Does anyone want Shuttle Discovery?

Doug Freyburger wrote:

Olympia is one of the few remaining pre-Dreadnought battleships. A
classic.

Olympia is/was a cruiser, not a battleship. Hence her city name.

Jim Davis

On Nov 3, 1:54*pm, Jim Davis wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote:
Olympia is one of the few remaining pre-Dreadnought battleships. *A
classic.

Olympia is/was a cruiser, not a battleship. Hence her city name.

Jim Davis

The shuttles ferry aircraft should be preserved for future operations
if EVER needed.

Let each museum that gets a orbiter pay X dollars into a insurance
fund to protect the orbiters.

Please lets NOT leave them out in the salt air to rot like we did with
the space certified apollo hardware.

that was a crime

On 11/3/2010 8:29 AM, Invid Fan wrote:


Sure, but construction started under Buffalo's Grover Cleveland and we
killed McKinley, so there's a connection there too Hell, maybe fresh
water would be better for her as well.

She'd ride deeper in fresh water than in salt water due to the lower
density, but at least you wouldn't have to worry about barnacles all
over the bottom. ;-) I still think the concrete idea is best, as that
solves all the hull deterioration problems permanently, and makes access
to the ship easy also.
For a really strange way to display a naval vessel, check out the
experimental sub Albacore that had our first teardrop hull shape:
http://ussalbacore.org/html/albacore_park.html
Odd little bit of Trivia regarding HMS Dreadnought BTW; she was assigned
to second line service in WWI, and managed to unintentionally revenge
the sinking of the cruisers Aboukir, Cressy, and Hogue when she rammed
and sank the U-29, captained by Otto Weddigen - who had commanded U-9
when she sank those three warships on September 22, 1914.

Pat

wrote:
On Nov 3, 1:54 pm, Jim Davis wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote:
Olympia is one of the few remaining pre-Dreadnought battleships. A
classic.

Olympia is/was a cruiser, not a battleship. Hence her city name.

Jim Davis

The shuttles ferry aircraft should be preserved for future operations
if EVER needed.

Far too expensive and a waste of money.

No one is calling to move the Saturn Vs around. Once the shuttles land for
the last time it's almost certainly the last time they'll ever be moved by
air.


Let each museum that gets a orbiter pay X dollars into a insurance
fund to protect the orbiters.

Please lets NOT leave them out in the salt air to rot like we did with
the space certified apollo hardware.

that was a crime

--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

On Nov 6, 9:12*pm, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
wrote:
On Nov 3, 1:54 pm, Jim Davis wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote:
Olympia is one of the few remaining pre-Dreadnought battleships. A
classic.

Olympia is/was a cruiser, not a battleship. Hence her city name.

Jim Davis

The shuttles ferry aircraft should be preserved for future operations
if EVER needed.

Far too expensive and a waste of money.

No one is calling to move the Saturn Vs around. *Once the shuttles land for
the last time it's almost certainly the last time they'll ever be moved by
air.



Let each museum that gets a orbiter pay X dollars into a insurance
fund to protect the orbiters.

Please lets NOT leave them out in the salt air to rot like we did with
the space certified apollo hardware.

that was a crime

--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

by future operations i mean moving shuttles from one museum to
another.....

the ferry aircraft should be preserved in some way for this reason

wrote:
On Nov 6, 9:12 pm, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
wrote:
On Nov 3, 1:54 pm, Jim Davis wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote:
Olympia is one of the few remaining pre-Dreadnought battleships. A
classic.

Olympia is/was a cruiser, not a battleship. Hence her city name.

Jim Davis

The shuttles ferry aircraft should be preserved for future
operations if EVER needed.

Far too expensive and a waste of money.

No one is calling to move the Saturn Vs around. Once the shuttles
land for the last time it's almost certainly the last time they'll
ever be moved by air.



Let each museum that gets a orbiter pay X dollars into a insurance
fund to protect the orbiters.

Please lets NOT leave them out in the salt air to rot like we did
with the space certified apollo hardware.

that was a crime

--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

by future operations i mean moving shuttles from one museum to
another.....

I know what you meant. And my point is still the same. It's NOT going to
happen.


the ferry aircraft should be preserved in some way for this reason

--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

On Sat, 6 Nov 2010 19:18:07 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:


by future operations i mean moving shuttles from one museum to
another.....

