Trojan Hybrids.....

From what I see, as I am not a privileged insider:

This new hardware allows someone who already owns a Hypertek rocket motor to attach a different cobustion chamber and use different fuel, WITHOUT modifying or damaging the original Hypertek tank in any way.

Isn't that a value-add for the customer?

Won't that improve the versatility of the motors he already bought from Hypertek, without discouraging him from buying more?

If the motors had similar thrust profiles to the available Hypertek line, I would see a problem. But that's not the intent. The plan is to market very different motors, suitable for different rockets, that have some commonality with the installed base of hardware.

Some rockets will be best for Hypertek, some for Trojan, some for both. It's up to the customer, who now has more to choose from.

That doesn't seem like a bad thing to me.

Originally posted by pratthobbies
From what I see, as I am not a privileged insider:

This new hardware allows someone who already owns a Hypertek rocket motor to attach a different cobustion chamber and use different fuel, WITHOUT modifying or damaging the original Hypertek tank in any way.

Isn't that a value-add for the customer?

Won't that improve the versatility of the motors he already bought from Hypertek, without discouraging him from buying more?

If the motors had similar thrust profiles to the available Hypertek line, I would see a problem. But that's not the intent. The plan is to market very different motors, suitable for different rockets, that have some commonality with the installed base of hardware.

Some rockets will be best for Hypertek, some for Trojan, some for both. It's up to the customer, who now has more to choose from.

That doesn't seem like a bad thing to me.

Click to expand...

I didn't suggest that it was a good thing or a bad thing. It's about the data, claims and our patents.

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

Doug, it boils down to an economics issue in the end. Whatever is the motor with the lowest cost of operation to the end user is the motor that will be flown, along with consideration given to the availability of GSE and the proximity of available fuel grains.

Anthony pointed out that he and Korey have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars developing the Hypertek hybrid motors. If another manufacturer comes along and leverages that investment (and patents) without compensating the original developer for their original investment, then that manufacturer is positioned for a larger upside gain because they haven't had to make the same investment to start reaping a profit sooner. If the Trojan motors fly without the benefit of any EAC/CTI patented devices, then that would be another story. But EAC/CTI could still claim patent infringement just by Trojan mimicking a EAC/CTI patented design.

Unfortunately, what adds value for the consumer is not always the winner in patent disputes.

Originally posted by ddmobley
If another manufacturer comes along and leverages that investment (and patents) without compensating the original developer for their original investment, then that manufacturer is positioned for a larger upside gain because they haven't had to make the same investment to start reaping a profit sooner.

Click to expand...

You mean like CTI loads designed to fit AT cases?

Originally posted by ddmobley
Anthony pointed out that he and Korey have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars developing the Hypertek hybrid motors.

Click to expand...

Really? I thought it was Kevin Smith that provided the investment capital for HT.

Originally posted by garoq
You mean like CTI loads designed to fit AT cases?

Click to expand...

Nope and you know why.


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

Originally posted by garoq
Really? I thought it was Kevin Smith that provided the investment capital for HT.

Click to expand...

Care to see the books?


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

Originally posted by pratthobbies
This new hardware allows someone who already owns a Hypertek rocket motor to attach a different cobustion chamber and use different fuel, WITHOUT modifying or damaging the original Hypertek tank in any way.

Click to expand...

I'll have to read the claims in detail, but I don't see how hooking up a 'T' combustion chamber to an 'H' tank is a patent infringement. Especially considering the fact that the 'H' injector is not used. Kind of like suggesting that if you use an AeroTech phenolic nozzle in a SU motor you're infringing on the AT RMS patent.

Originally posted by Anthony Cesaroni
Care to see the books?


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

Click to expand...

Not really, but what year did you start providing investment capital for HT?

Originally posted by garoq
Not really, but what year did you start providing investment capital for HT?

Click to expand...

2001 IIRC and it wasn’t investment capital.


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

So uhh Tom... Anthony made some pretty darn good points about your motors there... care to post a rebuttal? none of those points he made were moot, I'm a consumer, and I do care. I've always been concerned (as have many others) about your certification techniques, as well as your claims about motor performance (ISP in your O motor...what did you say, like 260 something?)

I'd like some answers too.

Originally posted by Anthony Cesaroni
2001 IIRC and it wasn’t investment capital.

Click to expand...

I was talking about the 1994-1995 time frame.

I would think that if HyperTEK does not recommend the use of their product with another system, then it should not be certified. What's the big deal about getting a licensing agreement anyway?

Originally posted by falingtrea
What's the big deal about getting a licensing agreement anyway?

Click to expand...

