Enterprise to NYC???

[airnutz]

So what is the lastest construction news from the future homes of the shuttle?

Only 2 months since the news broke, but it'll be interesting to see what the environment of budget shortfalls and cutbacks result in...Ya' never know, maybe NMUSAF may end up with a "default award", Chris?

[JohnB]

So what is the lastest construction news from the future homes of the shuttle?

Only 2 months since the news broke, but it'll be interesting to see what the environment of budget shortfalls and cutbacks result in...Ya' never know, maybe NMUSAF may end up with a "default award", Chris?

Nah...
I'm sure if they don't have the money, some federal pork will be heading their way.
Translated: If they had enough "pull" to get a shuttle, they have more than enough to get $15 million..."small stuff" to the feds handout patrol.

Last edited by JohnB on Thu Jun 09, 2011 9:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[B17news]

I just saw Enterprise last month at the NASM annex. It sure looked at home there, and the staff had recently done a really nice restoration on the paint. My vote is to leave it there.

-B

[tulsaboy]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again- I still think the process is not finished. Anecdotally and through the media, both the NYC and California locations have questioned their ability to both raise the necessary funds and fulfill NASA's requirements for safe and secure long-term display. Of the four, only Udvar-Hazy has its display area complete and ready to receive an orbiter- and that only because they've had one for several years and are just swapping one out for another. All three of the remaining proposals for construction of a new facility to house the orbiters will take at least a year from groundbreaking, if not longer. From what has been made public, none of the other three have any significant funds raised to support construction of their new facilities. California's might be cheap to build, relatively speaking, but I don't think, at least based on the renderings, that the other two will cost less than 5-10 million. With exhibits, probably more. With that said, it will take them a bit of time to raise the necessary funds. The transport is also an issue. I can't imagine that NASA will want to load and unload and reload Enterprise, and so I would think that it would make sense that the Smithsonian would only get Discovery once NYC is ready to take delivery of Enterprise- just keeps the loading and unloading off of the carrier aircraft to a minimum.

That being said, we are 17 months from the next Presidential and Congressional election cycle, which has the potential to change things immensely. Though I have been an advocate for my hometown, I can see great merit in several of the proposals that were rejected. I think there is still a lot of time left and an abundance of opportunity for some things to change. Much stranger things have happened.

kevin

[warbird2]

Does anybody else see it as a waste of money for the NASM just to swap two shuttles out? They have one already and very few people that ever see it will know there is a difference in the two. That sure seems like a lot of money that could be spent on other things the museum needs worse.

[muddyboots]

I have to agree it doesn't make much sense. I'm wondering what their reasoning is behind it.

[Zachary]

Does anybody else see it as a waste of money for the NASM just to swap two shuttles out? They have one already and very few people that ever see it will know there is a difference in the two. That sure seems like a lot of money that could be spent on other things the museum needs worse.

It comes down to historical significance (and bragging rights a bit too). A Shuttle that has actually been to space is more historically significant than one that has not. Kind of like an actual warbird combat veteran versus a generic version of the type - which would you find more interesting? Just my $0.02.

Zack

[tulsaboy]

muddy-

From what they have said publicly, the Smithsonian has always wanted the oldest space-flown orbiter on display. They were planning on getting Columbia until that tragic accident, and with the previous loss of Challenger, Discovery was the next in line. It has flown more missions and is the oldest surviving space-flown orbiter, thus in NASA's mind making it the most significant. And I think you are right, most people wouldn't know the difference. Kinda like most people wouldn't know the difference if they swapped the Spirit of St. Louis on the mall for EAA's replica. I still like knowing that when I'm standing near the Spirit, that I'm standing near the real deal. Likewise with the orbiters. I would think that to the Smithsonian, it is important to be able to honestly tell people that, "Yes, that really went into space." Having the test bed just wouldn't be the same thing, and since it is our national collection and this will (most likely) be the only opportunity to put a space flown orbiter in the national collection, they are jumping at the chance. To them, it is probably worth the money-though others of us might prefer they spent the money on other priorities, like the retsoration of Flak Bait.

kevin

[muddyboots]

that makes sense I guess. It sounds like musical chairs until you look at it that way.

[airnutz]

Yup, I agree with Zachary and Tulsa, it's more in line with the idea of, "the Smithsonian being the national official repository of our past."

[warbird2]

It comes down to historical significance (and bragging rights a bit too). A Shuttle that has actually been to space is more historically significant than one that has not. Kind of like an actual warbird combat veteran versus a generic version of the type - which would you find more interesting? Just my $0.02.
Zack

Thanks for the reply. I see the theory behind that, just not the practicality. If I already had a nice but generic P-51 on display I do not think I would spend millions of dollars to replace it with another P-51 that had been flown by Chuck Yeager just so I could make a big deal out of the historical significance when both of them are basically identical to the visitors. Especially when that same millions could be used to bring a handful of planes that I already owned in for public display. National collection or not, what they are doing sure seems like misplacing the priorities and the cash!

[JohnB]

I'm also fairly syure the reason why the NMUSAF didn't get one was then they'd have to find one for Pensacola.

[StangStung]

It's true that if you are viewing through the lense of "a space shuttle is a space shutte" then it would make no sense to replace one with another at Dulles. But they are not interchangeable items by any means. NASM strives to have the most significant historical item from our nation's aviation history for its collection. Which is more significant? The thing that did the deal, or the thing they talked about doing the deal with? In other words, do you want to movie Memphis Belle in your collection, or the one and only, unique and irreplaceable Memphis Belle? The one with all the history doing the dropping of the bombs and whatnot? Easy answer right?

Moreover, NASM is looking at this long term. That is, yes, it is expensive and seemingly impractical to bring Discovery to Udvar-Hazy today. But in 50, or 100, or 150 years, if they didn't, how many of our aerospace loving progeny would be saying, "why the h*ll didn't they bring the real deal to DC when they had the chance?"

I agree with those who believe not all has been written on the ultimate disposition of the shuttles. You would be surprised how many royally p*ssed off people there are in Houston and Seattle regarding this subject. I'm sure in Dayton as well, I just don't know that many people there. And as mentioned, who knows what may happen after the next election cycle (and this isn't an invitation to kvetch about politics, but simply a recognition of realities). Still, I doubt a fight over shuttle placement will be high on anyone's agenda given the other pressing matters at hand.

[67Cougar]

Does anyone else find it disturbing that Enterprise is going to NYC, when the city has no connection to the Shuttle program at all - and the US Air Airbus that landed in the Hudson, an aircraft that has a very strong, tangible link to the city, has ended up in a South Carolina aviation museum?

I know the answer to why (tourist dollars), but good grief ... that just ain't right.

[Rocketeer]

What about Texas?
I guess mission control had nothing to do with the shuttle program!