Comments by "Scott Franco" (@scottfranco1962) on "Bloomberg Originals" channel.

  1. The issue with rockets to space vs. flying to space is that it takes more net power to fly to space than to rocket to it. Flying to space leaves the craft taking more time in the atmosphere and inducing drag, which takes power to overcome. A ballistic rocket spends less time fighting the atmosphere. The factor that could change that is using air breathing engines to the highest point possible. Since part of an air breathing engines power comes from the oxygen in the atmosphere, that can replace carried fuel, ie., oxygen. Additionally, the air can be quite thin. A craft flying very fast scan scoop a lot of oxygen from a very thin atmosphere. Hence, the interest in ramjets. However, without advanced jets, and perhaps even with them, it still does not make that much sense to fly to orbit. It takes more time, exposes the aircraft to heating effects longer, etc. So the question is, as it was, why bother with it when we know so much about getting to space directly, with rockets. Most of the "flying space vehicles", such as the shuttle, don't use the wings to go to space, but rather to be maneuverable once it returns to atmosphere. Ballistic entry vehicles have no guidance at all (Apollo). Elon has proposed an intermediate solution, a rocket that uses fins designed to direct its path on return, sort of a cross between the two.
    16
  2. Absolutely, people who don't agree with you are stupid and crazy.
    4
  3. The Hindenberg didn't "explode", it burned.
    2
  4. "spends less than they receive in taxes". "spends less than they receive in taxes". "spends less than they receive in taxes". "spends less than they receive in taxes". "SPENDS LESS THAN THEY RECEIVE IN TAXES". You listening, Biden? Harris?
    2
  5. A good documentary, but wrong on at least one point. After the S-curve takeoff, which will result in only about %25 of new cars being sold as pure EVs, the net result will be the USA becoming a net oil exporter, and changing our trade deficits from negative to positive, since the biggest contributor to trade deficits is foreign oil purchases. This will be a bigger positive effect on the USA than any other country in the world, since we are the only ones that both produce huge quantities of oil but also use huge quantities. The biggest losers in the oil market are oil dependent nations such as Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Canada and others. Thus the biggest side effect is the acceleration of war and regime changes around the world as such countries loose their power to effectively bribe their populations into quiescence.
    1
  6. I don't understand what "shot term" means either.
    1
  7. Brian Krzanich left Intel, or rather was thrown out, because his tool was in another employee, not because of Intel tech issues.
    1