Under a plan discussed in today's Daily News, one of three retired space shuttles would be flown to JFK via 747 to be put on permanent display at the Intrepid Museum on the West Side of Manhattan.

The Intrepid is one of numerous sites hoping to get one of the three shuttles. Apparently, the decommissioned aircraft carrier used to recover returning astronauts when they used to splash down in water.

NASA wants the shuttles to go where they will be seen by the most people.

Is JFK considered an alternate shuttle landing site? I have heard this rumor numerous times.

Either way it would be cool to see a shuttle-backed 747 land at JFK. It would be even cooler to have a shuttle on display next to the Concorde in NYC!

http://www.intrepidmuseum.org/shuttle/

This is very much a very very long shot.

The orbiters have been spoken for.

OV-103 to Smithsonian (done deal)

OV-104 to USAF museum

OV-105 to KSC.

OV-101 to JSC.


The orbiter will not be allowed to be in open storage as stated in the RFP.

I highly doubt that NYC would be an alternate Shuttle landing site. As far as I know, Edwards AFB is the only other landing site besides Canaveral... Now there are some shuttle emergency landing sites throughout the world and JFK is one of them...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_abort_modes#Australia

Personally I wouldn't mind seeing the Space Shuttle on the Intrepid... Though I have a feeling that like every aircraft left on static display outdoors, the elements will take its toll...

There are several landing sites that serve as a backup if Cape Canaveral and Edwards AFB is unavailable. Kennedy is one of them, but that's a serious last resort.

It would be nice if the Shuttle made it to the Intrepid Museum. I just wonder how they'd house it. They'd have to build something.

Quoting FRAspotter (Reply 2): I highly doubt that NYC would be an alternate Shuttle landing site. As far as I know, Edwards AFB is the only other landing site besides Canaveral... Now there are some shuttle emergency landing sites throughout the world and JFK is one of them...

There are 3 sites for planned landings (White Sands NM is the third one); there are also a few spots designated for landing in case of failure on takeoff; that;s why weather in Spain can delay a launch..
However, as far as I remember, if worst come to worst, any runway capable of handling 747 can be used for landing. Apparently JFK fits that "last resort" profile.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/facility/sts-els.htm - here is a list of officially possible listed landing sites; none of them is in NY or NJ though..

With that, I expect thread to go into military-space forum quite soon

I love how many people on this site speak with authority . . . yet have no solid foundation to back it up.

Read the link: No decision has been made on where they are going yet. The Intrepid is on a "short list" and an enclosure would be built.

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/...h_to_bring_retired_craft_to_t.html

Quoting eksath (Reply 1): OV-103 to Smithsonian (done deal) OV-104 to USAF museum OV-105 to KSC. OV-101 to JSC.

Why would they move OV-101 from the Udvar-Hazy center after spending all of that time restoring it and building the exhibits around it?

Quoting kalvado (Reply 4): here is a list of officially possible listed landing sites

Yeah for Cherry Point, NC and Virginia Beach, VA.. As my parents live, literally, across the river from Cherry Point Marine Air Station, it would have been AWESOME to see the shuttle landing there..  

Ain't no chance in helicopter for that to happen, but still..

Quoting dvincent (Reply 6): Why would they move OV-101 from the Udvar-Hazy center after spending all of that time restoring it and building the exhibits around it?

I believe it's being swapped for one of the other shuttles, so it shouldn't be that big of a deal.

As much as I'd like to see a shuttle in NYC, the Intrepid's record when it comes to maintaining exhibits has been checkered, so I don't think it's going to happen.

Quoting dvincent (Reply 6): Why would they move OV-101 from the Udvar-Hazy center after spending all of that time restoring it and building the exhibits around it?

Because Discovery is by far the more significant orbiter.

-Mir

They left a Shuttle (Enterprise) outside for 6 months during the 1984 World's Fair in New Orleans. Thought it would be bigger but remember thinking it was about the size of a DC9.

It would be awesome, but IMHO the Space Shuttle should never run to seed at the outside but rather stay somewhere inside, sheltered from bad weather and environmental influences.

Quoting dvincent (Reply 6): Why would they move OV-101 from the Udvar-Hazy center after spending all of that time restoring it and building the exhibits around it?

Smithsonian got first dibs. They elected to get OV-103 as that is the most active and significant orbiter in existence post Columbia. It will be swapped out with OV-101 which is currently slated for JSC. OV-104 flew the most defense mission hence it is slated for USAF @ Writ-Pat. Apart from the cost of the whole operation of detoxifying the orbiter, there is an issue of control. These are still considered to be national assets that may need to be studied and analyzed for future designs hence they need to go to facilities that provide the resources to work with NASA etc. When, Colombia went down ,OV-101 was picked apart at the Smithsonian especially around the leading edges.

By the way, Smithsonian elected to go through the STS program equipment and narrowed their haul to 500 items (if memory serves me correctly) to be taken in the national archive. These were such items as an engine,a thermal tile and even astronaut food samples.

