Reverse Technology Transfer in the Space Industry

During the glory days of NASA's crewed exploration program, the job description of "rocket scientist" was synonymous with the image of supremely intelligent engineers, doing the impossible on a daily basis. NASA itself often uses the reasoning of technology transfer from space programs to the general public as a justification for its own existence - even Jane Public can appreciate the benefits of Teflon coated frying pans and memory-foam mattresses. Today however - 40 years after that giant leap for all mankind - the proud proclamation of "I work at NASA" has a very different image associated with it for most who hear it: that of an overly bureaucratic public servant to an agency with a history of producing frequently recycled vision statements but little else.

To be fair, this change in perception is not all due to a decline in the ways the business of "rocket science" is conducted these days. The fact is that Jane Public has simply gotten harder to impress - and who could blame her? We live in a world saturated with technological marvels, continuously advanced at breathtaking speed, where product cycles are measured in weeks, and your granny drives a car with more computing power than the Space Shuttle ever had. In contrast, space programs have very long development times (decades) and few (if any) product cycles. Without the unrelenting pressure of fierce economic competition, and the billion-people consumer base to test new products on, the space industry has been left in the dust when compared to other high-tech industries

There is an upside to this development however - for those of us rocket scientists willing to put aside our ego and learn from our terrestrial-bound counterparts. The rapid advancement and diversification of technology in literally all aspects of modern life has bequeathed us (rocket scientists) an enormous treasure chest of technological know-how. If we can remember to open it, we can draw from it inspiration, highly efficient manufacturing, and even ready-to-use system components with very little effort.

Take for example the automotive industry: the daily research budget of a company like Mercedes-Benz is staggering, easily out sizing even the most generously funded government space program, The pressure to keep improving and stay competitive in the market place is relentless - when is the last time you read about another performance upgrade to the latest model year Space Shuttle so customers won't switch to a competing brand?

For those of us who are fans of the technological top-end of motorsports (World Rally Championship, Formula 1, etc.), the technological parallels between aerospace and high-performance automotive research are so blatant that more than a few of us have worked in both camps. The University of Washington's Department of Aeronautics & Astronautics recently received research grants from Lamborghini to develop new light-weight structures. The same rapid prototyping technology used by F1 teams to test new aerodynamics packages in the 14 days between race weekends is just as applicable to developing wing planforms for a next generation Reusable Launch Vehicle. And it doesn't end with technology itself; there are many more lessons aerospace can learn from other industries. Two years back the BBC produced a fascinating TV series named "Formula for Success", taking an in-depth look at every aspect of the F1 industry.

While I'm just as proud as ever to be a contributor to humanity's push towards the stars, it is high time for us as an industry to remember a little humility, return our gaze back to Earth, and open our eyes and minds to the remarkable achievements of other industries. You'll be amazed at just how many types of wheels you'll not have to reinvent.