The British jet engine that failed in the 'Valley of Death'
"It was going great until it fell apart." Richard Varvill recalls the emotional shock that hits home when a high-tech venture goes off the rails.
The former chief technology officer speaks ruefully about his long career trying to bring a revolutionary aerospace engine to fruition at UK firm Reaction Engines.
The origins of Reaction Engines go back to the Hotol project in the 1980s. This was a futuristic space plane that caught the public imagination with the prospect of a British aircraft flying beyond the atmosphere.
The secret sauce of Hotol was heat exchanger technology, an attempt to cool the super-heated 1,000C air that enters an engine at hypersonic speeds.
Without cooling this will melt aluminium, and is, Mr Varvill says, "literally too hot to handle".
Fast forward three decades to October 2024 and Reaction Engines was bringing the heat exchanger to life at sites in the UK and US.
UK Ministry of Defence funding took the company into hypersonic research with Rolls-Royce for an unmanned aircraft. But that was not enough to keep the business afloat.
Rolls-Royce declines to go into details about Reaction's collapse, but Mr Varvill is more specific.
"Rolls-Royce said it had other priorities and the UK military has very little money."
Aviation is a business with a very long gestation time for a product. It can take 20 years to develop an aircraft. This unforgiving journey is known as crossing the Valley of Death.
Mr Varvill knew the business had to raise more funds towards the end of 2024 but big investors were reluctant to jump on board.
"The game was being played right to the very end, but to cross the Valley of Death in aerospace is very hard."
What was the atmosphere like in those last days as the administrators moved in?
"It was pretty grim, we were all called into the lecture theatre and the managing director gave a speech about how the board 'had tried everything'. Then came the unpleasant experience of handing over passes and getting personal items. It was definitely a bad day at the office."
This bad day was too much for some. "A few people were in tears. A lot of them were shocked and upset because they'd hoped we could pull it off right up to the end."
It was galling for Mr Varvill "because we were turning it around with an improved engine. Just as we were getting close to succeeding we failed. That's a uniquely British characteristic."
Did they follow the traditional path after a mass lay-off and head to the nearest pub? "We had a very large party at my house. Otherwise it would have been pretty awful to have put all that effort into the company and not mark it in some way."
His former colleague Kathryn Evans headed up the space effort, the work around hypersonic flight for the Ministry of Defence and opportunities to apply the technology in any other commercial areas.
When did she know the game was up? "It's tricky to say when I knew it was going wrong, I was very hopeful to the end. While there was a lot of uncertainty there was a strong pipeline of opportunities."
She remembers the moment the axe fell and she joined 200 colleagues in the HQ's auditorium.
"It was the 31st of October, a Thursday, I knew it was bad news but when you're made redundant with immediate effect there's no time to think about it. We'd all been fighting right to the end so then my adrenalin crashed."
And those final hours were recorded. One of her colleagues brought in a Polaroid camera. Portrait photos were taken and stuck on a board with message expressing what Reaction Engines meant to individuals.
What did Ms Evans write? "I will very much miss working with brilliant minds in a kind, supportive culture."
Since then she's been reflecting "on an unfinished mission and the technology's potential".
But her personal pride remains strong. "It was British engineering at its best and it's important for people to hold their heads up high."
Her boss Adam Dissel, president of Reaction Engines, ran the US arm of the business. He laments the unsuccessful struggle to wrest more funds from big names in aerospace.
"The technology consistently worked and was fairly mature. But some of our strategic investors weren't excited enough to put more money in and that put others off."
The main investors were Boeing, BAE Systems and Roll-Royce. He feels they could have done more to give the wider investment community confidence in Reaction Engines.
It would have avoided a lot of pain.
"My team had put heart and soul into the company and we had a good cry. "
Did they really shed tears? "Absolutely, I had my tears at our final meeting where we joined hands and stood up. I said 'We still did great, take a bow."
What lessons can we draw for other high-tech ventures? "You definitely have no choice but to be optimistic," says Mr Dissel.
The grim procedure of winding down the business took over as passwords and laptops were collected while servers were backed up in case "some future incarnation of the business can be preserved".
The company had been going in various guises for 35 years. "We didn't want it to go to rust. I expect the administrator will look for a buyer for the intellectual property assets," Mr Dissel adds.
