometowns with thriving local offices that train new generations of talent.<p>Tesla won in cars and SpaceX won in rockets (both very complex industries) over very well established incumbents. Don&#x27;t underestimate how much organizational dynamics can weigh on a company. Do you think the best people at Boeing are going to risk the next decade of their career working on a plane that might only do 300 orders when they could go get easy promotion working on the next 787?<p>Good luck to the team at Boom!!

Reducing flight time is not the same as reducing travel time. The real killer with respect to travel time are layovers airport delays. Cheaper airplanes capable of flying farther will reduce the number of layovers, and the big airlines know this. The market for supersonic planes will be small.<p>On a side note, why aren&#x27;t there more startups trying to reduce passenger time at the airport instead of focusing on faster airplanes?

It&#x27;s somewhat out of date, but I found this ~hour long podcast interview with the founder and CEO of Boom from August 2017 really informative: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.airplanegeeks.com&#x2F;2017&#x2F;08&#x2F;02&#x2F;463-boom-supersonic&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.airplanegeeks.com&#x2F;2017&#x2F;08&#x2F;02&#x2F;463-boom-supersonic&#x2F;</a><p>It goes into some of the technical and regulatory hurdles Boom is facing, among other things.

Is that nearly enough money to do what they intend?<p>Edit: To be clear — I find the prospect of affordable supersonic flight super exciting. But, knowing 0 about the aviation industry, what&#x27;s the secret sauce that makes this believable (e.g. budget at least one order of magnitude lower than competing products)?

Technically, I am sure it is possible with todays manufacturing, material and 3D printing capabilities etc., but I am thinking the biggest battles Boom faces will be regulatory.<p>Getting the aircraft certified by every country&#x27;s aviation body is going to be massive (unless they restrict flights to within the US only, which will basically negate the positives of international supersonic flight).<p>Then there are the battles against various environmental lobbying groups, like Concorde had to do, who will try to enforce curfews and restrictions on supersonic flights over populated areas.

Given the current emissions of air travel I find fairly repulsive to spend that much money designing a new airplane going completely in the wrong direction in terms of fuel efficiency. There is no way ( regardless of altitude, unless you’re going in LEO ) to avoid the huge drag losses of going supersonic, so most of that ticket price is going to go towards fuel.<p>If this ever flies and there is a kerosene carbon tax, that plane is dead.

I’m always conflicted when I hear about Boom. I’m cheering for them, but I can’t help feeling like it’s a scam. Then again, there is nothing impossible technicaly about civilian supersonic flight...

The one thing that the article doesnt mention is how Boom is going to overcome fuel capacity issues traveling to Asia. Concorde was never intended for trans-Pacific flight. They&#x27;re going to need to either create an aerial refueling system, or land somewhere.

Hey if the founder of PayPal can launch his own convertible into Mars orbit, then I can believe in the return of supersonic commercial flight!

Aerion is developing a supersonic (business) jet as well: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=TC6utYmM4_o" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=TC6utYmM4_o</a>

What&#x27;s interesting to me about this is that no major airline wants to go supersonic, for two reasons. First, because of the cost of development, and, second, because you lose a significant fraction of business class revenue to your supersonic fleet, raising the costs of tickets for leisure travelers and affecting routing. However, you don&#x27;t want to be subsonic if another carrier is supersonic, because then <i>they</i> get your business class revenue.<p>It&#x27;ll be interesting to see what happens if they make it.

Can anyone with a relevant background, a la aerospace engineering, begin to speculate as to how this team could accomplish such lofty goals on what very much seems like a shoestring budget? FTA, there&#x27;s mention of &quot;efficient aerodynamics, advanced composite materials, and an efficient propulsion system,&quot; but that seems to be the general arch of aerospace engineering anyway -- what&#x27;s the secret to 10x more efficient R&amp;D?

