XCOR Featured on ABC World News Tonight
Rick Searfoss of XCOR on ABC World News Tonight. (Credit: ABC News)
XCOR was featured in the Made in America segment of ABC World News Tonight on Thursday.
17 responses to “XCOR Featured on ABC World News Tonight”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
One Blog stated: “To be honest, my impression of the work at XCOR from the photo at the link is that of one or two guys working in their spare time in their garage on restoring a classic car. Though I wish them well, the progress seems very slow, and piecemeal. In fact, it reminds me much of Richard Branson’s many false promises at Virgin Galactic.”
http://behindtheblack.com/b…
That Made in America bit was a nice piece, although I didn’t see or hear anything I had not heard before. I hope this exposure works in XCOR’s favor, maybe exposing their venture to potential investors.
I have mixed opinions about Bob Zimmerman, but I think his assessment of XCOR is accurate: for all the years of working on Lynx, XCOR is a *long* ways away. In the race to carry paying passengers, I have Blue Origin is first, XCOR a distant second, VG doesn’t finish.
I find it peculiar how personally people take any critical analysis of XCOR, as Charles Lurio’s post exhibits. Every company has its fanboys/girls – I’ve seen similar emotionally-charged responses in response to a criticism of SpaceX.
Xcor has poor PR. Good story to tell, don’t tell it very well.
Their engine tech is fascinating. I’d really like to know more about their pumps and cycles, but it’s understandable why they play those cards close to their chest.
I think their not-hypergolic RCS system is also underrated – I’d love to hear more about it.
And yet, you wonder, why I object to China’s investment into XCOR, when the company is known for taking the technology back to China.
“Xcor has poor PR. Good story to tell, don’t tell it very well.”
You mean the exact opposite of VG?
I don’t like VG’s technical approach or their approach to publicity and *I am* rooting for XCOR. But I think a lot of people have an unrealistic view of their progress. Rand Simberg thinks we’ll see test flights this year.
I liked the NGLLC Masten, but today’s Masten is much more opaque. Seems like they do more paper studies and PowerPoint designs and much less hardware and flying stuff. Plus, I’m still bitter they never released the Xaero crash footage.
Who, in your opinion, is the most “open” company?
XCOR has a great blog, but it’s light on details. Who’s the best regarding technical reports and detailed test results?
I suppose ITAR regulations prohibit too much public sharing. Still, it would be great to see a truly open company, perhaps even crowd-sourcing some aspects of the engineering job (Like Perrinn racing, for example.)
Right now, I guess I would go with SpaceX. But if I’m allowed to pull from recent memory, I would say Armadillo by a landslide.
I miss those guys!
The team is actually back with a new start up using Armadillo technology. Here is their website.
http://www.exosaero.com/home
They may have the tech, but wasn’t Armadillo’s tooling sold off?
Not just ITAR, but the need to stop others from stealing the technology.
There is a lot of technology that is being developed in America’s space industry that others, esp. China, would kill for. Literally.
Whatever.
Deleted post because poster lied about me having a financial interest in XCOR. I do not. I’ve explained this time and time again. The disclosure statement explains this. And posters here keep distorting the facts.
It’s a sign of asteroid man’s cluelessness that he can’t or won’t understand the disclosure statement and he thinks I’m rooting for Virgin Galactic to fail.
The best thing that could have happened to this industry is for Virgin Galactic to succeed. It would prove out the market. It would open up investor confidence for other companies offering cheaper rides and different experiences. The iPhone was great for Apple, but it opened up a whole smart phone industry. You could get cheaper Android phones that did most of the same things.
The saddest thing is that VG hasn’t come through on all its promises. It would have made it easier for every one else. Instead, four people have died without getting anywhere near space. And they still haven’t figured out the engine.
He says into Space at 200,000′. It is 328,000′,62 miles. In the 60’s NASA did give out Astronaut wings for 50mi. No longer. 200,000′ is thin air, not recognized by anyone as Space. If Lynx is only going to 200,000′, which sounds about right since it has less performance than Spaceship-1, launched at 40,000′ that did get to Space. Since Lynx launches from the ground and less thrust 200,000′ might be made. I wonder where the GP thinks the Space boundary is, 100,000′? He has plenty of money and $95,000 is cheap to him, but he will not get his Astronaut wings with a flight on this rocket-plane. A rocket-plane ride for $95,000 may be a good deal to some people, but they should not tell stories about getting into Space. Nice view though. A little zero-G. No Space flight. If XCOR is saying Lynx will be getting into Space, I would like to hear their reasoning and proof. Sounds crooked to me. Maybe they really think they will get into Space. They keep getting money given to them. They let people assume Lynx is going into Space. So they make a living. To really fake people out they should say they will be towed to 40,000′. A lot closer, but Lynx is no SpaceShip-1. They might be breaking a law by not exactly saying how Lynx is getting into Space. Like Fraud. Doug says they will answer questions, so Doug give this comment to them and come back with what they say. If anyone sees where I am wrong, please reply. If it stays up long enough to be read.
Lynx Mark I can’t get to space. Lynx Mark II will. XCOR has always been crystal clear on that.
OK. I missed that. Thanks. I did assume that they said it was. I did a lot of research though. I had not been following them closely from the start. Might have been a good idea to sell rides in the Long Ez.