Other former employees also hold out for a phoenix rising from the ashes. But the Valley of Death looms large.
"Reaction Engines was playing at the very edge of what was possible. We were working for the fastest engines and highest temperatures. We bit off the hard job," says Mr Dissel.
Despite all this Mr Varvill's own epitaph for the business overshadows technological milestones. "We failed because we ran out of money."
Why we need 'revolutionary' cooling tech
The camera tech propelling shows like Adolescence
How to avoid a puncture on the Moon
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Florian Wirtz joins list of most expensive soccer signings in history
Florian Wirtz became one of the most expensive players in soccer history when the Germany playmaker joined Liverpool from Bayer Leverkusen on Friday for a fee of up to 116 million pounds ($156 million). Neymar: $262 million (222 million euros) Advertisement Paris Saint-Germain shattered the world-record transfer fee by signing the Brazil superstar from Barcelona in August 2017. It was more than double the outlay of Manchester United to sign Paul Pogba from Juventus for $116 million a year earlier. It remains the record transfer fee. ___ Kylian Mbappé: $216 million (180 million euros) A few weeks after buying Neymar, PSG also secured a loan deal for Mbappé — then the rising star of French soccer playing for Monaco — that included the option to make the move permanent in 2018. PSG did so, making it an outlay of nearly $500 million on two players. ___ Philippe Coutinho: $192 million (160 million euros) Advertisement Flush with cash after selling Neymar a year earlier, Barcelona spent most of it in a deal to buy Brazil playmaker Coutinho from Liverpool for a Spanish record fee. ___ Moises Caicedo: $146 million (115 million pounds) The Ecuador midfielder's move was previously the most expensive deal by a British club, with Chelsea buying him from Brighton in August 2023. ___ João Félix: $140 million (126 million euros) Atletico Madrid triggered a buyout clause in Félix's contract to sign the Portugal forward from Benfica in August 2019. ___ Jude Bellingham: $139 million (128.5 million euros) The England star got his big move to Real Madrid from Borussia Dortmund in June 2023, for an initial up-front fee of 103 million euros plus add-ons linked to performance. Advertisement ___ Antoine Griezmann: $134 million (120 million euros) Atletico could afford to sign Félix after selling France forward Griezmann to Barcelona for a similar fee a few weeks earlier. ___ Neymar: $98 million (90 million euros) Outside from Europe, the biggest transfer deal also involved Neymar when he joined Al Hilal, a team in the Saudi Pro League, from Paris Saint-Germain in August 2023. That came at the height of Saudi Arabia's push to sign high-end soccer talent to ignite the oil-rich state's domestic league. ___ AP soccer: Steve Douglas, The Associated Press
UPI
2 hours ago
- UPI
U.S. company to provide $6 billion loan for British nuclear power project
Protesters hold banners outside Hinkley Point power station in Somerset, United Kingdom, in 2011 against EDF Energy's plans to renew the site with two new reactors. The project began in 2017 and has had delays and funding problems File Photo by Ben Birchuk/EPA June 20 (UPI) -- Apollo, a U.S. asset management group, plans to provide a $6 billion loan to the British nuclear project Hinkley Point C being built by a French multinational electric utility company. Hinkley's estimated cost has soared from $23.7 billion to almost $60.6 billion and won't be operational until at least 2029, Baha Breaking News reported. Construction began in 2017. Apollo will provide an investment-grade debt financing package at an interest rate below 7% for the project developer, Electricite de France, sources told CNBC and the Financial Times. Apollo, which was founded in 1990 by Leonard Black, Josh Harris and Marc Rowan, manages capital for institutional and individual investors. Apollo, headquartered in New York City, had revenue of $26.11 billion in 2024 with a net income of $6.373 billion. The loan has a maximum maturity of 12 years. EDF is building two new nuclear reactors at the site in Somerset and will be able to borrow $2 billion each of the three years as part of the package. The company has had a shortfall since China General Nuclear Power Group, which was supposed to provide a third of the cost of the project, stopped providing further financing in 2023. CGN was removed by the British government from another project -- Sizewell C -- because of concerns about Chinese influence. The funding could be used for other British projects by EDF. Jamshid Ehsani, head of global principal structured finance at Apollo, described the deal as the "largest ever" sterling private credit deal. "It's going to help finance a critical, low-carbon nuclear project. This is the business Apollo is in today," he said. "Europe is a huge focus for us."
