← Back to context

Comment by XorNot

5 hours ago

It happens every now and again on here: someone comes up with like a 2% improvement in aerodynamics, and people are unimpressed. Meanwhile airlines are basically scrambling to get it rolled into their next-gen purchases because it's the biggest improvement in costs in a decade.

A 2% improvement that only costs 2% more to manufacture, sure.

A 2% improvement that costs 200% more to manufacture would be nonsensical to seriously propose.

  • You cannot possibly know that without knowing the operational lifetime of a plane and it's expected return. An airline doesn't buy a plane planning to break even on the purchase cost, for example.

    Which basically proves my original point.

    • Do you not understand what the word manufacture means?

      It literally doesn’t matter what the “operational lifetime” or “expected return” is if it costs 200% more to manufacture for only 2% improvements.

      It won’t ever get far enough in the design process for it to even be an issue.

      2 replies →