If i get a chance to dig up some public sources, for the bit about the Smithsonian and OV-103, I will. It is public domain news and has been for a while. So I am not saying anything that is unknown by the public at large.

by the way,jfklganyc, if you check my profile and see my pics, you will see what my understanding (i decline to say I am an authority) may be. If the the Intrepid can satisfy,NASA's RFP and committee, well..congrats!

Quoting Ronaldo747 (Reply 11): It would be awesome, but IMHO the Space Shuttle should never run to seed at the outside but rather stay somewhere inside, sheltered from bad weather and environmental influences.

I agree. The Russians put their shuttle-prototypes outdoors in a park and they look pretty cruddy now.

I saw one of NASA's 747's with the Enterprise riding piggy-back departing TUL back in the late 70's/early 80's (I can't remember any more). It was quite a sight. I wish I could watch an arrival.

Quoting dvincent (Reply 6): Why would they move OV-101 from the Udvar-Hazy center after spending all of that time restoring it and building the exhibits around it?

Here is a very public source related to OV-103 and Smithsonian.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122732839

"Space shuttle Discovery has already been promised to the Smithsonian. "

Wouldn't it be easier to land it somewhere other than JFK and send it by barge to the Intrepid?

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 5): I love how many people on this site speak with authority . . . yet have no solid foundation to back it up. Read the link: No decision has been made on where they are going yet. The Intrepid is on a "short list" and an enclosure would be built. http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/....html

By the way, the very last line on the article is factually incorrect.

NASA will NOT pay the cost to decontiminate and transport the orbiter. It is a cost borne by the requesting organization.

Additionally, it is no longer $42 mil. the price was restated down to in the $28 mil (?) range (if my memory serves me right).


Since the KSC visitor center has down a tremendous job with the Saturn V, ISS building etc, it would be a most obvious choice to roll a orbiter down the road from a OPF to the final destination. This will eliminate the huge transport costs hence Florida has another advantage in terms of the having an orbiter sitting on site at KSC.

JSC might be a bit of a challenge as I understand the canal used to move the Saturn V has had highway bridges in place. So maybe, NYC has a shot at OV-101.

Quoting eksath (Reply 12): Smithsonian got first dibs. They elected to get OV-103 as that is the most active and significant orbiter in existence post Columbia. It will be swapped out with OV-101 which is currently slated for JSC. OV-104 flew the most defense mission hence it is slated for USAF @ Writ-Pat. Apart from the cost of the whole operation of detoxifying the orbiter, there is an issue of control. These are still considered to be national assets that may need to be studied and analyzed for future designs hence they need to go to facilities that provide the resources to work with NASA etc. When, Colombia went down ,OV-101 was picked apart at the Smithsonian especially around the leading edges.

Thanks for the information, Suresh. I don't doubt that they would want it, I was mostly curious.

Mainly it just gives me another excuse to go back there and get a photograph of another orbiter.  

Quoting Mir (Reply 9): As much as I'd like to see a shuttle in NYC, the Intrepid's record when it comes to maintaining exhibits has been checkered, so I don't think it's going to happen.

Now that is some truth right there! The most disappointing of recent times was the treatment of the Concorde.

Quoting 71Zulu (Reply 10): Thought it would be bigger but remember thinking it was about the size of a DC9.

I looked this up just a short while back, and the airliner that's closest to the same length as the shuttle is the A-320, from what I have found. They are just about a foot difference in length.

Quoting dvincent (Reply 17): Thanks for the information, Suresh. I don't doubt that they would want it, I was mostly curious.

Anytime Dan!

4 more to go unless....an act of God..or Obama ..or Congress.

 

Quoting 71Zulu (Reply 10): They left a Shuttle (Enterprise) outside for 6 months during the 1984 World's Fair in New Orleans. Thought it would be bigger but remember thinking it was about the size of a DC9.

Enterprise is not an actual orbiter. It was built for flight testing. I really doubt any of the actual orbiters would ever be left outside for any significant period of time.

The Intrepid museum said they would build a indoor structure along with the concorde if they get the shuttle

Quoting panam92 (Reply 22): The Intrepid museum said they would build a indoor structure along with the concorde if they get the shuttle

Where? There's room along the port?

Quoting comairguycvg (Reply 19): I looked this up just a short while back, and the airliner that's closest to the same length as the shuttle is the A-320, from what I have found. They are just about a foot difference in length.

Right, but this was 1984 and I don't think I even knew what Airbus was back then.  

Quoting CitrusCritter (Reply 21): Enterprise is not an actual orbiter. It was built for flight testing. I really doubt any of the actual orbiters would ever be left outside for any significant period of time.

Ok, didn't know that. I thought I remember it having the heat tiles in place so guessed it was real. It was quite a thrill seeing one up close and haven't seen another one since. We were very proud of the shuttle because the large external fuel tank was and still is built right here in New Orleans.

