News about Space Shuttle Enterprise location decision

[Avnut]

I’ve heard some news regarding the Intrepid Museum and the Space Shuttle Enterprise. That there was a mistake in the application process and that Dayton was actually tied for third place with New York. The Intrepid Museum has announced plans that Enterprise will now be placed across the river from the museum. However, there is controversy regarding this decision in that the location isn’t zone for museum use.

It has been mentioned that two Space Shuttles will be within less than a day’s drive from each other. I don’t recall any mention in light of the hurricane this summer that went through the Washington, D.C. and New York areas that one Space Shuttle is in the hurricane zone, Florida, with two more in potential hurricane zones. One of them will be located close to the water. This is something that should be taken into consideration now as part of the long term preservation.

My personal feeling is that Enterprise should go to L.A. since it has more of a connection to that area with the glider testing done at Edwards and the fit-checks at Vandenberg. Endeavour would then go to a Midwest location. NASA is already getting one, they can’t have two, so Houston is eliminated as a consideration. I don’t know how the other Midwest locations ranked other than Dayton being tied for third. Dayton would be my choice then, besides the Air Force Museum (I will not refer to it as the National Museum of the United States Air Force, to me “national and “United States” in the same title mean the same thing) was already planning and fund raising for the next addition.

Here are some news articles regarding what I’ve heard about New York and Ohio pertaining to the Space Shuttle location decision.

Dayton Tied for Shuttle After Scoring Error was Found
http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/day ... 38597.html

After Winning Coveted Shuttle, Museum Changes the Plan for It
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/29/nyreg ... .html?_r=1

Change in Plans for New York's Space Shuttle Renews Criticism of NASA's Site Decision
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/09 ... yorks.html

Ohio Pol Says City 'Woefully Unprepared' for Space Shuttle
http://www.dnainfo.com/20111013/chelsea ... z1cPrtFtmf

White House site has Dayton Space Shuttle petition
http://www.bizjournals.com/dayton/blog/ ... space.html

Dayton Space Shuttle Petition Tops Required 5k Mark
http://www.bizjournals.com/dayton/blog/ ... -tops.html

What have others heard, and what are people’s thoughts about what is happening?

[mustangdriver]

I am shocked, just shocked I tell you. Thank you for posting this. I hope Dayton gets one. If for no other reason, so that the midwest folks get to see one.

[P51Mstg]

In all of this... Did anyone ever consider 2 things???

1. Display of Shuttles.... Why just on wheels on the ground? Why not one vertical with the external fuel tank and SRBs and another on the back of the 747 and the third on the ground? Expensive but it shows the shuttles in ways they were actually used....

2, Should they get it forever? Aparently everyone wants one and there are few to go around. After the newness wears off and the promotions go away, a Shuttle gets stale. How often do locals go to see the shuttle? Or Statue of Liberty or whatever? So let the city keep the shuttle for 10 years and then it gets moved elsewhere for another 10. Then they can try to get it back. Buildings? Come on they build a whole OLYMPIC CITY for a 2 week Olympic event, a building for a shuttle shouldn't be too hard to do (cost wise that is) in comparison. Especially considering what a true bust the Atlanta Olympics were compared to what they had projected in economic impact.

Mark H

[Voodoo]

Mark -- Some thoughts on your questions:

1. There are three reasons why they won't do this -- Money, money, and money. It's a requirement that the shuttles need to be exhibited inside, and this would call for a much larger building than wheels on the ground. There might also be an engineering problem with keeping a shuttle "stack" assembled indefinitely.

2. In theory, this is an excellent idea. However, in practice I doubt that the shuttles will move once they're assigned to their new homes. Moving a shuttle requires a customized 747 and special gear to lift the shuttle on/off this 747, and once the current shuttles are dispersed to their museum homes, there wil be no reason for NASA to maintain or keep this infastructure. The shuttles are sufficiently large that they would be very awkward to move on the ground, so I doubt that it would be very practical to move them very far along the ground either.


