Jeebus Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Wow, I thought this would be a hot topic here. Maybe there's a legitimate reason why we didn't get it....? HOUSTON (KTRK) -- Houston's Johnson Space Center will not receive one of the retired space shuttles as the fleet is distributed around the country.There are three shuttles up for grabs and the Johnson Space Center in southeast Houston was considered a contender to get one. However, we had some serious competition from several cities including Seattle, New York City, Los Angeles and Dayton, Ohio. The big announcement officially came today at noon on the 30th anniversary of the first space shuttle launch.Discovery, which ended its flying career last month, will be housed at the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum in Washington, DC. That leaves Atlantis, Endeavor and Enterprise, which is a prototype orbiter that never made it into space.Atlantis will go to Kennedy Space Center in Florida, where all the shuttles have been launched. The prototype Enterprise will go to the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum in New York. California Science Center in Los Angeles will receive the Endeavour.http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/technology&id=8067440 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fringe Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 That sucks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbigtex56 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 I can understand the Smithsonian. To a lesser extent, the Kennedy Space Center has a legitimate, historic reason for having a shuttle.But, NYC? LA? Whatever involvement they had with the shuttle program is, at best, minimal.We already have an internationally known facility dedicated to the history of America's space exploration. This fight is not over. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samagon Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I hope not, la doesn't exactly conjure thoughts of the shuttle program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 This fight is not over.Sure seems like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livincinco Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I think Houston should have a shuttle, but let me play devil's advocate - NY and LA - do you think that it may have something to do with them being the #1 and #2 largest cities in the US? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 This whole thing smells, and bad. Forget everybody hating Houston (especially East coasters), NY and LA getting these seems like a direct slap in the face. How is it possible we weren't at least the number 2 city? Again, something's rotten in Denmark. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I think Houston should have a shuttle, but let me play devil's advocate - NY and LA - do you think that it may have something to do with them being the #1 and #2 largest cities in the US?One (1) shuttle for Washington DC because it has NASA HQ.One (1) shuttle for Cape Canaveral because it has KSC.One (1) shuttle for Southern California because it has the Dryden Flight Research Center & Edwards AFB.New York City makes absolutely no sense. Nothing happened there!One (1) shuttle for Houston because it has JSC. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simbha Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 (edited) Was this politically motivated, based on population, or simply a matter of economics (i.e., JSC supporters were not able to raise sufficient funds)? It's disappointing, yes - but I'd rather see Houston look forward than backward. Don't ask me what that means, other than to hear me say I'm an eternal optimist. Edited April 13, 2011 by Simbha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Heard on the news it WAS politically motivated, and some want to have a congressional hearing on why Texas was snubbed.A lot of people on news comments, including me, believe that it's Obama's revenge for being George Bush's state.(Psst! Obama! Houston has LOTS of your supporters!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Timmy Chan's Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 To make matters worse, on top of not being awarded a shuttle, Houston's JSC is losing all its shuttle trainers and simulators. They'll be shipped off to places like Seattle; Dayton, OH; and College Station.In exchange Houston gets two space shuttle seats.That's not a "snub". That's an unamibiguous slap across the face, plus a middle finger...and I think Obama even said something about our mama. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTAWACS Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 To make matters worse, on top of not being awarded a shuttle, Houston's JSC is losing all its shuttle trainers and simulators. They'll be shipped off to places like Seattle; Dayton, OH; and College Station.In exchange Houston gets two space shuttle seats.What do you mean we get two shuttle seats? What does this mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Heard on the news it WAS politically motivated, and some want to have a congressional hearing on why Texas was snubbed.A lot of people on news comments, including me, believe that it's Obama's revenge for being George Bush's state.(Psst! Obama! Houston has LOTS of your supporters!)Wait. There are consequences to being a non-compromising, political ideologue?Who knew? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fringe Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Well Obama has definitely lost my vote for 2012. (Unless Pallin is running against him then like always I will be forced to vote against the worst of two evils). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I would never base my vote on something as trivial as where the government chooses to mothball old hardware, but this political angle is suspect. The Smithsonian has long been promised one of the shuttles, and Cape Canaveral is a logical choice. The only "political" choices would be LA and New York. Perhaps I am naive, but what does the President gain by giving a couple of old shuttles to two states that voted solidly Democratic in 2008, and are in no danger in 2012? Nothing. Perhaps Dayton, Ohio would have reaped a political windfall, but they did not get one.This sounds like so much sour grapes, and coming from a state that goes out of its way to sabotage the President's policies, one has to say, what did you expect? This is exactly what Texas' political leaders would have done, so I suppose that is why they are so suspicious that it may have been done to them. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian0123 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 To make matters worse, on top of not being awarded a shuttle, Houston's JSC is losing all its shuttle trainers and simulators. They'll be shipped off to places like Seattle; Dayton, OH; and College Station.In exchange Houston gets two space shuttle seats.That's not a "snub". That's an unamibiguous slap across the face, plus a middle finger...and I think Obama even said something about our mama.I don't believe it was politically motivated. If it were, I would think that we WOULD have received the shuttle. LA and NYC are already politically safe for Obama... so he has nothing to gain by sending the shuttles to them. Houston (and Texas) is a place Democrats are going to try and make gains in w/ the growing Hispanic population and shift to urban areas. If it were political, they would have tried to woo over voters in potential battle ground states for years to come. