[Stratoscope]

I will never understand why Boom chose such a terrible name.

Of course it is a novelty to hear a sonic boom once or twice, but who wants to hear them repeatedly? I imagine they will fly mostly overwater like Concorde, but why remind people on the ground of the most annoying thing that a supersonic flight does?

Much worse, as safe and reliable as they can build and fly these airplanes, eventually there will be a flight that does not make it to a safe landing. When that happens, there will be a loud...

[simonebrunozzi]

For me it's instead a really cool name.

[rbanffy]

> I will never understand why Boom chose such a terrible name.

It’ll be the core of countless jokes. I remember a TV series called “Fireball XL5” about a spaceship with that name and I always found it amusing someone would want to board something named like that.

[Sebb767]

Spaceships always land as a fireball (atmospheric re-entry), so it's a fitting name IMO.

[rbanffy]

Only the real ones. When you have sci-fi rated engines, you can do a full propulsive reentry down to the landing area without the need for atmospheric braking.

[wutbrodo]

That's a good point. I'd guess that it's optimized more for investor/employee attention than the broader market. It's evocative of cool physics and "disruption" instead of the blandly pleasant tone one takes to appeal to consumers.

I wouldn't be surprised if they rebranded if/once they start offering flights.

[jdavis703]

If powered flights were invented today it would have been banned for noise and safety concerns. Just look at how upset people in SF get about the once a year Fleet Week aerial demonstrations.

[golemotron]

SV edginess