This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Education

Mike Suffredini Objects to Legos in Space

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
August 29, 2012
Filed under , , , ,

NASA’s Space Station Manager Did Not Like The Idea of Legos in Space
“Suff inquired about the relevance of performing the Lego experiment onboard from an ISS research priorities perspective. Ms. Robinson explained that Lego is Leland Melvin’s top priority – for education given that Legos are something that children are very familiar with and that can reach tens of thousands of students. Suff asked if the folks at HQ had considered the negative aspects of showcasing Legos in that it may seem we are not utilizing 1SS resources to their fullest capacity. Ms. Robinson explained that she was not aware that people had considered that perspective and would pass this on.”
Keith’s note: The United States has spent somewhere between $60 to 100 billion on the International Space Station – and the agency’s program manager doesn’t think that a simple education project – one that uses something simple (Legos) that millions of “future explorers” use every day – is relevant? I do not hear Mike Suffredini objecting to all of the other stuff (baseball caps, college t-shirts, cartoon characters) that make their way onto the ISS. So why pick on something simple that (potentially) allows children to have a personal connection with this incredible on-orbit research facility? This is simply baffling.

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

19 responses to “Mike Suffredini Objects to Legos in Space”

  1. T.C. Judd says:
    0
    0

    “baseball caps, college t-shirts, cartoon characters”…or playing golf during a Russian EVA?!

  2. James Lundblad says:
    0
    0

    As an informal educator (afterschool robotics) I would side with Leland Melvin. I grew up making all kinds of things with Lego. I don’t like some of the directions Lego has gone with video games, and some of the kits. I prefer the design and build it yourself old school. I would complain about Angry Birds before Lego simple machines. I think it’s a symbiotic relationship, NASA is good for Lego, and Lego is good for NASA Education.

  3. Steve Whitfield says:
    0
    0

    The reality is that Lego will still be around long after both Suffredini and the ISS are long forgotten.  To me, this suggests that it’s possibly a very powerful educational tool and should be used as such.

    Steve

    • npng says:
      0
      0

      Steve, I have to applaud the Lego Group and the Kristiansen family for putting serious effort and money in to space, ISS related products and education.  So a U.S. firm doesn’t make it happen, instead a firm in Denmark pulls this off with NASA.  Good for both NASA and the Lego Group.  Tie your product to a $100B on-orbit facility, smart.  If nothing else, a good branding move by Lego, good market and product visibility.  And on top of that you can instill some interest, enthusiasm and basic education in to students and give teachers and educators a decent tool with which to teach science, physics, math, micro-g, space, plastics, structures, design, modeling, and all of STEM.  And since the U.S. is, what?, 27th ranked in education today, heavens knows we could use some “Major STEM” even if it was created in Denmark.  All that good .edu stuff aside…

      I have to strongly agree with Mike Suffredini.  I’ll be clear.  It’s not that Legos and education lack relevancy.  It’s that the primary efforts and manpower spent to utilize the ISS must be those that involve high-end, leading-edge, breakthrough science and R&D, activities that have powerful value outcomes for the ISS. 

      What?  I’m saying that education isn’t important?  No, not at all.  I’m saying that education is important, but has a fractional role and that is has justifiable partial piece of the overall ISS research and utilization portfolio.  I think that is the message/concern that Mike was really transmitting in his comment.

      If the ISS depreciates at $500+ Million per month, will Legos activities generate sufficient value to offset those costs? Of course not.

      So sure – keep the Legos activity active – but make sure it’s prioritized appropriately and focus on the critical elephants-in-the-room that must succeeed to justify the ISS’s use.

      Put the Lego activity in another setting.  Put it on a multi-billion dollar nuclear aircraft carrier.  Transmit Lego You Tube science videos from the deck of the carrier.  Is that a good use of a $4B carrier?   Put Lego activity in a power plant.  Build some cute structures.  Add a light bulb.  Tell the kids they can light the bulb by flicking the power plant switch on and off.  No question, it would be amazingly educational.  But is that a good use of a $4B power plant?   Go grab Livermore or Sandia or Oak Ridge and hand it to the educational folks.  Let them use the facilities (at time and cost) for educational purposes and outreach.   Build a Lego fusion reactor.  For 100 students to do that would surely be an unforgettable project.   I’m sure that most parents and teachers too would be overjoyed to know that their kids are getting exposure and educational involvement with an asset or facility or lab that is worth billions or 100’s of billions or dollars.  Who wouldn’t?    But are any of these uses of multi-billion dollar assets, as a central function (key statement), really appropriate?   

      I don’t think Mike wants to step on all of the Lego blocks or squash the activity, but I do think he is keenly aware that if Lego was the prime focus, it would be insufficient to justify a $3B annual operational expenditure. Do you agree?   

