Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It’s smoke and mirrors.

They’re promising literally everything under the EW sun, which is easy to do when you’re not under contract to prove it or deliver anything.




Pulsar has been procured under public contracts for years now, and is currently deployed in multiple combat roles. Of all the critiques you could make, this is not a good one.


This is not the case. From Palmer's Twitter:

"Pulsar is one of several Anduril products that has been undercover for years. It has already been deployed to multiple AORs across continents at fixed sites, on ground vehicles, and in aircraft.

RFML (Radio Frequency Machine Learning) is a game-changer for electronic warfare."


Oh well if the CEO says so

Edit: To be clear, you have read what’s not being said: no agency is funding this or taking delivery of anything. With internal R&D you can make any outlandish claims and no one can call you out on it. (Under contract R&D, your outlandish claims are tied to a statement of work.)


You are simply wrong. Multiple US military customers have been taking delivery of Pulsar for years now. Why make things up?


Multiple, you say? Do these customers have names? Contract vehicles? You know, the normal stuff you put in a press release when there’s a new delivered capability?


As I told you hours ago in response to your other false claims, some of Pulsar's contracts are publicly disclosed and go back years. This isn't a "new delivered capability", that is just another instance of you making something up that has nothing to do with reality.

Doubling down on this is really dumb, Anduril obviously wouldn't be publicly stating that Pulsar has deployed to combat if it wasn't true. Your critique isn't just wrong, it doesn't even make sense.


The press release certainly implies new. Announcement! Dateline: yesterday! First of kind! Doesn’t sound mature or established. Not “USAF selects for phase 3 follow-on USD300MM IDIQ“.

And they don’t actually state it’s been deployed to combat. Did you notice the careful wording? They’ve been “developing it to support operational combat” etc. Not that a DoD customer actually bought and deployed it in combat.


So you think it is a ponzi scheme on investors? If they have no product to sell to the US/NATO military then obviously the company is worthless.


The defense contractor space is entirely made of players who make big promises, then get under contract to deliver something just functional enough to get follow-on funding to “make it operational this time.”

With the right connections, it’s extremely possible to fail upward on this track.


They have other products that are very real AFAICT. Reusable loitering munitions and air combat drones.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: