Keep in mind this is business as usual for the folks that work at the Nevada National Security Site including 'Area 51' & the Tonopah Test Range...

They have their own small 'airline' of 737s called "Janet" that runs shuttles in and out of McCarran and those sites several times a day:

Janet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_(airline)

Janet 737 flight history: https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n319bd

There's a mission in Flight Simulator X that has you flying a 737 from McCarran to Area 51. I never knew it was based on a real shuttle service.

Interesting comparison/contrast, linked from right in the middle of the article:

http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20170221-the-gruelling-six-...

* Six hours <-> six hours

* Try to use the downtime <-> try to use the downtime

* Go home just to sleep <-> go home just to sleep

Getting home at 21:00 and he's up again at 05:00 so most of that time will be spent sleeping. What's the point?

Agree, he could just stay over near SF during weekdays and fly back home with family on weekend. Time better spent and more economical.

A lot of consultants do exactly this in Dubai! Most have their families in Dubai, but fly to Kuwait / Saudi / etc for the week and come back for week ends see their families.

That's pretty standard for a lot of consultants everywhere. Fly to a client site for the week and then back home on weekends. This is talking about daily.

They're not flying to Kuwait/Saudi/etc every. single. day. of the work-week.

The man in the article must really hate his family.

Quite the opposite, I'd say.

21:00 to 05:00 at home. So by face time with family i guess only sleeping face... I would say that he loves his company more ;) [edit] never mind, it's not my business to judge anyone. It's his choice.

Yeah it really doesn't make much sense. I got the vibe that he does it just to be able to say so, especially in the beginning when talking about how people react.

I don't even know where to start with this comment, only seeing your family on the weekends? Doesn't seem like much a life to me.

He's only going to really see them on the weekends either way with his current schedule. The commenter was suggesting that, given this, it'd be more economical to just stay in SF during the week.

However, the funny thing is that apartments in SF are so expensive that the $2300/month he's paying to fly on the small commuter jet is actually not that horrible of a deal compared to renting a small place in the city. So maybe he just enjoys the commute. I've flown on a private jet like this (Cessna Citation CJ2+ in my case) and it's definitely a fun experience.

He is at home from 21 to 5, for me, to feel good I would have to sleep that entire time. But this guys still needs a shower I assume. If he has kids, they are asleep when he gets home and are still when he leaves. He probably does only see his family on the weekends.

Unfortunately that is not always a choice.

We own a house that would be an hour and a half commute each day to Boston. We can't afford to sell our house and move on the whim just because we switch jobs (what happens when our next job is back closer to where our house was in the first place!?)

Right now I work out of my house but my wife and I have already discussed that if either of us ever have to commute to an office in Boston itself that we would get an apartment there to spend the night as needed if the commute doesn't work out.

At least until we get self driving cars or they extend the train to go to where we are.

With his current schedule, he doesn't really see his family anyway.

I know of a few people that do this - they also own an apartment/house to live in during the week...

"The"? In the 1990s I had an employee who commented by plane from Sonoma to Palo Alto every day. She and her husband "planepooled" together in a small prop plane.

It seemed weird to hear of it but her commute wasn't that big a deal, especially since their home and jobs were close to small airports.

That's a 2 hour commute at the best of times. I suspect that makes huge financial sense and they probably get there in 30 minutes.

The flight itself will take around 30-40 minutes depending on the plane and the winds, plus 30 minutes for pre-flight, run-up and parking at destination, plus whatever it takes to get to/from the airport.

Though when you planepool with your sweetie that's not lost time!

This guy's life would change radically with the 30min LA to SF Hyperloop.

that's really sad, it would still take me 1hr to get from east bay to svl (via private shared transit :))

> “The way I justify a six-hour commute is having the ability to have all the things that I want," he explains.

I just don't see having the point in having "all the things that [you] want" if you don't have the time to enjoy them. Who has time to enjoy your money if you don't get home till 21:00?

I've actually known some people who live in one city and work in another (between Dallas and Austin), but they did it by renting a second apartment in the city where they work and living there during the week, only commuting home on the weekends, which they always did by car.

I would guess because he's in the middle of building his company and raising his kids, and doesn't plan to keep this arrangement forever.

I would also guess that he can actually afford a house for his children to grow up in down in Burbank.

I wonder if Motiv subsidies the Surf Air membership. Moving a company from LA to SF is expensive - maybe that was part of the price payed to keep the CTO.

I'd also point out that it possibly was not his decision to move the company.

He addresses this in the video: For whatever personal reasons, uprooting his family and moving them is just not an option right now.

Talk about carbon footprint...

I bet he feels great about that.

Indeed, I am always dumbfounded by the progressive, jet-set class that complain endlessly about CO2 emissions and then go fly across the world.

