[AR] Re: Bipropellant solid
- From: "Monroe L. King Jr." <monroe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 07:24:58 -0700
Wow interesting! I'd say so far looking at these patents the orifice
(between the fuel and oxidizer) is indeed still novel enough to warrant
the patent.
Weather or not the orifice is needed and actually makes his system
better remains to be seen I suppose.
Good food for thought thanks for posting.
Monroe
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [AR] Re: Bipropellant solid
> From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <acesaroni@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, October 27, 2014 6:54 am
> To: <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> It's an "all solid, reverse hybrid". As far as I can tell, there is only one
> independent claim and the document is at the published application phase. I'm
> not sure if the examiner will allow the independent claim as there are a
> number of published examples of prior art reduced to practice and disclosed.
>
>
>
> DSC00319.JPG
>
>
>
> DSC00346.JPG
>
>
>
> DSC01760.JPG
>
> Anthony J. Cesaroni
>
> President/CEO
>
> Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace
>
> http://www.cesaronitech.com/
>
> (941) 360-3100 x101 Sarasota
>
> (905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Stephen Burns
> Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 1:24 AM
> To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [AR] Re: Bipropellant solid
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: <mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [
> <mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Ben Brockert
>
> Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 11:13 AM
>
> To: <mailto:arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Subject: [AR] Re: Bipropellant solid
>
>
>
> >Good finds on the patent application. Based on the correlation between
>
> >the length of a chemical's name and its price on Sigma Aldrich, I
>
> >wonder how much that little model rocket cost in propellant. Another patent
> >says that all you have to do is oxidize 3-amino-1,2,4-triazole to form
> >3,3'-azo-1,2,4-triazole, nitrate that, and viola,
> >5,5'-dinitro-3,3'azo-1,2,4-triazole.
>
>
>
> >That is one of the most impressive patent claims I've seen in years.
>
> >If they actually own the entire field of solid bipropellant rockets that
> >will be quite a feat.
>
>
>
> There is some prior art in the field. US 3429265 A from 1960 for example.
>
>
>
> Also CA 2367192 A1 from 2002 by inventors Anthony J. Cesaroni, Michael J.
> Dennett, Jeroen Louwers
>
>
>
> There seems to be a distinct lack of reference to Prior Art in modern
> patents. Have they dropped that criteria so I can patent the wheel now?
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Burnsie.
Other related posts:
