I just reread it as well, and what was clear is that the description of the engine, initially, was unclear. I assumed upon initial reading that the engine he w

I just reread it as well, and what was clear is that the description of the engine, initially, was unclear. I assumed upon initial reading that the engine he was describing was conventional, and the author was talking about "detonations" in there, like the firing of a cylinder. If it was a turbine he was describing, there is no pulse, its a continuous burn. So overall, it didn't make sense to me, to describe an engine to use to compare the new tech to, that doesn't exist. Therefore I assumed that the author was comparing to an existing one, which does not detonate (well, they do, but its a BAD thing).