Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
NASA Space Science

Start Saving To Buy Your Space Shuttle Now 197

stoolpigeon writes "With the retirement of the shuttle drawing near, NASA has begun to plan for museums that may want a used orbiter of their own. The Orlando Sentinel reports that NASA issued an RFI to US educational institutions, science museums and other organizations to see if they would be interested in the orbiter while also able to cover the estimated $42 million cost of 'safeing' the shuttle and transporting it."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Start Saving To Buy Your Space Shuttle Now

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Do the math... (Score:4, Informative)

    by icebrain ( 944107 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2008 @08:45PM (#26153393)

    a Shuttle weighs 4.5 million pounds with a maximum payload weight of approximately 50,000 pounds

    That's for the entire stack - orbiter, boosters, and full external tank. The orbiter itself has an empty weight of about 180,000 lb. So you're looking for a launcher that can put 200,000lb or so into orbit; there are only a couple: Saturn V, Energia, and the shuttle (remember, the orbiter goes into orbit too, plus whatever it's carrying).

  • by BZWingZero ( 1119881 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2008 @09:08PM (#26153565)
    I know I shouldn't have, like any good /.er, but I read the article. The $42 million includes shipping from KSC to the airport nearest the purchasing museum. You still have to pay to get it from the airport to the display site.
  • by iamlucky13 ( 795185 ) on Wednesday December 17, 2008 @09:22PM (#26153677)
    I can't find the original information, but I'm pretty sure the allocation of the shuttles won't be soley based on cash, but also on perceived value to the public for receiving one and consistency with the general mission of the museum. Keep in mind, the $42 million is supposedly for refurbishment for display, not to raise additional money. This first of all will mean cleaning up any potential hazards, like residues of hydrazine manuevering fuel. Of course, they get fairly weathered by each launch and re-entry, so there'll be some polishing to be done, and undoubtably ITAR-sensitive or high value equipment like the main engines will be removed and replaced with detailed replicas where applicable.

    There's three orbiters surviving (Discovery, Atlantis, and Endeavor). I suspect Kennedy Space Center will keep one and house it near their Saturn V that's on display. This is consistent with another article [spaceref.com] that says two orbiters and six engine display kits will be made available according to the RFI. With public accessibility being a likely major consideration, the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum is almost guaranteed one of the actual orbiters, to replace the Enterprise aerodynamic test vehicle which is currently housed there.

    That's going to make it a tough grab for the remaining orbiter. Because McMinneville is roughly an hour-long drive from the relatively small and aerospace-vacant city of Portland, I think their chances of getting an orbiter are relatively slim, even though they have a great facility and can probably afford it.

    The Intrepid Museum in New York Harbor is certainly prominent enough, but they would need to make a rather substantial addition to protect the shuttle from the elements. It probably wouldn't be possible to deliver it to the waterfront an SCA flight to New York, but if they wanted to put it on a barge like the Concorde they have on site, they may be able to float it straight up from Florida that way. I think they're also at a disadvantage because there will already probably be two shuttles on the East Coast (Florida and DC).

    I think Johnson Space Center in Houstan and Marshall Spaceflight Center in Huntsville are the two most likely locations not on one of the major coasts. Both of them already host two of the three remaining Saturn V's (the third is at Kennedy). On the west coast, I think the lead option is Boeing's museum of flight, partially because of their accessibility and ability to host a space shuttle, but also because of their involvement with the shuttle program (although that is due to their acquisition of Rockwell).

    I would bet one of these three locations will get the third orbiter. That still leaves Enterprise after it leaves the Smithsonian, which only did glider and procedural tests, but would still be a major attraction. Maybe Evergreen has a chance at getting Enterprise, but I think more likely a second of the above three will get her. There is also a ground-test mockup called Pathfinder currently at MSFC in Huntsville that would likely get a new home if one of the orbiters went there, but it's only externally representative of the flight vehicles.

    A commenter on another site had a fantastic idea, in my opinion: before sending the last of the orbiters to a musuem, use the SCA to take it on a tour of the US. This would be a great opportunity for millions to see it and the modified 747 together.
  • Re:I would buy it... (Score:5, Informative)

    by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Thursday December 18, 2008 @12:19AM (#26155457)
    Yup, the initial $42 million is a drop in the bucket when it comes to the shuttle: "the average cost per flight has been about $1.3 billion over the life of the program and about $750 million over its most recent five years of operations." (cite) [space.com]. I don't know whether that $1.3 billion is inflation adjusted - a very real consideration when a fair amount of the cost was up front in the late 1970s.
  • Re:I would buy it... (Score:2, Informative)

    by osu-neko ( 2604 ) on Thursday December 18, 2008 @12:50AM (#26155785)

    Except it sounds like Obama wants to kill [wsj.com] the Orion project.

    I can't understand how they could be so keen on throwing $500 billion at failed banks and mortgage deadbeats, yet they have no problem cutting NASA's $30 billion budget.

    Did you actually read the article you linked to? There's nothing in it that suggests Obama wants to kill the Orion project. Indeed, if he's looking at the cost of alternatives to the Ares rocket, it strongly suggests he plans to continue Orion. You don't need an Ares alternative if you're just going to kill Orion.

    There's also no suggestion in the article that he has any intention of cutting NASA's budget.

    ...And take about $100 billion of that bailout money and put it into R&D, including space exploration. In the medium to long term, we will reap much richer economic rewards for such an investment.

    Personally, I'd love to see NASA ax Orion and instead spend the money on space exploration, but make up your mind. Should we be spending money on space exploration, or spending a lot of money sending people somewhere we've already been?

    I'm hoping we don't get into the same situation we got into back in the 80s where we spend immense amounts of money on the shuttle program and spend almost nothing at all on space exploration...

  • Re:leave it in space (Score:3, Informative)

    by vought ( 160908 ) on Thursday December 18, 2008 @08:14PM (#26167549)

    At the altitude that the space station is oribiting, there is no atmosphere, and thus no drag per se.

    I beg to differ. From SpaceRef.com:

    "As a further consequence of ISS attitude, the station's daily orbital decay has been at its lowest (~20 m/day). Orbital decay is a function of atmospheric density at the orbit altitude and the station's cross-sectional ("frontal" or "ram") area, which creates the drag. Depending on attitude, ISS drag area can vary between a low of 390 square meters (where it is currently) and a high of 670 sq.m."

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken

Working...