nasa technology transfer program

SpaceNut · 2016-03-27 12:57:48

This has happened a few times with the inflateble of Bigelow and the Rockets of Space x to name a few but We should be further along with getting man into space....

kbd512 wrote:

SpaceNut,
There's just not much in the way of fast-moving development in this area. If the goal is to actually land more massive payloads on Mars, then these projects have to be provided with more funding than they currently receive. Sooner or later, new EDL technologies have to be tested on Mars. To this day, the only EDL technologies that have seen use on Mars are all legacy technologies. The Mars 2020 rover is still set to use legacy technology. If indeed we are advancing the state-of-the-art in this required technology for landing humans on Mars, then we're doing it incredibly slowly. At the current pace of development, there's probably another five years worth of development before we see any EDL technology that is an improvement over current technology.
These EDL technology threads tend to get buried because the technology may as well be entirely theoretical until someone actually tests the technology in a realistic environment since Mars' atmosphere is so unlike Earth's atmosphere, the technical aspects of current EDL technology projects are buried in incomplete documentation, and apart from small demonstrators there's virtually no other use for these technologies.
If NASA decided to make more of the information related to these projects available to the general public, it's likely that aerospace engineers would find the problems interesting and contribute whatever they could reasonably contribute in their spare time to solving the problems.

Ya no funds or just barely any flow is not much better....

But the technology is not free and is sold by Nasa...

Lots of web site links.... for nasa technology transfer program....

Terraformer · 2016-03-27 16:34:05

However, the technology development is paid for by the public, so it really ought to be the public who own any intellectual property developed...

Dexter2999 · 2016-03-28 13:18:44

SpaceNut wrote:

Ya no funds or just barely any flow is not much better....
But the technology is not free and is sold by Nasa...
Lots of web site links.... for nasa technology transfer program....

Perhaps "sold" should be replaced with "licensed" for a better long term return on investment.

SpaceNut · 2016-03-28 17:14:37

http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/partner … nsfer.html
http://technology.nasa.gov/
http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/about_u … index.html
http://www.techbriefs.com/
http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/
http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/communi … ation.html

IPP seeks potential licensees and negotiates license agreements to transfer NASA technology. More than 1600 such technology transfer successes have been documented in NASA's Spinoff Magazine over the years, which include commercial applications in health and medicine, transportation, public safety, consumer goods, agriculture, environmental resources, computer technology, manufacturing, and energy conversion and use. Licensing terms are negotiated on a case-by-case basis, although technology fields of use are defined as narrowly as practical in every case; exclusive licenses are uncommon, but still possible in exceptional cases. IPP also facilitates the reporting of new technologies by both NASA and contractor inventors, as well as assesses the commercial potential and strategic value of those technologies to NASA’s missions. Therefore, IPP facilitates the protection of NASA’s rights in intellectual property to which it has title, thus providing the basis for licensing and technology transfer.

The trouble with licensing is that it is not exclusive.....

Dexter2999 · 2016-03-28 23:41:07

The claim for exclusivity is most likely more of a red herring that business people use to fleece the more engineering minded.

I have known a number of engineers in my life who I find hugely frustrating. I consider them the guys who know all the answers but don't know the right questions to ask. I would propose ideas and would repeatedly be met with, "yeah, someone is probably already working on that."

I couldn't make them understand. How many brands of automatic drip coffee makers are there? How many brands of automobiles? It is the engineer who says, "someone is already doing that" and the business minded who say "I need to get my piece of the pie!"

Battery operated power tools were developed for the space program. They sold the tech. So that would make it "exclusive"? Yet, how many brands of cordless tools are there? I know of at least four off the top of my head. So how does that concept of "exclusive" have any real value. Anything that is engineered, can most likely be reverse engineered. Changes can be made to avoid patent infringement.

But overall I think the concept is merely a negotiation tactic. Just my opinion.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2016-03-27 12:57:48

nasa technology transfer program

#2 2016-03-27 16:34:05

Re: nasa technology transfer program

#3 2016-03-28 13:18:44

Re: nasa technology transfer program

#4 2016-03-28 17:14:37

Re: nasa technology transfer program

#5 2016-03-28 23:41:07

Re: nasa technology transfer program

Board footer