Martin

[Voodoo]

Duplicate post

Last edited by Voodoo on Tue Nov 01, 2011 5:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

[Voodoo]

Also duplicate post

[maradamx3]

[quote="Avnut"]I’ve heard some news regarding the Intrepid Museum and the Space Shuttle Enterprise. That there was a mistake in the application process and that Dayton was actually tied for third place with New York. The Intrepid Museum has announced plans that Enterprise will now be placed across the river from the museum. However, there is controversy regarding this decision in that the location isn’t zone for museum use.

It has been mentioned that two Space Shuttles will be within less than a day’s drive from each other. I don’t recall any mention in light of the hurricane this summer that went through the Washington, D.C. and New York areas that one Space Shuttle is in the hurricane zone, Florida, with two more in potential hurricane zones. One of them will be located close to the water. This is something that should be taken into consideration now as part of the long term preservation.

My personal feeling is that Enterprise should go to L.A. since it has more of a connection to that area with the glider testing done at Edwards and the fit-checks at Vandenberg. Endeavour would then go to a Midwest location. NASA is already getting one, they can’t have two, so Houston is eliminated as a consideration. .................
quote]

What's done is done, but since you asked what other people think......

NASA can't have two??? That's the argument against Houston? Seriously? That's a bit of a childish reason.

Backing up to the discussion about where the 3 orbiters plus the test model Enterprise should have gone, take a look at the facilities and areas that MOST supported the vehicle......
Kennedy for obvious reasons - launch, processing, and the lion's share of recoveries
California for obvious reasons (Edwards & Palmdale) - the orbiters were built and refurbished there, initial flight testing, and recoveries originated at Edwards
Houston for obvious reasons - Mission Control and all manned training, astronauts home base
That leaves one orbiter to go where?????
You still have Louisiana which built the external tank, Alabama - propulsion, Goddard, Dayton, Utah - SRBs, etc. How do you choose which location deserves a shuttle over another? You don't choose a location based on population, politics, he already has one, or how close one is going to be to another. Just like I have to travel to Ohio to go visit the NMUSAF, or Oregon to the Evergreen museum, or Florida for MickeyWorld, or BFE, we can travel to go visit the nearest shuttle, wherever they end up!

[Russ Matthews]

Why not one vertical with the external fuel tank and SRBs ...

It's my understanding that is exactly how the California Science Center plans to exhibit Endeavour (though that may well change when they review the final price tag).

[p51]

You can’t have a rotating exhibit because you’d need the NASA 747s to move them around and specialized equipment that will be sold off as soon as NASA delivers the shuttles and no longer needs the gear to go with them (and probably at least one of the 747s, too). A LOT of bandwidth has been devoted to this over in space forums like collectspace.com. The decision has been made, everyone knew that there would be griping from places that didn’t get one. For example, I live somewhat close to the Museum of Flight in Seattle, which already built a building for a shuttle and it sits empty now near Boeing Field. I’d love to see one there but it isn’t going to happen, even though they will be getting the full crew trainer currently at Houston. I too question the sense in having two shuttles so close to each other (and yes, I know the area well and know that DC and NYC are not next door to each other, I’ve driven between them several times), but I don’t question the matrix that NASA used when deciding who got them. In the end, it was a combination of the mission of the venue in question, the number of people who would visit these venues in any given year, and the ability to maintain the orbiters. I know nothing about the California museum but have been to the others named. It does make sense that they should go where they’re best seen and have the best chance to be properly maintained. As much as I’d have loved seeing one come to Seattle (and make no mistake, the Museum of Flight REALLY was surprised they got turned down as they were already constructing the building to house it when the decision came out), I know that far more people who care about the space program would go to the places designated to see them on display. It’s really that simple. As for displaying one vertically, I’ve read this is exactly what the California museum intends for the Endeavour (no SRBs or tank will be included, though). Being from the South originally, I dislike the idea of a shuttle going to NYC more than anyone out of pure principal, but it does make sense considering how many people go to the Intrepid museum each year…

[Garth]

With the SCA 747s probably gone (there's some talk that NASA wants to keep one to piggy-back outsized loads, like they did with the PhantomRay last year), the only way to move a shuttle will be by road or by sea.