      If Mike does not see deeply serious, mature ISS utilization occur and occur quickly, the entire manned on-orbit endeavor may be in a world of hurt, or just extinct.  If the ISS and on-orbit research facilities are not funded, productive, and sustained – you can have all of the space STEM in the world and all of the kids inspired to the max – only to find there IS NO space facility to use or work on or to have a career in, in the future.   The “Lego Kids” of today, being 5-15 years old, will not enter the workforce for 10-20 years (2020-2030).  They will not assume lead roles until 2030 to 2050.   Will there be an ISS or on-orbit facility when they reach those decades?   I suspect Mike’s driven urgency is to make damn sure that critical R&D is done on the ISS – NOW – so there will be a laboratory for today’s kids that are the 35 year old technology movers, shakers and leaders in 2040.

      NASA, but moreso the U.S. and all of the ISS partners have a central, very serious, even urgent mission; a time sensitive mission, given the relatively short life of the ISS and the considerable amount of time and effort it takes to put a real series of science payloads on orbit that creates great value.

      • kcowing says:
        0
        0

        Mike Suffredini is a Scrooge – and an inconsistent one. He allows all manner of astronaut toys and other trinkets to fly at thousands of dollars per pound (that’s fine) but when there is a chance to use the ISS to inspire and inform the next generation, he suddenly gets serious about the ‘appearance’ of what is proper on the ISS. Gimme a break. NASA has no idea what the ISS is for – therefore everyone is free to decide for themselves what it is or is not supposed to do.  As for aircraft carriers – no one seemed to be worried when the Navy alllowed real ships to be used in a movie version of a board game “Battleship”.

        • npng says:
          0
          0

          A scrooge?  Interesting description of character and demeanor Keith.  I wonder if your comment will prompt Mike to look deeply into a mirror for a moment or simply think “consider the source” and blow you off.

          The dynamics of the situation, ISS and HSF are changing and Mike knows it.  He’s going to either rise to the situation and assume a new dimension of management engagement or resign himself to being taken over by 100,000 educators with hand puppets. 

          When you say “all manner of toys” relative to NASA, it’s an understatement.  From Legos to Camilla and then globally to the Czech “Little Mole”, one thing is for sure, we’ve loaded the ISS wall to wall with mascots and toys.     

          Scrooge or not, I’ll give Mike the benefit of the doubt. Let’s see which way utilization goes. Will the ISS be our new on-orbit Toys R Us? Or something more “relevant”? (there’s that Mike-word again).  

          Don’t misunderstand me regarding educators and teachers and STEM and even non-STEM, they are all vital.  Most of them deserve far better classroom equipment, tools, resources and more time to innovate and to have access to technology and learning aids.  The best of them should have double the salary they make today.  But that is a separate issue.  If the optimization and use of a $100B ISS pivots on Lego experiments and teachings of those 5-12 or that Lego is considered of great relevance, I think we’re toast. 

          [The Navy ship used in the movie Battleship released April 2012 was the USS Missouri – not an aircraft carrier, but an Iowa class battleship . The ship was decommissioned in 1992.  It became a museum ship in 1998 then stationed in Hawaii.  Recently it was reported to be leaking.  I’m surprised it was even used for the movie.  From what records there are, the movie production paid for the costs of its use and paid a few sailors a modicum fee to serve as extras on some of the shoots.  The move received ‘rotten’ reviews.]

          • kcowing says:
            0
            0

            I use my real name when posting. You do not. Suggest that you look into the mirror WRT your comments about my character and demeanor.

          • npng says:
            0
            0

            My apologies Keith if my comments above were vague. For clarification, I was not
            referring to your character or demeanor at all. As for names, some of us do not
            possess the same degrees of freedom and liberty you are able to enjoy.

      • Steve Whitfield says:
        0
        0


        Suff inquired about the relevance of performing the Lego experiment onboard from an ISS research priorities perspective.

        npng,

        Basically, I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said.  However, first off, I think this whole business is being taken out of context.  I don’t get the impression that Suff is opposed to either Lego itself or a Lego “experiment” being conducted on the ISS (that’s just my impression).  I think he’s genuinely concerned about priorities, period, because the people on the ISS are clearly overworked — there is nowhere near enough manpower to do all of the tasks that they’ve been assigned, so I’m guessing he’s looking for things to scrap, or at least differ.  And on a quick look basis, something involving toys would seem like a good choice as maybe mot so essential.  If that is his reasoning, then in his place, I would have done exactly the same.

        On another note, the word education has more than one implication and I think maybe we’re at cross purposes here.  Educating the kids who are currently at the Lego-using age, which you put at 5-15 years old, is not what I would be concentrating on, for essentially the reasons that you’ve given. Return is too far in the future, and full of uncertainty.  But I think Lego has an appeal to all kids, from 3 to 63; it’s one of the few things involving a toy that parents, and grandparents, still do with their kids and all enjoy (try it; it’s fun).

