Popular Products Developed by NASA Scientists

by Warren Riddle on August 15, 2009 at 11:20 AM

NASA frequently receives headlines for awesome, and ridiculous, tech developments, but some of its scientific contributions integrate seamlessly into the consumer landscape with very little, or no, fanfare. Radar Online recently compiled a list of 13 NASA developments that were originally intended for space travel, but also became mainstream products.

One of the selections is well-known, like the now-banned high-tech swimsuits (which the U.S. team wore on its way to numerous world records during the Beijing Olympics). Folks might be surprised to hear of some NASA developments include smoke detectors, cordless power tools, and the "memory metal" used in braces.

Radar Online did leave off some developments that deserve recognition, such as the Disposable Absorption Containment Trunk (i.e. diapers) made infamous during the psycho-astronaut fiasco, or memory foam used in beds, pillows, wheelchairs, body armor, and a host of other everyday products.

Given the current state of the economy, the next NASA development ready for public consumption seems obvious. A pimped-out lunar rover (with a power cell that works for weeks) would not only provide a green alternative to gasoline, but could single-handedly save the U.S. auto industry (so long as NASA doesn't charge $19 million for the unreliable onboard toilet). [From: Radar Online]

[Ed. note. The space pen was not, in fact, developed by NASA. Paul Fisher spent over a million dollars designing and testing pressurized space pens, which NASA eventually purchased and used in space.]

Tags: history, invention, inventions, NASA, space, top

Comments

ZaZapperAug 15th 2009 11:52AM

Highly Ranked

Anyone wanting to bash NASA for being worthless should take a look at all the conveniences they enjoy everyday. Nice article to inform the masses about the "side" benefits of space exploration. I'd be willing to bet some poster down the line will try to tell us it's all fake, and they'll use their computers and satellite connection to say so.

Dislike

Report

N8Aug 15th 2009 3:11PM

Neutral

Once more a pitiful attempt to justify the inflated NASA budget. We're not saying eliminate the scientist. We are saying let someone other than the taxpayer fund the science. I was brainwashed along with many others by dehydrated ice cream and space camp movies. I now say let other countries waste their resources to go to the moon. Let's employ ours here. By all means put the NASA's brain trust on the development of more efficient energy options and let private industry fund them.

Dislike

Report

N8Aug 15th 2009 3:18PM

Low Ranked

Once more a pitiful attempt to justify the inflated NASA budget.
We're not saying eliminate the scientist. We are saying let someone
other than the taxpayer fund the science. I was brainwashed along
with many others by dehydrated ice cream and space camp movies. I now
say let other countries waste their resources to go to the moon. Let's
employ ours here. By all means put NASA's brain trust on the
development of more efficient energy options and let private industry
fund them.

Dislike

Report

raykumbaAug 15th 2009 6:51PM

Neutral

Human innovation is most evident when people are faced with extreme challenges, when a problem has to be solved. This is the environment that NASA scientists and engineers are faced with and is the reason why NASA has been at the forefront of technology.

Dislike

Report

McDuffik49Aug 15th 2009 10:07PM

Neutral

Yeah, that space pen was great, for about $5000 I think. Invented to write upside down. But the Russians already figured out what to use to write upside down. It was a PENCIL!

Dislike

Report

wjakeAug 16th 2009 9:51AM

Neutral

NASA did NOT spend millions to invent the Space Pen. Parker Pen developed it, without any contract or grant from NASA.

A little research, people!!

Dislike

Report

mikeisman2Aug 16th 2009 11:00PM

Neutral

i agree with you n8 but then again take into account how many private investors that arent oil companies have the money or power to invest such amounts into finding an alternative energy source and the oil companies arent willing to do so until the oil is copmpletely gone and that wont happen we will just drill in other places i mean for gos sake they could drill off the coast of new jersey they havent yet but they could. all im sayen is it is the way it is and unless a huge chaange is made its gunna stay that way!

Dislike

Report

Add your comments

Your comments:

Remember me

E-Mail me when someone replies to this comment

Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.

When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.

To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.