posted 11-04-2010 06:42 AM               

The OPF is a perfect safe haven until a new Apollo/Satyrn type center is built.

posted 12-16-2010 10:24 AM               

Congress, spaceport propose display plans for retired space shuttles

Plans are moving forward for the display of two of NASA's soon-to-be-retired space shuttles at the Smithsonian and the Kennedy Space Center.

Although NASA has yet to announce where its orbiters will be dispatched once they cease flying missions next year, recent actions have helped remove obstacles and clarify the logistics for the Washington, DC institution and Florida spaceport to receive shuttles...

posted 01-25-2011 10:48 PM               

Since the general public cannot stand next to the shuttle after it lands, I would love to see the shuttle with all the original tiles broken or marked, used tires, original paint, pitted windows, and so on. I would want to see it used, just as it is when it is done with the flight.

posted 01-25-2011 11:05 PM               

The orbiters will need to be "safed." Hazardous materials and the systems associated with them will be removed by necessity, less they pose a significant risk to human health once the orbiters are housed indoors for decades.

Safing includes removing the reaction control system (RCS) and orbital maneuvering engines (OMS). Their external components will be replaced by static display pieces as appropriate.

Further, NASA will not be providing space shuttle main engines (SSME), as they remain needed for the Space Launch System being developed. Instead SSME kits, built from spare parts and replicas, will be furnished.

Broken tiles will likely be replaced for health concerns (the same concerns that explain why NASA does not distribute loose tile fragments) but a majority of the tiles and blankets will remain exactly as they are after the last flight. The orbiter will not look clean.

posted 01-26-2011 04:35 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fezman92:
I guess KSC isn't going to use the orbiter service building to display a shuttle.

---

posted 02-16-2011 08:40 AM               

The money from the United States Air Force's budget would be used to pay the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to prepare and transfer the space shuttle to the museum.

The budget line item said placing the Space Shuttle Atlantis in the Air Force museum "would be a historic reminder of the USAF contributions in space."

...Michael Gessel of the Dayton Development Coalition said the Air Force budget request would not circumvent NASA's decision process.

"It is a sign of strong support from the Air Force for bringing a space shuttle to the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force, and an indication the Air Force appreciates the value of the shuttle to educate Americans," Gessel said.

posted 02-18-2011 10:53 AM               

Bolden said a selection process is ongoing. NASA received proposals from 29 entities -- primarily museums -- and he said the decision would be his and his alone.

"I'll make the decision -- not the Secretary of the Air Force, not even the president, to be quite honest," Bolden said.

"We have briefed everybody -- Congress, the White House, people around the president -- and every one agrees that I will make the decision," he said. "I will make a decision by early spring."

posted 03-03-2011 03:48 PM               

Mark down the date: April 12.

That’s when NASA will decide whether Wright-Patterson Air Force will receive one of three retired space shuttles for the National Museum of the Air Force.

At a House hearing Wednesday, NASA Administrator Charles F. Bolden revealed that the agency would pick the three winning sites from among 29 different cities trying to land one of the prized orbiters.

posted 03-04-2011 10:05 AM            

• 40-Foot Glass Wall Going Up At Museum Of Flight Space Gallery (with video)

• Laying groundwork for Space Gallery

Now, Robert just tweeted to me that it's now 29 institutions competing. Would love for NASA to publish the full list of who's all competing. I know they probably will never do that but I would be curious.

Thanks Robert for staying on top of the story. My own personal hope is that the shuttles are retired to various "time zones" to make it easier for people to visit one in their lifetime.

posted 03-09-2011 05:55 AM               

As for where the orbiters will end up, here's my take. I'll be interested to see how accurate I am. No offense to anyone - just my two cents.

• DISCOVERY - Udvar-Hazy (everyone expects that). In my opinion, Intrepid's only claim is that "many will see it" being in the largest city in the world. But they have no connection to the shuttle program and shouldn't receive one. A mock-up will suffice. Udvar-Hazy will host as many visitors as Intrepid and the Smithsonian is our "national museum."

• ATLANTIS - The Museum of the USAF in Dayton, Ohio. The Museum of the Air Force will be awarded Atlantis because of the connection to DoD missions and it is located so that many in the mid-west can visit her.

