XCOR engine in Time Magazine [Update]

The XCOR LOX/Methane engine makes it into Time Magazine's The Best Inventions of the Year: Rocket Science category. Unfortunately, it is NASA, which funded the XCOR/ATK project, that gets all the credit.

Here is a PDF file with a view of the relevant pages in the print version of the magazine.

[Update Nov.6.07: Just to be clear, I'm tweaking Time Magazine, not NASA, for failing to spread the credit.]

Posted 11/05/07 | 13:45:00 by TopSpacer | Filed under: Transport Companies

Comments

Not to take away from the various efforts but it's not an invention for starters. I never read the article but my wife did and mentioned something about the dragon fly R/C toy among other items making the list as well, to put things into perspective.

Anthony J. Cesaroni
President/CEO
Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace
http://www.cesaronitech.com/
(941) 360-3100 x101 Sarasota
(905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto

Posted by Anthony Cesaroni at 11/05/07 14:04:05

Hi Anthony,
Well, sure glad you aren't taking anything away from their efforts...

General readership magazines, e.g. Pop Sci/Pop Mech, always have a wildly diverse mix of items in these sort of year end tech highlight lists. Yet all the companies with items listed can take pride in doing something innovative enough to gain attention.

Speaking of perspective, this sort of recognition (or near recognition) doesn't just benefit one small company but gives attention to the rocket and space industry as a whole, and this ultimately benefits companies like Cesaroni as well.

- Clark

Posted by TopSpacer at 11/05/07 14:32:25

Yeah, or what is the new invention in "the invention of the year", iPhone. It's just a smart phone like so many before it.

This is just marketing posing as journalism.

Posted by mz at 11/05/07 14:56:47

Marketing rocket engines? There isn't much of a consumer market yet, though we can hope that will change.

Posted by FC at 11/05/07 16:11:26

" There isn't much of a consumer market yet, though we can hope that will change."

Thats the point though - when people are taking notice like this, that tells you that it is moving towards a consumer market sooner rather than later.

Posted by Ferris Valyn at 11/05/07 17:02:55

They wouldn't have included it in the list if NASA hadn't funded it. There's no name-drop value in XCOR to the general public.

Posted by Arclight at 11/05/07 22:52:37

"They wouldn't have included it in the list if NASA hadn't funded it. There's no name-drop value in XCOR to the general public."

Posted by Arclight at 11/05/07 22:52:37

Or ATK for that matter, unless you have their stock in your pension fund.

In any event, innovation and not invention for most of the items cited would have been the correct term. Invention is misleading to those not familiar with the various technologies. Overstating technology can be detrimental when people buy into something that doesn't or can't meet the claims, the technology is immature or is just "what's old is new". Aerospace included. Investors and customers can be hard to convince a second time. You need to get it right the first time in a new and large market sector.

Remember the flying car?

Anthony J. Cesaroni
President/CEO
Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace
http://www.cesaronitech.com/
(941) 360-3100 x101 Sarasota
(905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto

Posted by Anthony Cesaroni at 11/06/07 07:41:03

I think the reason it was included was this awesome photo. They could have labeled it as tachyon emitter or whatever and it would still be included.

Posted by anonymous at 11/06/07 07:42:19

I think the reason it was included was this awesome photo. They could have labeled it as tachyon emitter or whatever and it would still be included.

Posted by anonymous at 11/06/07 07:42:20

I think Anonymous has a point there- Mike Massee comes through for XCOR once again! The other iconic picture of the methane engine (you know, the one that had two-page spreads in both Pop Sci And Wired a couple months ago :) has been nicknamed the "Deathray Shot".

Step one in finding investors and customers is getting their attention. Helping publishers provide interesting content is an economical means to that end.

Posted by Doug Jones, Rocket Plumber at 11/06/07 08:19:11

Congrats to Xcor!
Though you might want to put a retro-active comment on the inclusion of Dr. Dana Newman's BioSuit. Skin Suit technology is going to be needed for REAL activity in space and the MIT BioSuit work has been the newest work in almost 30 years on a concept that the 'expert' space suit designer/builder community has regulated to the trash heap from mis-information, and active disinterest.

As to XCOR getting 'name-drop' recognition it's mentioned at the very least as 'on-par' with the name ATK. Here is Northern Utah that DOES get a lot of recognition, both because they have a large composite manufacturing plant here along with the Shuttle SRB refurbishment and processing plant, but also because they are the ones that pushed the "Stick" hard enough to get NASA to buy it.
(Not that the last one is actually a 'good' point I admit :o)

Every company had to start someplace, getting XCOR mentioned at all in a magazine such as Time is great PR, even if they gave credit to the wrong folks :o)

Posted by Randy Campbell at 11/07/07 07:27:04

Add Comment

Note: HTML code will not work except for bare URLs (i.e. http://www...). Also, for postings older than 1 week, comments are filtered manually to prevent spam and so may not appear for a few days.
Note: Trash talking and name calling, especially in anonymous comments, won't be tolerated.