Amazing! I am suprised to find 2 cool ideas from NASA in as many weeks. The below link is an interesting excursion for a stogy government agency to explore marketing avenues of the tech savy. Mach 30 might consider using this “spread the word” technique.
Cool marketing idea from NASA…
Great Video clips from NASA!
Here’s an article and the associated video clips below. This isn’t directly related to safe, sustained, routine, and reliable access to space, but it made me smile. It is Not stereotypical NASA at all, however, it is close to what I’d expect to see during an operational flight of a Mach 30 vehicle!
It also provides some insight into a spacefaring culture. Here’s the article:
http://gizmodo.com/5360801/buzz-lightyear-back-from-468-days-in-spaaace
and the link to the videos:
The need for a common analysis platform in open design
There are several barriers preventing engineers from sharing their work (that is the underlying analyses, as opposed to just the results). Some are cultural, such as the norm for journal article (publish equations, methods, and tools, not data files), and some are technical (using different tools, or different formulations). I believe the technical barriers reinforce the cultural ones, and are more straight forward to address, so I would propose looking at those first (this is actually a similar approach to the course of open source software, where early efforts focused on developing the tools that enabled people to share their work, including open source compilers and version control).
So, let’s take a look at one of the technical barriers: using different tools. One solution might be to use open source analysis tools (and they do exist for many specialties). Unfortunately, this would involve convincing engineers to use new tools, which at best means requiring the to learn how to use them and interpret their output, and at worst means convincing them that the tools really work (good engineers gave a heavy skepticism of new engineering analysis software). What if we turn the problem on its head? Instead of finding the one set of tools to use, we make it easy to switch between tools. I am thinking of a vendor neutral analysis description language. Engineers develop their analysis in this neutral format and then use translators to write vendor specific input files. Then if the engineers want to share their analysis, they send the neutral format file to someone who then uses a translator for the tool of their choice.
Now, I don’t imagine this would be easy. Their are many disciplines with many tools in each. But, imagine how much easier it would be to share one’s work. If anyone knows of an example of this, please let me know.
A couple of cool links
Here are a couple of links I found that are not really news worthy, so I thought I would share them on my blog instead of in the forums.
- White Knight Two test flight log – keep up with progress of the WK2test flights over at Scaled Composites
- Canadian Space Society home page – a very interesting space organization in Canada, be sure to check it out
Gap in U.S. Human Spaceflight Could Reach Nine Years — Aviation Week, 2 Aug 09 –
To me this is rediculus. In the 1960s NASA went all the way to the moon in the time it’s taking them to design our current system!! This 9 year gap doesnt even include flight test time or account for any additional future delays. Does anyone else see somthing wrong here?
for the full article <click here>.