Quoting comairguycvg (Reply 19): I looked this up just a short while back, and the airliner that's closest to the same length as the shuttle is the A-320, from what I have found. They are just about a foot difference in length

Well they may be almost the same length, but definitely not the same 'size'. The Orbiters are much larger vehicles in almost every way... kinda the way a DC-10 is much 'larger' than an equally 'long' DC-8-63.  

Quoting comairguycvg (Reply 19): the airliner that's closest to the same length as the shuttle is the A-320

In that case, maybe they could land one in the Hudson after its last flight and save the expense of transporting it to NYC  

Quoting eksath (Reply 12): When, Colombia went down ,OV-101 was picked apart at the Smithsonian especially around the leading edges.

I happened to be down in DC and visited Udvar-Havy at that time - somewhere I have photos of Enterprise missing a section of the port wing leading edge.

[Edited 2010-03-23 22:09:37]

Quoting 71Zulu (Reply 24): Ok, didn't know that. I thought I remember it having the heat tiles in place so guessed it was real.

Foam and paint, looking up close at Udvar-Havy it looked kind of cheesy.. I DO look forward to seeing the flight article up close and personal.

Living here in NYC I would DIE to have one here.. but I think our chances are as good as they were at getting the 2012 Olympics... not a chance.

So who gets the 747 transporters?

Quoting moose135 (Reply 26): I happened to be down in DC and visited Udvar-Havy at that time - somewhere I have photos of Enterprise missing a section of the port wing leading edge.

NASM Dec 2004

Wherever the shuttles end up going, I'd like to see at least one mantained so you can at least walk through it and get an idea what it was like onboard, like the Concorde at the Intrepid, or the 747 nose section at the NASM.

Marc

Quoting Cadet985 (Reply 30): Wherever the shuttles end up going, I'd like to see at least one mantained so you can at least walk through it and get an idea what it was like onboard, like the Concorde at the Intrepid, or the 747 nose section at the NASM.

Will be darn near impossible to do without cutting the thing up - no chance that'll happen. Where would you walk anyway? Nowhere to walk in the aft or payload bay. Flight deck is cramped and only accessible by ladder. Leaves the middeck which isn't much bigger than the flight deck.

Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 31): Will be darn near impossible to do without cutting the thing up - no chance that'll happen. Where would you walk anyway? Nowhere to walk in the aft or payload bay. Flight deck is cramped and only accessible by ladder. Leaves the middeck which isn't much bigger than the flight deck.

No...People could use the ladder to go between the two decks. That's how people move from deck to deck on some of the Navy ships that are now museums.

Quoting Cadet985 (Reply 32): No...People could use the ladder to go between the two decks. That's how people move from deck to deck on some of the Navy ships that are now museums.

The ladder is small, lightweight, and designed for occasional use by techs & astronauts on the ground. Would not stand up to the punishment of large crowds of visitors for decades. Besides everyone would have to crawl in the side hatch.

Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 33): The ladder is small, lightweight, and designed for occasional use by techs & astronauts on the ground. Would not stand up to the punishment of large crowds of visitors for decades. Besides everyone would have to crawl in the side hatch.

The ladder could easily be modified, or a different one installed. And as for getting in the hatch, if astronauts in their gear can fit in, I'd imagine that a common tourist with a camera could.

Again, my idea was just that, an idea. I know there are a lot of logistical issues that would have to be worked out.

Marc

Quoting Cadet985 (Reply 34): Again, my idea was just that, an idea. I know there are a lot of logistical issues that would have to be worked out.

Your idea would require the shuttle to be considerably modified or disassembled. NASA ruled this out from the start in the RFP. It's not going to happen.

any museum would have to make the viewing ADA compatible... so the best you'll get is some exterior ramps and a peek in the windows.

Quoting kanban (Reply 36): any museum would have to make the viewing ADA compatible... so the best you'll get is some exterior ramps and a peek in the windows.

Perhaps, but not all museums have all exhibits accessible. I know there are parts of the Intrepid, for example, that are not ADA compliant. Same I'd assume goes for most ofher warships that are now museums.

FYI: Please read the photographer's comments. The prelims have begun on OV-101.

Maybe she will end up in NYC.  

(But I would not put any money on it!)

View Large View Medium

Photo © Mark Carlisle

Quoting CitrusCritter (Reply 21): Enterprise is not an actual orbiter. It was built for flight testing. I really doubt any of the actual orbiters would ever be left outside for any significant period of time.

Enterprise is a actual orbiter. It was built to become an orbiter, but due to changes in design while building OV-102, Enterprise was heavier than the rest. With the loss of Challenger, NASA considered fitting Enterprise with flight qualified parts, but decided to use spare parts and structures to build Endeavor.

Now, Explorer and Pathfinder are not actual orbiters. Pathfinder was even used for test fits when Enterprise was not available, or a task that would be too rough on an actual orbiter.