The benefit of putting Enterprise in NYC is that if/when Intrepid fails to properly maintain her, she can be put on a barge and moved anywhere else that can handle a barge. This is actually how Enterprise will get to Intrepid - she'll be offloaded at JFK and barged over. Just like they did with their Concord.

This opens up the possibility that, in the event the SCAs are scrapped, she could eventually be moved to Houston (there was discussion in one of the earlier threads about barging a shuttle over from Kennedy) or even to somewhere on the West Coast (put her on a ship and take her through the Ditch).

Personally, I think a GREAT West Coast location for a Shuttle would be in the Port of Los Angeles, where they're taking the battleship Iowa for display.

Given that, if I were running things Endeavor stays in Florida, Enterprise goes to Cali and Atlantis goes to Dayton (due to her heavy use on the USAF/NRO missions).

[RickH]

You know we are forgetting that KSC already has a full blown mockup of the Shuttle on outside display. What are they going to do with that one ? While it's not a real shuttle, it is a very high resolution display and would make a great exhibit for someone.

[Pogo]

I've been out of the loop for a couple weeks. Isn't Houston getting a full size mockup used for training? I was appalled beyond words that JSC/SCH wasn't getting one of the birds, but then the mockup sounded pretty good because it would be hands-on, and we might even get a peek inside....?

[mustangdriver]

It is my hope that when, and I DO mean when one of these Shuttles needs to be moved because they are not being preserved correctly, that the NMUSAF is offered one, and that the NMUSAF turns it down.

What no one wants to address about this is, two of the museums that worked hard to meet the requirements to get a shuttle did not recieve one, and two museums that did not meet the requirements, and still do not meet them, and have no plans on meeting them were awarded them. The Museum of Flight built a whole new building for the shuttle, only to get turned down and have the one that they wanted given to a museum that just now started fund raising for a building, and another that plans to place the Shuttle into storage. That wasn't the deal. Remember you had to show that you either had the space already, or the funding to build the facility. That was the deal.

Do I wish one went to Dayton. Of course. I still consider the NMUSAF my home museum. But what really sucks about this is that this is just politics. Plain and simple.

I will use my favorite quote from Betty Grissom. "Put one in Epcot, because NASA always was a Mickey Mouse operation."

[mustangdriver]

You know we are forgetting that KSC already has a full blown mockup of the Shuttle on outside display. What are they going to do with that one ? While it's not a real shuttle, it is a very high resolution display and would make a great exhibit for someone.

It is confirmed that JSC Houston is indeed getting that mock-up called the Explorer.

[Misterg97]

It is my hope that when, and I DO mean when one of these Shuttles needs to be moved because they are not being preserved correctly, that the NMUSAF is offered one, and that the NMUSAF turns it down.

What no one wants to address about this is, two of the museums that worked hard to meet the requirements to get a shuttle did not recieve one, and two museums that did not meet the requirements, and still do not meet them, and have no plans on meeting them were awarded them. The Museum of Flight built a whole new building for the shuttle, only to get turned down and have the one that they wanted given to a museum that just now started fund raising for a building, and another that plans to place the Shuttle into storage. That wasn't the deal. Remember you had to show that you either had the space already, or the funding to build the facility. That was the deal.

Do I wish one went to Dayton. Of course. I still consider the NMUSAF my home museum. But what really sucks about this is that this is just politics. Plain and simple.

I will use my favorite quote from Betty Grissom. "Put one in Epcot, because NASA always was a Mickey Mouse operation."

I'm sure I'll hear about this .... The reason that the NMUSAF was turned down is 5 words.

Not in Boehner's back yard