[createdapril24]

Oh interesting. No rebut of specific points or facts, just blanket disagreement?

I think its hard to call a whole article "correct" or "incorrect." This article makes many assumptions, states many things as facts, and yes - makes judgements. For the reasons states above I think the article overstates its case. It's behind the newest reporting by around two years. It misses or completely excludes important details (e.g. range requirements for retransmitter drones).

That doesn't make the article wholey incorrect or worthless. But yeah I think if someone is reading that article they should be aware of its inaccuracy, factual deficits, etc...

Happy to dive into any of the one-by-one points in the GP comment if there's questions or skepticism.