New York Post
3 hours ago
- New York Post
I've ditched HR to free my company from the social-justice police
'I want to be the first company without HR.' It was just a throwaway comment I made this month at a conference called Freedom Fest — but the audience went wild, and the line went viral in an Instagram post with over 5 million views. 'They produce nothing,' I continued. 'They monitor our words. They tell us what we can and cannot say. Advertisement 'They inhibit creativity. It's bad for business.' At my own start-up — XX-XY Athletics, the only brand standing up for the protection of women's sports — I'll be damned if I'm going to let the ladies of 'The View' run around policing my employees' conversations. We started with no Human Resources department a year ago, and we'll continue with no HR as we grow. Advertisement My statement touched a nerve because anyone who has worked in corporate America has been subjected to the censorious 'Head Girl' rule-making emanating from HR departments. And they are tired of it. When I started my business career in the early 1990s, HR was responsible for recruiting, benefits and payroll — that was it. As I moved up the ladder and found myself in executive meetings, the HR leader weighed in last on key business decisions, if at all. Advertisement Thirty years on, HR leaders are calling themselves 'Chief Human Resources Officers,' and they proclaim their power with reckless and off-topic abandon. HR departments today are packed with Tracy Flicks, the way-too-eager high schooler played by Reese Witherspoon in the movie 'Election.' Flick is the archetypal 'Head Girl,' a term derived from the British school system and its tight hierarchy of internal discipline — ambitious and officious with little actual skill or intellect. Hand-raisers like these are not selected to lead for intelligence or ability, but for conscientiousness and a willingness to uphold 'the rules.' Advertisement That was fine when HR had no power. But now, after yearning for a seat at the table, HR's midwit elites have found a way to exert increasing influence in the corporate environment — leveraging social-justice buzzwords to accrue power and (what else?) make more rules. In the 2020s, HR asserts its newly found clout with tyrannical zeal. When I interviewed in 2023 for a CEO job at an $8 billion retailer, I made it all the way to the end of the corporate leadership receiving line, successfully fielding queries on my business acumen and brand-building accomplishments. My last interview was with the HR representative on the board. Her first question: 'Will you apologize for what you've done?' Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters What I'd 'done' was advocate for opening public schools during the COVID pandemic. By 2023 I'd been proven right. That didn't matter to the HR lady. I'd violated her tightly enforced script. Advertisement I didn't apologize, and I didn't get the job. Over the last two decades, HR has gone from operational support to Operation Head Girl Hall Monitor. They force-feed trainings about acceptable language; they make 'merit' out to be racist; and they set hiring criteria based on risk avoidance rather than excellence. But hiring people who don't offend anyone won't result in employees who take initiative and make things. Advertisement Am I being sexist in calling them Head Girls? In 2023, 76% of HR managers in the United States were female. The shoe fits. (And yes, men can be Head Girl types, too.) British academic Bruce Charlton explains the Head Girl 'can never be a creative genius because she does what other people want by the standard they most value.' That's why the Head Girls of HR made everyone add pronouns to their email signatures starting around 2020: Social standards. Not because it drove the business. Advertisement No, these time-suckers shift focus away from the business. Front-of-house employees — builders, makers and service providers — must spend a significant amount of time thinking about the words they use rather than their actual jobs. Critics of my viral comment pushed back at me: 'You need HR to avoid unnecessary risk!' they chorused. Right. That's the fear HR leverages to maintain its unearned influence. Advertisement Risk avoidance means hiring mediocre people with no opinions who never offend anyone. Those hires won't take my one-year-old start-up to big-brand status. I want big thinkers with creative minds. Sometimes these folks are disruptive. But there are no new products or breakthrough marketing campaigns without them. My company is a walking, talking HR violation. We 'misgender' all day long. In fact, speaking truth (as I call it) is required to work here. We're not in school anymore. We don't need a persnickety Miss Manners etiquette-enforcer telling us to be nice. I'll continue to go it alone without HR. I'll assume the so-called risk so I can lead in my own voice. And I'll succeed, or fail, on my own terms. Jennifer Sey is founder and CEO of XX-XY Athletics.
