|
Author
|
Topic: Texas lawmakers: Move Discovery to Houston
|
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 54473
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-10-2025 12:37 PM
   
collectSPACE Texas Senators: Move space shuttle Discovery from Smithsonian to HoustonNASA's retired space shuttle Discovery may be removed from the Smithsonian and put on display in Houston, if two lawmakers from Texas get their way. U.S. Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) on Thursday (April 10) introduced the "Bring the Space Shuttle Home Act," which directs NASA to take Discovery from the national collection and its Virginia home of the past 13 years and deliver it to official visitor center for NASA's Johnson Space Center.  |
dtemple
Member Posts: 799
From: Longview, Texas, USA
Registered: Apr 2000
|
posted 04-11-2025 12:52 AM
This needed to be done back in 2011. Seems too late now. The move would cost millions of dollars, and seems totally impracticable at this point. Destroying the mate/demate device was not smart. Dismantling it and storing it (for a period of time as long as refurbishing an SCA was feasible), sure, but destroying it immediately, not smart. To eliminate a capability is not a good decision. There is some way to move an orbiter - enough money thrown at the problem is the only way. If a method is developed, it needs to be maintained so it can be done in the future. |
onesmallstep
Member Posts: 1509
From: Staten Island, New York USA
Registered: Nov 2007
|
posted 04-11-2025 08:22 AM
Let it be. What's next — moving the Liberty Bell from Philadelphia to the National Mall in DC? This is just posturing and PR; Space Center Houston already has a real 747 SCA with mockup Shuttle Independence mated on top (you can even walk through it). But if they really want to do it, why don't they ask all those nice space tech millionaires to foot the bill to pack up Discovery; ship it overland; construct a new enclosure/building in Houston etc. Oh, and give the Air and Space Museum's Udvar-Hazy Center in Virginia the 747/Independence; Houston can't have it both ways. I think us taxpayers should not have to foot the bill - a waste, per Musk's DOGE, no? |
Dave Ginsberg
Member Posts: 214
From: Redmond, Washington, USA
Registered: Dec 2007
|
posted 04-11-2025 02:48 PM
Since it seems (to me) that some of the historical facts may be distorted in the proposed bill, I went looking for the original selection criteria and decision process for choosing the museums to receive and display the three remaining space shuttle orbiters. I found this excellent compilation of articles and forum threads put together in real time as the shuttle orbiters were being prepared for display and delivered to museums. There may be some pertinent insights contained within. But, I am unable to find any articles or discussions specifically pertaining to the selection criteria and decision process. Could someone point me in that direction? |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 54473
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-11-2025 03:28 PM
The NASA Office of Inspector General reviewed NASA's selection of the space shuttle homes in August 2011. You can read that report here. |
CJ
Member Posts: 101
From: Cherry Hill, NJ
Registered: Nov 2003
|
posted 04-11-2025 07:06 PM
quote:
Originally posted by dtemple:
This needed to be done back in 2011. Seems too late now... Destroying the mate/demate device was not smart.
NASA has a habit of cutting things up or tearing them down. It's a budget thing.Give me a break. Sixty million people are within a three hour drive to Chantilly Virginia. |
mercsim
Member Posts: 263
From: Phoenix, AZ
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 04-11-2025 09:11 PM
"Bring the Space Shuttle Home..." It wasn't born there. It never landed there. It never took off from there. It seems like home would be Palmdale, Edwards, or Kennedy, but not Houston. |
OV-105
Member Posts: 926
From: Ridgecrest, CA
Registered: Sep 2000
|
posted 04-12-2025 08:05 AM
quote:
Originally posted by dtemple:
Destroying the mate/demate device was not smart.
