On a side note, why aren't there more startups trying to reduce passenger time at the airport instead of focusing on faster airplanes?
The bigger problem for a business case for paying extra to fly supersonic is that convenience is as much about timing of landing as length of flight, especially in an era where portable computers and digital connectivity exists and regular long haul flights are generally comfortable enough for the average business class flyer to sleep on. Cutting three or four hours out of an 12 hour flight doesn't sound quite so exciting when you realise that it's a choice between 8 hours in a seat or 12 hours in a lie flat bed with a choice of departure times and arrival airports.
Yes they can. Clear makes security a breeze. And small, efficient planes make direct flights competitive with connecting ones.
A lineup anywhere is a sign of not enough money being paid, so people pay with their time.
I do bet that some of the fee you pay to Clear goes to the TSA, which pays for more security staff.
More poignant examples: mobile passports and global entry. Fundamentally faster (checks performed when you enroll, and then automatically, and while you get off the plane), and scalably so.
The biggest delays are people who don’t have their ID and ticket ready when they get to the front of the line, and people who can’t figure for the life of them how to use the kiosks without additional assistance.
For example, the TSA added pre-check, which does speed up security by reducing requirements.
And the UCIS has added kiosks for global entry and us citizens, which effectively increases the number of security processing 'staff' at checkpoints, making things faster.
No it doesn't, because the limitation at most major airports is the number of takeoff and landing slots. More, smaller, planes would reduce capacity because you can only have a plane takeoff every 3 minutes or so.
For international flights, actual flight time can be brutal. I have colleagues who regularly take 14 hour flights. Some people would gladly pay extra to shave a few hours off of that.
> On a side note, why aren't there more startups trying to reduce passenger time at the airport instead of focusing on faster airplanes?
Just thought about it, it could actually be harder for startups to work on reducing passenger time at the airport. A main blocker would be convincing airports (and/or governments) to adopt your solution.
Assuming the 55 seat $5k+ demand is there.
We already have very-long-range business jets like the Global and G650ER for when P2P is essential and cost is secondary.
The 767 was a great plane for those routes especially on the shorter end (like TYO-SEL or TPE-HKG). The 787 is significantly heavier so performs poorly in terms of fuel efficiently until it's flown a couple thousand miles to make it up in better cruising performance.