Being an aviation buff, I think Boom Supersonic is incredibly exciting.<p>Being a history buff(especially aviation), I wonder where it sits in terms of possibility &lt;—&gt; probability of repeating the tech industry(Microsoft related ties) enabled Eclipse Aviation debacle.<p>Eclipse Aviation was founded late in the Dot Com Tech bubble with a promise of cheaper Very Light Jet(VLJ) private ownership and air taxis.<p>Boom Supersonic was founded late in the current tech bubble with a promise of faster business class&#x2F;first class travel.<p>My primary concerns would be the fuel burn per passenger seat miles and shorter maintenance intervals required based on current engine technology.<p>Is Boom SuperSonics a possible indicator of late tech bubble drawing board excess?<p>I’m actually not trying to be negative, because everything beautiful, cool, and fast is awesome.<p>I’m just concerned about a possible echoing of the Eclipse historical speedbump.

Some people say what did for the SST&#x2F;Concord&#x2F;tu144 was sunk cost. I read that BA was running at profit ignoring sunk cost when the fire blew the model apart.<p>But it was a niche product. So, if boom reoccupied the niche and can leverage the now long amortized sunk costs of supersonic research with some twists to get fuel cost and noise under control.. maybe they can be profitable.<p>I&#x27;d fly in one if it made sense cost wise (frequent business traveller intercontinental for twenty years) but I am also believing this is a terrible model for high altitude AGW consequences

I make 2 week trips almost every month from the Bay Area to APAC. I waste 2-3 days in airplanes. I am all for this. It is unrealistic to think it will not happen. The only question is will a space company get there first (virgin) where it is up and down in less then 2 hours to the other side of the world. Those that are making such a big issue with the CO2 lack persecptive. This will happen. The focuse for CO2 should be on the cars on the road and the energy plants and factories that are not green, not something that is overall a small percent of the carbon foot print. Removed the ground transport, factories and power plants that are not green and you are majorly net negiavte on CO2 output. The tech for this is going to advance, period. Focus on the things that has the largest foot print and the tech is ripe for the change (electric cars charged by wind&#x2F;solar&#x2F;hydro&#x2F;geothermal&#x2F;nuclear power plants).

&quot;Yikes, when did HN become so full of haters?&quot; Well, it will likely fail. But it is great to finance such &quot;blue sky&quot; projects. Only in the US.<p>&quot;Focussing on gas is the complete wrong way of looking at this. Humans and our ideas are the ultimate resource, not gas.&quot;<p>Some people would disagree: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ourfiniteworld.com&#x2F;2011&#x2F;02&#x2F;21&#x2F;there-is-no-steady-state-economy-except-at-a-very-basic-level&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ourfiniteworld.com&#x2F;2011&#x2F;02&#x2F;21&#x2F;there-is-no-steady-sta...</a>

Out of the 55 people on that plane how many actually need to save 50% of the flight time if they&#x27;re already flying business or first?<p>Would this development not be better put towards smaller and faster planes rather than trying to transport ~55 people at a time? Make a small passenger jet that can do New York to London in 3 hours and it could possibly be profitable as a niche private jet not unlike Gulf&#x2F;Lear&#x2F;etc...<p>Growing up seeing the Concorde land and take off I would love to be on a supersonic flight at some point in my life.

Has Boom Supersonic solved the problem that when the government tested the impact of frequent sonic booms on the populated centres in the 1960s it drove people nuts, caused building damage, and people hated it?<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;paleofuture.gizmodo.com&#x2F;when-the-faa-blasted-oklahoma-city-with-sonic-booms-for-1649589210" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;paleofuture.gizmodo.com&#x2F;when-the-faa-blasted-oklahom...</a><p>I assume Boom is like so many startups in that they have ignored history and have barreled ahead anyway.

Fly from NYC to London for $4000 in uber lux first class aboard a spacious, comfortable 787 or A380.<p>Or spend 5x that to get there in half the time aboard a cramped super sonic jet.<p>I don’t get it.<p>If you make existing planes nicer, people will complain that the ride is too short. And it will be much, much cheaper.