There were only two mate/demate devices, one at Edwards and one at KSC. There was also the orbiter lifting device that was moved from Vandenberg to Palmdale. The mobile one used during transition and retirement might still be around, but if not they do have the lifting sling at the California Science Center used to lift Endeavour. NASA 911 is in Palmdale and would need four engines and a full maintenance check but could still be used to move Discovery. The real question is, where would they put it in Houston? Is the Congress going to provide the funding for a building for it? |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 54473
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-12-2025 10:43 AM
The bill makes no mention of funding the exhibit.NASA 911 no longer has any of its orbiter attachment hardware. New hardware would have to be made. Likewise, the California Science Center scrapped (recycled) the sling and related orbiter attachment hardware after Endeavour's lift was completed. A new sling would need to be made. The SCA could land at Ellington, as it has in the past, but then it would be an even bigger challenge (and cost) to move Discovery from Ellington to Space Center Houston than it was to move NASA 905, as the latter was partially deconstructed before it was moved. On the Houston side, it would be better to barge Discovery to Clear Lake and then bring it on shore using the same loading dock that was used for the Saturn V stages. In Chantilly, however, Discovery would need to be transported 30 miles overland before it reached water, a distance more than double Endeavour traveled for three days (and nights) in Los Angeles. There is really no good way to move Discovery today and no good reason to do so. |
SpaceAngel
Member Posts: 519
From: Maryland
Registered: May 2010
|
posted 04-13-2025 02:38 PM
"Discovery" deserves to remain in its rightful retirement home at the National Air and Space Museum's Udvar Hazy; besides, the SCAs have already been retired and it would be impossible relocate the orbiter. |
denali414
Member Posts: 896
From: Raleigh, NC
Registered: Aug 2017
|
posted 04-15-2025 08:14 AM
More political nonsense, without a purpose, just a vanity bill from Texas senators. As pointed out no historical reason to be in Houston, never landed there. The costs would be in millions and that is without the cost of building a housing for it. In my opinion, a complete waste, and ruins years of advertising for Smithsonian. |
GACspaceguy
Member Posts: 3173
From: Guyton, GA
Registered: Jan 2006
|
posted 04-15-2025 08:26 AM
Have them set up a virtual tour booth at JSC that allows a camera that does a walk around tour of the Shuttle that the viewer controls.Moving an artifact of that size is always possible given enough money but why do it. The Smithsonian is the right place for an orbiter. If you had to move one and could really justify it more, move Enterprise. NYC never felt right to me and you could barge it to Houston. But that is just my thoughts not recommendations. "Leave sleeping dogs alone" in my opinion. |
space1
Member Posts: 960
From: Danville, Ohio
Registered: Dec 2002
|
posted 04-15-2025 09:28 AM
We have to keep in mind that the selection criteria considered more than just an association with the Orbiter. As I recall there was consideration for additional teaching resources and exhibit features, among other things. So winners were picked, and losers were disappointed. Houston has a Saturn V - that's plenty to be proud of.If any serious consideration would be given to such a move, it should only be done with private funding. That said, I would prefer things stay as they are. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 54473
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-15-2025 10:00 AM
quote:
Originally posted by GACspaceguy:
...move Enterprise.
Enterprise is no longer federal property. As part of its move in 2011, its title was transferred to the Intrepid (just as Endeavour is now the property of the state of the California [the California Science Center is division of the state government]). The only orbiters Congress has remaining purview over are Atlantis and Discovery. One assumes that Cruz and Cornyn knew they could not make a strong enough argument to favor Houston over Kennedy Space Center, so they were only left with the Smithsonian. The problem, at least in the way I see it, is that Smithsonian has the strongest case for an orbiter over all other institutions. |
Jim Behling
Member Posts: 1975
From: Cape Canaveral, FL
Registered: Mar 2010
|
posted 04-15-2025 09:02 PM
quote:
Originally posted by dtemple:
Dismantling it and storing it (for a period of time as long as refurbishing an SCA was feasible), sure, but destroying it immediately, not smart.
They were not needed. Dismantling and storing a MDD would be a waste of money. Anyways, how do you think Discovery and Endeavour were removed from the SCA and Enterprise placed on one? |
pupnik
Member Posts: 123
From: Maryland
Registered: Jan 2014
|
posted 04-17-2025 05:35 PM
quote:
Originally posted by space1:
Houston has a Saturn V - that's plenty to be proud of.
And ironically, that Saturn V belongs to the Smithsonian. |
pokey
Member Posts: 381
From: Houston, TX, USA
Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 04-24-2025 09:34 AM
All retired shuttles are on the east or west coast. None are centrally located. FedEx is located in Memphis for a reason. The Kansas Cosmophere would have been a reasonable location for at least one. Houston is still on the perimeter of the U.S. Space Center Houston has the fiberglass orbiter on top of the 747. Yes, it's not a real one but it is viewable to more people. It is not hermetically sealed inside a building per the retired orbiter contracts. As someone who supported the shuttle program 1985 to 2011, driving by the 747 with the space shuttle while running errands is a beautiful sight. Never gets old. |
advertisement