Product Design & Development
 Share
RSS Feed 

At Issue

Journey To The $300 Pen

 Permanent link

by Jeff Reinke, Editorial Director, PD&DJeff Reinke, Editorial Director, PD&D

Like many of you, I read David Mantey’s column last week in which he discussed the younger generation’s perceived malaise about landing on the moon.  

While most celebrated the anniversary of our “one small step,” he lamented that to many in this age of heightened technological expectations it just wasn’t a big deal. I then battened down the hatches in preparation for the storm of responses it might, and did, generate. (With all due respect to the opinions of Jack T, David’s desk is neither clean nor uninhabited.)

While no one will argue with the accomplishment of said feat, I thought David’s point was interesting and I do agree that many of NASA’s endeavors generate only a ho-hum acknowledgement, especially from those who didn’t live through the early stages of this agency’s development. However, in many ways these lassie-faire attitudes are really the ultimate compliment for those who pioneered space travel.

I say this because it seems their work has fallen into the same category as a number of other technologies that we are regularly exposed to, but rarely think about.

I couldn’t tell you the names of the individuals responsible for the modern day refrigerator and I definitely take it for granted, but we certainly don’t celebrate the first time one was used. The same could be said for countless other every day items that have become ingrained into our daily existence.

In my opinion, walking on the moon impacts today’s generation the most by mitigating any limitations that might be in place, and helps set a new bar that still permeates throughout the service, design, production and engineering communities.

Although there are any number of areas that I could point to for such an example, I have to reference a recently received a press release that details a new fountain pen design.

Before you laugh, the product in question is from the German manufacturer Lamy and it retails for $300. That’s right – a $300 fountain pen.

Now, I’m not going to claim expertise on the subject of writing instruments – I thought the $20 Cross pen I received as a graduation present was exorbitant – but I’m guessing there were probably earlier models with fewer features and less distinguishable designs before the dialog3 was unveiled.

Constant motivation to further innovate has produced a product that is so over-engineered; few will ever have the need. But it’s still sets an impressive benchmark for what I’d consider a commodity item.

Similarly, before landing on the moon we were happy with land lines and typewriters. Now, cell phones and wireless internet connections drive communication.

So was landing on the moon a big deal? Of course, and David would agree. But the fact that more people would pay $10 to see the latest Transformers movie than watch a free shuttle launch from the comfort of their own home is a testament not to generational indifference, but to the competence, foresight and accomplishment of those associated with Apollo 11.

If it wasn’t for their work, we might all have to suffer through the use of disposable ballpoint pens, but at least for $300 you wouldn’t run out of them any time soon.

What's your take? Comment below.


Thanks for adding balance to the conversation, Jeff. A parallel comparison would be the advances in disease treatment that we now take for granted, each of which is the result of the work of countless medical researchers over many years. But aren't we lucky that we CAN now take these for granted?

And remember the bulge in students who went into engineering after the Russians launched Sputnik? If the upcoming Augustine review of NASA helps regalvanize the space program we may see a revival of engineering again in this country.

Lynn Manning
Posted by: lynn manning at 7/29/2009 3:43 PM


There's no doubt that the space program deserves credit for making our modest attempts at space travel these days more routine from a safety perspective, but to compare space travel to pedestrian commodities like refrigerators and pens is going a bit far. Refrigerators and pens have evolved to the point of utility where they can only be over-engineered for their single function; the space program is only in its infancy in terms of its permutations and possibilities. More people will pay to see the Transformers than watch a shuttle launch because the Transformers is a) promoted creatively and regularly and b) it fuels the imagination, which our space program has not done a good job of doing of late. Let's also add that someone stands to make a buck off the Transformers and so they have a motivation to make it work...there would be nothing wrong with increasing the commercialization of space as well.
Posted by: Fred K at 7/29/2009 4:19 PM


Interesting thoughts about commercializing space Fred. You'd think the fewer bills the government has to foot right now, the better. But I'm wondering how tough it would be to police private useage of a governement agency?
Posted by: Jeff at 7/29/2009 4:59 PM


"but to compare space travel to.....pens is going a bit far"

I'm guessing that Jeff's reference to pens was a nod to the space-inspired development of ballpoint pens that would function upside down and in zero gravity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Pen

Space launches are, I suspect, a bit like Top Fuel drag races - awe-inspiring if you are close enough to feel your insides quiver but not necessarily that great TV.

And if they really wanted more people to watch the launches maybe they should get Transformer heroine Megan Fox to do the commentary, in cutoffs.
Posted by: Pedal Power at 7/30/2009 1:40 AM


I certainly agree with Pedal Power that Megan Fox could make paint drying seem exciting, so NASA should call her agent.

To Jeff's point about policing private usage of a government agency, I don't think that's the model that is going to expedite the commercialization of space. If you examine Virgin Galactic's model, they have developed their own launch craft, so no government dependency there aside from an FAA license perhaps. In terms of launch sites, they are cultivating several; an Abu Dhabi investment group is buying 33% of the company to help secure Abu Dhabi as a spaceport for the program. Pretty much all of this circumvents the US government's involvement. But here's the problem as well if US industry is anyone's concern...the foremost private company advancing commercialization of space is majority owned by a UK firm, with minority ownership from Abu Dhabi...to which countries will the benefits of this program flow? Granted their spacecraft (WhiteKnight2/SpaceShip2) was designed by American Burt Rutan, but that doesn't seem to give the US much of a stake in the rewards in this new industry.

China, India and Russia all have their sights set on the moon and Mars, so it seems that someone on the planet is still inspired by the possibilities for space programs. The US has a new vision for going back to the moon too, but it keeps getting pushed back and the Shuttle's lifespan keeps getting extended. I love the Shuttle, but it's proven to be a distraction to moving ahead.
Posted by: Fred K at 7/31/2009 10:51 AM


register or log in to comment on this blog!

At Issue

Beta Products & The Human Guinea Pig
Mike Willshaw, Radius Creative
My Garbage Blanket
Anna Wells, Editor, IMPO
A Quick Fix
Meaghan Ziemba, Associate Editor, PD&D

Quick Links

Site Sponsors


Most Viewed

Videos & Webcasts

Cannon vs. Skull 3/17/2010
Schmit Prototypes builds a canon powerful enough to blow your brains out.   Continue
Dynamic Structures Digital Prototyping 3/17/2010
When designing their structures, Dynamic Structures uses Audtodesk Inventor to go beyond 3D design.   Continue
Augmenting Reality 3/17/2010
The new technology makes driving more safe and convenient by enhancing the driver’s site.   Continue