Generally speaking, cash first, egos second, and after that, the list is wide open.

Yo buddy,

Actually, at LDRS 25, Newton Seconds expended for "research" was slightly over 40 %. There were 201 commercial fliers, and 38 "research" fliers. We call it "research" cause that is what it is these days to us dumb hobby guys who can post numbers like the above quoted. Plus its more "politically correct" to the FAA (not to mention the insurance underwriters) as the term "experimental" connotates a scenario of "watch me loop my unproven Experimental homebuilt airplane into the ground".

There are several reasons why 16% of LDRS registered fliers accounted for over 40 % of NS expended. One. NFPA limits of 40960 NS. Two. Maturing hobby enthusiasts taking their skills to the next level, and including propulsion, ie, satisfaction of mastering their craft. Three. Economics. That only applies to a few "research" guys, maybe 5 percent, as the set up costs don't justify a savings, unless they fly a lot. That said, fewer than that number could fly w/o those savings, at that level. Four. Performance. Yes, us dumb "research guys" are not only wringing higher performance out of APCP than what is commercially available, (and yes, I know the limitations of offering commercial product to the masses in this litigous society, I'm a bidness man myself) but our success ratios rival and surpass our commercial flier counterparts in terms of failures, according to my local club data. True, many times commercial operator malfunction is to blame due to inexperience, but when the "research" flier equations comes into play, ie, better understanding of the whole package, including propulsion, errrors are vastly reduced.

Status quo? Well, if loosing 16% of the market means doomsday, I'd say the market has too many products chasing too few dollars.

Frankly, I grow weary of claims blaming "EX" for cutting into mfgs's "pie". The real reason that the market is so limited, and thereby decreasing technological advances, is because of excessive regulation. The reality is, if regulation was eased, the market could grow at least (IMO) 3 times its current participation. (And I doubt that "research would grow concurrently, remember, its the "maturing" hobbyists that fit that scenario). The possibility of that reality (easing regulations)remains to be seen. But until then, how about we keep our eye on the prize, and focus on the real problem? The enemy ain't us, ie.

Peace, brothers/sisters....

Pat G

Originally posted by Anthony Cesaroni
<snip>... Add to that EX, (the term research dumbfounds me because it doesn't fit the definition) and you have another slice of the pie. Don't get me wrong about EX BTW, I'm a lifetime RRS member. Still, the volume of EX shots in terms of Ns at the last LDRS was over 40% IIRC. Don't forget the regulatory problems in the hobby either.

How long do you think the status quo will survive and technologically advance along these lines?. I enjoy sport rocketry and fortunately it's not my company's day job.

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

Click to expand...

Originally posted by Anthony Cesaroni
I enjoy sport rocketry and fortunately it's not my company's day job.

Click to expand...

What about the rest of us?

Originally posted by garoq
What about the rest of us?

Click to expand...

By that do you mean it is your day job or that you don't enjoy it?

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

Originally posted by Anthony Cesaroni
By that do you mean it is your day job or that you don't enjoy it?

Click to expand...

I mean it is MY day job.

come on guys you both have great products to add to the hobby. Ill be watching this thread so you know what to do

Originally posted by Bowhunter
come on guys you both have great products to add to the hobby. Ill be watching this thread so you know what to do

Click to expand...

I'm watching this thread too. Why anyone needs to know that is beyond me. But it seems the status quo.

Originally posted by DumasBro2
I'm watching this thread too. Why anyone needs to know that is beyond me. But it seems the status quo.

Click to expand...

Needs to know what? It was a joke.

Needs to know what? It was a joke.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

Why anyone needs to know I'm watching this thread.

I guess I should have quoted the previous post. It was "tounge in cheek" of the moderation of something that wasn't in need of moderating because it was a joke. I guess I forgot the smiley.

Originally posted by DumasBro2
Exactly.

Why anyone needs to know I'm watching this thread.

Click to expand...

Well, your joke's not very funny. Now I'M going to be watching this thread. And you know what that means.

I'm going to watch this harder than either of you! just you wait...

Originally posted by Nate
I'm going to watch this harder than either of you! just you wait...

Click to expand...

You just do that! Now I am gonna STARE at it!

Ha! I'll show you!

I'm only going to give this thread a passing glance every now and then.

So THAT'S how you want to play it, eh?

Then I'm going to just close my eyes altogether! I refuse to watch it.

uh oh...I'd better tow the line.....

This thread turned out to be pretty funny!

Originally posted by Todd Moore
This thread turned out to be pretty funny!

Click to expand...

Oh so you think this is FUNNY?

Everyone, WATCH Todd!