Eating and buying local is good for the environment, but so is staying local.

/off-topic-rant

I think the world would be better off if more people traveled. Travel is an opportunity to expand your views and get along better with others. I would rather give up cars, meat, most mass produced goods, and single family homes before travel.

That's pretty close to a Mark Twain quote:

> “Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.”

The incremental waste of an additional passenger on a commercial (or full charter) flight is very different from a flight that exists to serve the needs of exactly one individual.

That said, I could envision compromising my values if somebody wants to get me a Cirrus Vision[0] for Xmas.

[0] https://cirrusaircraft.com/aircraft/vision-jet/

There's a striking difference between knowing a different culture/region and commuting everyday to work.

My understanding is that if we did everything you say, it wouldn’t make a dent in the problem. It doesn’t really address the core problem with CO2 emissions.

No individual action will. The problem isn't reducing your emissions, it's convincing everybody to do so.

Focusing on air travel is particularly strange, since air travel only accounts for 2-3% of total CO2 emissions.

"And, while von Badinski is aware that his flight comes with a significant carbon footprint, the Bay Area leg of his journey is more environmentally friendly. He keeps a plug-in hybrid vehicle at Oakland airport for the drive into San Francisco."

Could anyone do the math?

Assuming a PC-12, about 79 gallons of jet fuel, one way. Seats for six, eight or nine people depending on the configuration. Let's say eight, so ten gallons of jet fuel per person per direction.

A gallon of jet fuel releases 20lbs of CO2, so 200lbs.

PC-12's are really efficient aircraft, both in terms of fuel usage, but also maintenance. Your average business jet costs 5-10 times more per hour to operate (not counting pilots)

How does this compare to, for instance, your average car running for an hour?

A 25mpg, single occupancy car going the same Oakland to LA distance would use about 15 gallons of gas. Or about 300 lbs of CO2 (*depends on ethanol content)

So a fully occupied PC-12 releases less greenhouse gases per person for the same trip.

The average car will burn about three gallons of gasoline an hour cruising on the highway, so about 60lbs of CO2.

If you assume highway cruising to be 60mph, that's only 20mpg. That seems a low average for modern cars.

The average MPG of a new car is only about 25, and the average age of cars actually on the road is over a decade. And 60MPH is a slower highway cruising speed than I've seen anywhere outside of big cities or congested areas. 75+MPH is far more common.

A plug-in hybrid?!

Given his length of time on the road, he'll burn more energy lugging that electric drivetrain around for the latter 80+% of his trip than if he drove a fuel-efficient gas or diesel car in the first place.

Sure, it’s a rounding error. Basically, it’s irrelevant.

I did a weekly commute BUR<->SJC for a year back in 2000-2001 (before 9/11). It was a PITA. Now I work from home. Life is too short.

I fly weekly between Dallas and wherever the work is. I've been doing this for a year and absolutely love it.

I love airports. I love airport drama. I love flight. I love fighting to get through the mobs of people waiting to board. I love listening to the ATC while taxiing and looking up my route info and weather while doing so. I love FlyerTalk. I love it all.

Right now, there is no better feeling than the lift from a good takeoff.

I would fly more if I could. I'm not sure if I would get burnt out from flying every day. Especially on a single turboprop. Those are the lawnmowers of the skies and the wind loves pushing them around. (I also LOVE turbulence.)

The biggest reason why I love it: weekends with my fiancee are amazing, especially since I don't have to spend money during the week. Time together is more meaningful. (Note that we didn't have a long distance relationship; we lived together daily for three years before I started doing this crazy travelling business.)

In the nineties, a distant uncle of mine (I'm from the poor side of the family haha) used to commute to central London each day by helicopter from his farm in Buckinghamshire. That's sensible (if the company is paying!). 6hours by plane each day... not so much o_O

This man need to learn one word, and learn it well:

Move

That is, move closer to your work. Keep the other house if you will, he has enough money for two houses. But, move closer to your work. Alternatively, move your work closer to home. Your family will love you for it, especially as they won't have to explain why their husband/partner/father insists on having a carbon footprint big enough to show up as a thin line visible for future geologists.

From what I was told by my friend who worked at Bombardier - the company would fly their Toronto-based employees (who needed to work at Montreal) everyday from Toronto to Montreal and then back at the end of day.

He had to fly 5 days a week MON-FRI. And this is about 10 years ago.

I know of a few people that commute weekly (has a rental property) by plane live/work at HQ for the week and fly home on the weekends....I can't believe people _want_ to do things like this

Some people love traveling. Their obsession can find all the excuses to travel. Not sure if his company funds the travel or he funds it himself.

Must have been a slow news day at the bbc.

"business man flies in plane regularly"

"Main breaks social norm by taking abnormal mode of transport to work for a ludicrous amount of time each day".