Obligatory quarterly post from me about optimism (or lack thereof on HN)! :)<p>It&#x27;s unfortunate that so many people come out of the woodwork to tell people their ideas are terrible or won&#x27;t work without actually understanding the idea, technology, or risk-adjusted return that investors may be considering. It&#x27;s far far more interesting to consider how things may work or what you may be missing. I&#x27;ve listed a mini-FAQ at the bottom about Boom. I&#x27;m an investor in every Boom round, from before they were in YC so am clearly biased, but also know the company very well.<p>Props to everyone in the thread who is asking genuine questions and actually trying to understand what the team is building.<p>References<p>-----<p>Dropbox launch: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=8863" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=8863</a> Coinbase launch: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=4703443" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=4703443</a> A 2012 thread discussing comment negativity where: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=4363717" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=4363717</a> A classic thread from 2012 where PG talks about negative comments: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=4396747" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=4396747</a><p>Mini-FAQ<p>-----<p>1. Isn&#x27;t the most important part of reducing flight times the pre-flight experience (security, airport delays, etc.)? Yes, you are correct. However, the long haul international market that is about 10% of the overall number of flights in the world is still a HUGE opportunity where the bulk of time is spent in the air. Boom is most effective in these longer 8-hour+ flight situations like SFO-Tokyo, LA-Syndney, etc. On these routes you would save a day round trip. For many people an extra day in the office or an extra day with family is a tremendous win.<p>Most people don&#x27;t realize but travel to Hawaii 10x-ed in the decade after the jet engine became common because Hawaii became a five hour flight from the West Coast instead of an eight hour flight. Imagine if you could get from SFO to Japan or China as fast as SFO-NYC.<p>2 - How can do this for so cheap? It will be capital intensive to get to the final plane, probably ~$2B. Most of this can be financed with debt, however, because there are many billions in pre-orders from airlines already. This round gets you to fly a one-third scale version of the plane and be ready to raise an even bigger round to build the full scale plane and get to FAA certification in the series C.<p>The Boom team has been very smart in their go to market by maximizing the amount of already FAA approved technology that goes on the first plane. For example, the carbon fiber composite is the same as that used on the 787. Fast tracking the components because they&#x27;re already FAA approved dramatically reduces costs.<p>3 - What qualifications does this team have? How can they possibly pull this off? The team includes 80 technical experts and leaders from Airbus, Boeing, SpaceX, Gulfstream, NASA, and Lockheed. Collectively, the team has made key contributions to 40+ successful air and space vehicles the SpaceX Falcon 9, Airbus A380, and the SR-71 Blackbird. The team has led the development of many planes that have gone from 0 to FAA approved and launched.<p>Hope the above is helpful to people reading through and wondering how this makes any sense. I think Boom is a once in a lifetime, category creating company (like SpaceX or Tesla). Happy to answer more questions if you have any.

I find it amusing that planes like the Concorde were shelved once and now we have emerging businesses trying to capitalize on that dead market.

I actually think supersonic is the opposite of the direction to take air travel. The current speed of 500mph is already incredibly fast given the size of the planet. Even 200mph is sufficient.<p>The real problem is comfort. Planes are incredibly uncomfortable, even if you pay thousands of upgraded seating. I&#x27;d rather flights take 2-4x as long but be 10-20x more comfortable.<p>I&#x27;d like to see true innovation, using high-speed blimps or massive ocean-going ground effect airplanes, hovercraft, or something.<p>I&#x27;d rather take 1 day &quot;air cruise&quot; to Europe than a 4 hour hair-raising rollercoaster ride.

I hate being an armchair critic, but Boom brings it out in me. It’s so arrogant to claim that you’re going to deliver a commercial supersonic airliner for pennies in just a few years. They haven’t even flown a scale model, built a full-scale model, etc, and they’ll need to innovate many different areas at once, from manufacturing to aerodynamic design to propulsion, etc. They could easily spend billions of dollars and 10-15 years on all that <i>before</i> they get to certification, which is <i>incredibly</i> expensive and time-consuming. Established companies like Boeing and Airbus that have been building jets for many decades don’t have a magic wand, and it takes them much longer and more money to incrementally improve their planes, not to mention entering an entirely new category where tons of innovation is required.<p>Why are people so convinced some random startup with no experience is going to be able to do the impossible? It’s not enough to point at SpaceX and say “they did it, so we can too!” It’s a totally different product category, market, and regulatory environment.<p>I wish there was a way to short the stock of private companies.