Viewing profile — V_Terranova_Jr
V_Terranova_Jr
HN member- Joined
- Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 9:37 PM UTC
- HN karma
- 323
- Public activity
- 117 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About V_Terranova_Jr
Recent public activity
-
comment
Comment #47652877
There is an element of truth to this. It's also true that the U.S. government is a terrible customer, especially for bespoke or expensive military goods. However, you can see my ot…
-
comment
Comment #47652717
The highest priority in U.S. government acquisitions is to respect the business "rights" of suppliers and potential suppliers. It's hard to understand how tightly this is wound int…
-
comment
Comment #42619042
I'm sorry, but this is basically incorrect on every point other than the limited tenure. Source: I work in this sector. PMs often come directly from industry. Once they do, there i…
-
comment
Comment #42056931
Replying to finish a discussion no one will probably see, but... > That the original comment I replied to is false: "Good luck designing crash resilient structures without simulati…
-
comment
Comment #42036811
What is your actual assertion? That tools like FEA are needless frippery or that they just dumb down practitioners who could have otherwise accomplished the same things with hand m…
-
comment
Comment #42036685
I don't know about full-on nationalization, but we have plenty of evidence to show the incentives for publicly-owned for-profit companies whose primary customer is the Government a…
-
comment
Comment #42036612
This is a poor example of "Government innovation". It's more an example of legislative overreach / "pork barrel" politics, and bad acquisition practices. The Government is certainl…
-
comment
Comment #39032636
We probably won't get much further going back and forth on this. For what it's worth, you seem very reasonable, I've appreciated your comments for a long time, and I'm sure we'd ge…
-
comment
Comment #39032058
There's more to the Linus-style jerk phenomenon than just telling entitled people to piss off (I would be reluctant to call that being a jerk if that's all it was). See https://new…
- comment
-
comment
Comment #37813932
> ... the idea that Musk hasn’t considered oil panning and should’ve just asked an engineer is ludicrous. The author assumes Musk must be an idiot despite all of the evidence to th…
-
comment
Comment #37811767
Elon is well-known for firing or sidelining technical staff with whom his intuition disagrees, regardless of his own technical depth in any of those matters. His companies have a l…
-
comment
Comment #36656326
> I wonder what the situation will be in terms of fuel efficiency. Obviously it will take more energy per second to push through the atmosphere, but that may be defrayed by not hav…
-
comment
Comment #36651981
> Give more funding to proper engineers, not physicists/chemists Materials science departments are often called "Materials Science and Engineering". How do they fall in your catego…
-
comment
Comment #36651959
> So it makes sense that most researchers are looking for higher efficiency. It makes sense that researchers should be considering metrics other than efficiency as well for new mat…
-
comment
Comment #36651859
I've previously written a few relevant comments that hopefully answer in parts: [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27386119 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35124271 …
-
comment
Comment #36651264
If commercial supersonic flight has any hope of being economically viable, one of the prerequisites will be cruising below Mach 2.
-
comment
Comment #35126873
> I do wonder how much modern design can overcome, in materials, engines, aerodynamics, and flight controls. The basic physics are arrayed against you. Higher speed cruise flight a…
-
comment
Comment #35126783
Carrier catapults violently accelerate aircraft to the point they are going fast enough to lift their own weight, within the takeoff length on the deck. You could likely lessen fue…
-
comment
Comment #35126733
> then they realized the fuel economy of supersonic aircraft peaks around Mach 3 As I noted in a below comment, there isn't a way for this statement to be accurate without a lot mo…
-
comment
Comment #35124271
> No, it's exceptionally bad to fly close to Mach 1 and you do better if you fly faster up to Mach 3 or so. Where do you get this from? I suspect you are talking about the Breguet …
-
comment
Comment #33684694
I'm an aerospace engineer and I find the F-15 (esp. the C model) to be a hell of a sexy beast (so to speak), very visually stunning, and the F-35 to be relatively ugly. There's a r…
-
comment
Comment #33684579
Current military thinking is "No" - the expectation, via lots of simulation, analysis, recent history, large-scale military exercises, and intel is that advanced weapons systems ma…
-
comment
Comment #33684016
There is a kernel of truth in what you say, but only that. The article is basically right, but I would argue severely undersells the atrocity of an acquisition the F-35 represents.…
-
comment
Comment #33398274
Counterpoint: Crichton's Airframe is a great book that illustrates how journalists reporting on complex subjects they don't understand can cause great harm regardless of their inte…