        But more importantly, kids and adults of all ages know what Lego is and what you can do with it.  This is somewhat unique. Most “toys” or other playthings have a finite life time, after  which the generation gap kicks in, and the rate of this happening is always accelerating.  But Lego is as universal as Koolaide and Kleenex.  If we accept this as true, then consider that the most effective and potentially most cost effective method of promotion is simple association.  Athletes makes big money promoting things like razors.  Celebrities act as spokespeople for charities; etc.  And they do nothing but speak  lines written for them.  The public associates a product or idea with a well-known person — association.  Quite in addition to the scientific work that the ISS must do, it also has to continue to exist, as you’ve pointed out.  NASA is not allowed to advertise itself or promote itself in the normal product marketing sense. However, it can be promoted by association, especially now that we have the CASIS link (hopefully).  So, with this we have a different take on “education” — educating the masses instead of just young children.  How many people, in the US or any other country, have any meaningful knowledge of the ISS and what it is supposed to be doing?  Obviously far too few.  But by simple association techniques they could be “teaching” people of all ages and persuasions about the ISS and what it is and can be doing.  Imagine how much Kelloggs would pay to get Tony the Tiger associated with the ISS and in return, the cereal boxes become more good promotion articles, for which NASA and the other ISS partners may well have to pay little or nothing at all.  So I see the Lego situation as being two separate experiments — the original planned one and also, if they’re smart and can make the time for it, a test case for ISS promotion and education to the general public through association.  Well-known worldwide outfits like Pepsi, Coke, Adidas, Sony and many more are potential other “associates” of the ISS, and their product packaging can become promotion materials and “education” materials.

        Steve

  4. Jafafa Hots says:
    0
    0

    “it may seem we are not utilizing 1SS resources to their fullest capacity.”
    Well we sure wouldn’t want the public’s impressions to match reality now, would we?

  5. spacesystemguy says:
    0
    0

    People please, give Suff the benefit of the doubt.  He is simply asking if people have thought this all the way through.  I know that he will gladly support this if all of the right people are on board.  Having been in exactly that position in the past you would be surprised how many ideas get to the final stages of implementation without having been fully discussed.

    That said, you will never make everybody happy. 

  6. Dan Connor says:
    0
    0

    Take a look at this program and maybe Mr. Sufferdine will have a different understanding of the impacts on not only with the children in our country but around the world.
    http://www.usfirst.org/robo

  7. Jeff2Space says:
    0
    0

    I see no problem with using Lego on ISS to inspire kids.

    One year I volunteered to help out at a Lego First competition.  What better way to get kids interesting in careers like engineering and computer programming?  On top of that, they’re part of a team, so they have to learn to work together on projects. 

  8. John Thomas says:
    0
    0

    Having stepped on many Lego pieces left on the floor, there can be many small pieces with Legos. Could it be there is a debris concern that many pieces might get lost in the station and cause a problem later?

    • npng says:
      0
      0

      John, your comment brings up a number of points.  First, if your house is strewn with broken Lego pieces, you may need help from one of those hoarder tv show teams, or at least a vacuum cleaner and some home organization training.   Second, the ISS in micro-g really has no floor, so the clutter on the floor problem comparison is somewhat moot.  Third, having random pieces of Legos cluttering random locations in the ISS may be good. 

      Who knows, similar to the Lithium Hydroxide canister and duct tape mod on Apollo 13, maybe a random Lego will be used to plug a micro meteorite hole at the last minute, and save the day. 

      My concern with Legos on the ISS has more to do with their safety warnings and age-use.  I believe Legos states right on their boxes that pieces are to be used by people: 5 to 12 years old.  Some of the crew members must be decades older than that.  Unfortunately the Lego Group has no statements regarding the hazards that may occur when adults play with the pieces either on Earth or in Micro-G, although I assume NASA JSC has put together a 50 page safety spec for that.  

      Beyond ‘choking hazards’, there may be dramatic decreases or increase in the IQ of those playing with Legos for extended periods, novel new structures may be inadvertently invented, or who knows, new Legos pieces may be brought to the ISS to replace degenerating bones.

      I’d like to see NASA put one of the new 3D-printers up on the ISS.  Then they could make some new Legos pieces and ship them back to Earth.   Instead of Lego – Made in Denmark, they’d say  Lego – Made On-The-ISS.

      • John Thomas says:
        0
        0

        I never said they were strewn about the floor. Sometime if you have kids, you’ll understand.

        If the small Lego pieces are floating around, they could become an inhalation or choking hazard, even for adults. That’s one reason for the lower age limit.

      • Robert van de Walle says:
        0
        0

        Perhaps Lego Mindstorm and Technic kits could “save the day” by replacing some damaged
        subsystem… That would be entertaining.

    • Paul451 says:
      0
      0

      From memory, they used the glove-box.

  9. Fred says:
    0
    0

    If Suff can’t make and expidite simple decisions but instead be an obstacle, what can be expected from him on the more substantive payloads? I am all for the benefit of the doubt, but how much more time should he be given to demonstrate his leadership? This Lego issue provides a snapshot into that leadsership. He has a record on ISS Utilization, it should be objectively reviewed and graded.