If desired, they'll have to find a way to move them overland or by sea
(barge, like how the Spruce Goose was moved.)

the ferry aircraft should be preserved in some way for this reason

It isn't so much the aircraft as the expertise to operate it and the
mating devices. There are not enough missions for the aircraft and
crews to justify keeping them around indefinitely.

It would probably be cheaper to just remove lightpoles and overhead
wires from the necessary roads (already done for some oversized loads
anyway) and tow one overland 20 years from now than to keep the SCA
and its crew expertise for those 20 years.


Brian

On 11/6/2010 5:12 PM, Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:


No one is calling to move the Saturn Vs around. Once the shuttles land for
the last time it's almost certainly the last time they'll ever be moved by
air.

The thing that's fascinating is that the comparatively small amount of
money (by NASA standards) to safe the orbiters and carry them to museums
is more than those museums are either willing to spend to put one on
display, or flat outright can't afford on their yearly budgets.
That gives you some idea about just how big the NASA budget is compared
to other expenditures.
Five hundred million dollars per Shuttle launch seems like business as
usual down at NASA; to anyone else it seems like "What the hell are you
talking about?". :-D

Pat

On Nov 7, 12:49*am, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Sat, 6 Nov 2010 19:18:07 -0700 (PDT), "

wrote:
by future operations i mean moving shuttles from one museum to
another.....

If desired, they'll have to find a way to move them overland or by sea
(barge, like how the Spruce Goose was moved.)

the ferry aircraft should be preserved in some way for this reason

It isn't so much the aircraft as the expertise to operate it and the
mating devices. There are not enough missions for the aircraft and
crews to justify keeping them around indefinitely.

It would probably be cheaper to just remove lightpoles and overhead
wires from the necessary roads (already done for some oversized loads
anyway) and tow one overland 20 years from now than to keep the SCA
and its crew expertise for those 20 years.

Brian

just preserve the airliner, dont scrap it out, and save all the
documentation and current workers instructions. keep the airliner
indoors on display, with everything serviced for very long term
storage.

the carrier aircraft is a part of history too

and dont send any museum shuttle to a land locked place where it
couldnt be moved by land if needed.....

On Sun, 7 Nov 2010 05:46:46 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Nov 7, 12:49*am, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Sat, 6 Nov 2010 19:18:07 -0700 (PDT), "

wrote:
by future operations i mean moving shuttles from one museum to
another.....

If desired, they'll have to find a way to move them overland or by sea
(barge, like how the Spruce Goose was moved.)

the ferry aircraft should be preserved in some way for this reason

It isn't so much the aircraft as the expertise to operate it and the
mating devices. There are not enough missions for the aircraft and
crews to justify keeping them around indefinitely.

It would probably be cheaper to just remove lightpoles and overhead
wires from the necessary roads (already done for some oversized loads
anyway) and tow one overland 20 years from now than to keep the SCA
and its crew expertise for those 20 years.

Brian

just preserve the airliner, dont scrap it out,

They're doing that anyway, to keep at least one as spare parts for
SOFIA.

keep the airliner indoors on display,

Do you have any idea how big a 747 is? If you want one stored indoors,
feel free to write someone a check for the enormous building and the
environmental controls to keep the place working in perpetuity. Even
the world's premiere and best-funded aviation museum (NASM neither
Mall nor Dulles) can't handle a 747 indoors.

with everything serviced for very long term
storage.

That would still be hugely expensive to bring back up to speed 20
years from now. I still suspect it would be cheaper to just take down
light poles where needed to move overland. We already have lots of
experience doing that to move outsized items (transformers, etc.) on
local highways. It isn't cheap, but it is much more economical than
keeping people on standby forever, or retraining lots of people in the
next generation to do the old jobs.

the carrier aircraft is a part of history too

But very few organizations have room to display a 747 even outdoors,
nevermind indoors, so they'll be sent off to Davis Monthan or wherever
to sit in a desert.

and dont send any museum shuttle to a land locked place where it
couldnt be moved by land if needed.....

Air Force Museum is land-locked (Columbus, OH) and about as dependable
as you're going to find.

Brian