You’ve repeatedly stated, essentially, that having more mass does not mean that it requires more force to accelerate the heavier car. Contrary to fundamental laws of Newtonian physics.

So, Newton was wrong when he said that for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction? The force of traction and force of acceleration must be equal. That's the third law of motion.

Wait....are you saying traction isn’t the limiting factor in deceleration?

I don’t think you know how traction works...

Assuming they’re screws. With this level of jankiness, I’d guess they’re nails and as soon as it goes sideways they’ll just pull out.

Retail investors are stans, largely, which is not necessarily a bad thing but usually a bit irrational.

Not sure what direction you're trying to ghosn with this.

I mean, it's a pretty standard statement for someone that loses a government contract? There are appeals and whatnot that are available as essentially forms of government oversight. Go find a Lockheed press release after losing a contract reward to Northrup Grumman or something like that, and it'll read pretty much…

Right, this feels like the equivalent to STI.

Probably by design. That way they can claim they were using the equipment but not actually be bothered by it.

There is the significant consideration that sometimes patents can spread novel ideas in a public forum that trade secrets avoid. So if you’re worried that simply telling the world that you have a way to do X will open up efforts to do X without use of the patent, it may be better off to just not tell people.…

Also dependent state to state in the US - 38 states are only one party consent.

(This would be so meta if it had only come from Civil War.)

This is what scares me about the whole thing of applying go fast and break stuff to transportation. It seems like a very Musk thing to do to get one successful flight, proclaim success, and subsequently kill a bunch of people by putting them on the next launch.

So have they touched the chassis at all, or is this nothing but another refresh of the same fundamental design?

Drive across the country and go offroading in Moab.

There’s a reason the focus is on kerosene. EV airliners will not happen beyond short range (like less than 1000mi) regional. Even with ideal battery performance the energy density is such that adding battery capacity beyond that takes more energy to fly around than you add to the pack. Hydrogen is possible, but very…

...and they were hiring a bit a few months back. Think they have a decent amount of military funding, which is promising for a start-up. Thought a bit about applying, but even a well-funded start-up is still a start-up, and that’s not enough stability for me.

That’s the hydraulic system, not the APU. And it’s usually only on the ground, when only one engine is on.

It’s mainline. It counts.