• ENTERPRISE - Seattle Museum of Flight. Seattle will win an orbiter - the first one built. They deserve one, the west coast deserves one but it's Enterprise they'll get. If not Seattle then I expect Enterprise to return home to Palmdale.

• ENDEAVOUR - KSC, we're not letting her go.

  Seriously, Kennedy Space Center will win because it is the center that cared for and launched every shuttle. If we don't win one, expect me to be arrested for laying across the runway trying to stop her from leaving. I'm only half-joking.

posted 03-09-2011 06:49 AM               

1. There is already at least one orbiter on the east coast.
   
2. It wouldn't look right
   
3. How do they get it there?

posted 03-09-2011 07:06 AM               

Having the shuttle on the Intrepid would be interesting, with the cruise port nearby. I can see the museum's attendance increasing with the cruise lines marketing a trip to see an actual shuttle as a shore excursion.

I agree, however, that Intrepid is a very unlikely candidate to get a flown orbiter, because there's no "tie" to the shuttle program. It's why I've said that if Intrepid wants a shuttle, they should try for Enterprise, because few, if any, museums and the like are fighting over her.

posted 03-09-2011 10:39 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart Sastrowardoyo:
It's why I've said that if Intrepid wants a shuttle, they should try for Enterprise, because few, if any, museums and the like are fighting over her.

---

posted 03-10-2011 10:55 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSpace86:
All these other museums and places people keep mentioning have almost nothing to do with the Space Shuttle except have an attractive collection of artifacts. There is absolutely nothing wrong with keeping them at the places that had the MOST to do with the STS program.

---

posted 03-10-2011 03:10 PM               

My bet is the Cape. Its fair. They have the long, proud history with it.

That being said I am a member at the Intrepid, so I would love to stroll down there on a Saturday afternoon, and see any shuttle at all.

posted 03-10-2011 08:33 PM               

The Air Force Museum is a spectacular place, with several hangars full of historic aircraft and more on base (XB-70, AF-1) that are less easily accessible to the public. I have been there a few times, but always find the facility nearly empty of visitors. There have been times I felt like the only one there!

The arrival of Atlantis would bring a short-lived surge of tourists, but I doubt the shuttle will get as much attention following the initial interest that it would in another venue.

Even though some of its design specs were dictated by the military, the years leading up the STS-51L saw the Air Force brass moving toward an assured launch capability with ELV's. Challenger sealed the deal and only a handful of classified DoD flights and MSE's were flown before the military moved off completely.

As most know, the planned Vandenberg launches never happened, and the shuttles never saw the polar orbits that are so necessary for reconnaissance work. Curiously, Air Force Undersecretary Pete Aldridge, who was set to fly on STS-62A from VAFB, was instrumental in the move away from sole reliance on the shuttle.

So I would find it far more appropriate, given the scarcity of the spacecraft, to have the two flown orbiters kept close to those who devoted their lives to them, namely KSC and JSC. The latter attracts a great number of visitors and the presence of a shuttle would attract many more young kids to come and perhaps be inspired to go into engineering or science.

Just think of the stories that could be told by JSC-related folks who made so much history with this program...flight controllers, crew trainers, technicians, and astronauts. They know the workings of the space shuttle better than anyone.

posted 03-11-2011 11:44 AM               

Yes, it was never comfortable relying solely on the STS as its only means of space access, which it had to agree to politically if the shuttle were to be built. As future experience showed to be correct, the AF was very much worried that a serious problem with the shuttle could completely cut off military access to space (the shuttle's lack of sortie rate was another factor). The ELV was one way to avoid that.

As for the post-Challenger era, it was Ronald Reagan's decree that the shuttle not launch satellites that could be deployed by unmanned vehicles that did in the Air Force's major participation in the program, including Vandenberg, not its own lack of interest.

The point is still correct: there has been a complex relationship between the Air Force and the shuttle program (and NASA in general sometimes), but you can't deny that (for better or worse) the Air Force had a critical role in the shuttle program from before it was even on paper. In my opinion this sort of complexity makes for the best kind of history to tell.