Much has been made of the record-producing swimsuits that Speedo has developed over the last few years: they represent “technological doping” to detractors (aka Speedo’s embarrassed competitors) and the next logical step in sports technology to supporters.
The one thing most people can agree on is that they work. Through years of R&D, Speedo developed some snazzy water-repellent fabrics, laser-bonded seams, and platinum-encrusted turbulence-fueled nanowire micro pumps (ok, maybe not that last one). Anyway, turns out that NASA helped out with the suit testing with its wind tunnel facilities.
Laser-bonded seams!
I’m often intrigued by how these sorts of collaborations are used to enhance an organization’s image. Universities and companies often brag about the other institutes and centers they’re connected to, which somehow makes them more vibrant (if only because they’re reflecting the luster of another institution).
Now, to clarify, these partnerships often are quite productive and foster some important interdisciplinary innovation (that inspires intelligent investments in industry :). But from a marketing standpoint, it’s largely based on the appearance of expertise. If your product is associated with a generally well-respected group, then it must be a good product. But it’s a bit of a house of cards, really: attaching a big name to something doesn’t inherently make it any better.
In this particular case, both Speedo and NASA are hoping to trade up using the perceived authority of their partner. Speedo makes it well-known that it’s not just a swimsuit, but a NASA-tested swimsuit. NASA, for it’s part, emphasizes that it helped produce records not for swimmers, but for Olympic swimmers — they’ve even gone so far as to promote the story at the top of their website these days. I suppose it’s an engaging and timely public-interest story, and after all, NASA needs all the fluff it can get these days.
Better than focusing on more pressing issues, like this, this, or this…
NASA needs all the fluff it can get these days.
Why do you say this? I thought that public opinion of NASA was pretty high at the moment, with all the success of the Phoenix. Do you mean more on the financial side? NASA needs the money? It is pretty cool to note that NASA is still held up to be the highest standard of all that is science and engineering. If the swimsuit is NASA tested, it must be great!
This is totally off the topic of this post, but I have Phoenix questions for you, yet again. I read that Mars will soon be on the opposite side of the sun from Earth, and will be immersed in darkness. This darkness will kill Phoenix’s solar panels and cause it to die a cold and slow death. How long will Mars remain dark? Is there any chance of the Phoenix rising up again (hee) when sunlight returns?
Hey Anna!
Yeah, I was mostly referring to the recent bits of bad news about a behind-schedule rocket, a delayed mission, and the fact that we’ll have to depend on Russia for several years to get astronauts to space. Fortunately, you’re right that public support is generally quite high.
As for Phoenix, it’s the brutal martian winter that will do it in. Because it’s at such a high latitude (think Alaska), it will get virtually no sun during the winter, and CO2 frost will likely accumulate on the panels. Not sure how the electronics are affected, but according to the mission site, there are no plans to contact the lander in the spring. That said, in about a week Phoenix will hit 90 days on Mars, which was the initial goal!