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I would never base my vote on something as trivial as where the government chooses to mothball old hardware, but this political angle is suspect. The Smithsonian has long been promised one of the shuttles, and Cape Canaveral is a logical choice. The only "political" choices would be LA and New York. Perhaps I am naive, but what does the President gain by giving a couple of old shuttles to two states that voted solidly Democratic in 2008, and are in no danger in 2012? Nothing. Perhaps Dayton, Ohio would have reaped a political windfall, but they did not get one.Yeah, I tend to agree. This wasn't Machiavellian enough to be overtly political. I suspect that we're witnessing a crappy bureaucratic process in action. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fringe Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 May not have been politically motivated to gain votes but I have no doubt it was politically motivated towards Texas and Rick Perry. Houston Screwed Again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barracuda Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 If it is political, it's as much a failure of state and local representatives as it is a snub by their adversaries. As per the quote in the Chronicle, ideologues aren't good at dealmaking. What's really more important is that JSC continue it's role as NASA's preeminent space facility. Hopefully the backlash will put more pressure on keeping more jobs and projects based at JSC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 If it is political, it's as much a failure of state and local representatives as it is a snub by their adversaries. As per the quote in the Chronicle, ideologues aren't good at dealmaking. What's really more important is that JSC continue it's role as NASA's preeminent space facility. Hopefully the backlash will put more pressure on keeping more jobs and projects based at JSC.Absolutely. If someone wants to be angry at politicians, the better target would be the arrogant and/or lazy Texas pols who apparently simply assumed that Houston would get the shuttle. Remember the military truck contract in Sealy that went to Wisconsin? AFTER the contract went to Wisconsin, the local politicians screamed and cried, but the fact remained that they ignored it until it was too late.It is much easier to cover their incompetence by blaming it on politics than it is to admit that our Texas politicians simply expected the shuttle to come here without their doing their jobs. I'm not buying it. Especially, since there were articles suggesting that we started trying way too late to affect the outcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marksmu Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 If it is political, it's as much a failure of state and local representatives as it is a snub by their adversaries. As per the quote in the Chronicle, ideologues aren't good at dealmaking. What's really more important is that JSC continue it's role as NASA's preeminent space facility. Hopefully the backlash will put more pressure on keeping more jobs and projects based at JSC.Its political. Obama has no chance in Texas...he knows it. The shuttles will increase revenue through tourism....he is repaying a favor. These States helped him get elected, and he wants them to help him get re-elected. He is prepaying them for part of the 2012 campaign. What does he have to gain in Texas? Nothing....Texas is still a solidly red state for the time being. Texas has the JSC...if he gave one to JSC it would not look political at all....it would look deserved, earned...like the right thing to do. That is not the Obama way....I was surprised Chicago was not a nominee.As to ideologues not being good at dealmaking...I can't think of more ideological politicians than Obama/Reid/Pelosi. They are farther to the left than the tea-party is to the right....you can't meet in the middle of any political discussion when one group of people wants the government to coddle everyone for everything cradle to grave, and make sure that everyone has equal everything regardless of work. and the other party wants the government out of everything except for the Military. Both parties spend too much money....After watching the "compromise" on the budget play out, financially speaking I dont see much of a difference between parties. Both are completely out of touch with reality. We are losing our world standing as a super power, an economic leader, and the only thing our politicians want to argue about is more of the same....a 38 billion dollar reduction in a 1.3 trillion dollar increase in our deficit from the new budget....only in DC can that be an accomplishment. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skwatra Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Not that I agree with the decision, but the Shuttle was designed by Rockwell in SoCal and built in Palmdale. Boeing Canoga Park and Huntington Beach played heavy roles in the Shuttle until engineering was relocated to Houston in 2001. So they have the history, though JSC has a more important one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livincinco Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Not that I agree with the decision, but the Shuttle was designed by Rockwell in SoCal and built in Palmdale. Boeing Canoga Park and Huntington Beach played heavy roles in the Shuttle until engineering was relocated to Houston in 2001. So they have the history, though JSC has a more important one.Explain New York. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skwatra Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Explain New York.I can't, but they didn't get it so who cares. anyone has the right to put their names in the hat. I was just explaining that southern california does have ties to the space shuttle program, albeit dated. again, i'm very disappointed and was hoping for it to come to Houston. There's plenty of land by Rocket Park, it would have made a great addition to the Space Center. You would think that whole Mission Control card would have held some water. oh well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsb320 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I think it's money related. NY and LA are both paying $28m each for a shuttle. The Smithsonian and KSC are not paying anything. I would imagine that if JSC were selected, we would not have had to pay either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fringe Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I think it's money related. NY and LA are both paying $28m each for a shuttle. The Smithsonian and KSC are not paying anything. I would imagine that if JSC were selected, we would not have had to pay either.First I've heard of that. I did not realize they were for sale. I wonder if Houston was allowed to even place a bid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skwatra Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 there is some sites out there stating the shuttle was sold for $28M, but this seems to be more realistic:Article on shuttle moveObviously there is a large cost to move the shuttle and house it. It would make sense that for private museums they would foot the bill while for KSC, JSC, or the Smithsonian the government would have to eat the cost, giving an advantage over JSC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marmer Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Actually I think we've already got JSC and Space Center Houston and Rocket Park. Makes sense they would think we have "enough" and would put the shuttles elsewhere. I've heard that the NY and CA choices were based primarily on population size of the metro area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skwatra Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Actually I think we've already got JSC and Space Center Houston and Rocket Park. Makes sense they would think we have "enough" and would put the shuttles elsewhere. I've heard that the NY and CA choices were based primarily on population size of the metro area.I think because we have JSC, Space Center Houston and Rocket Park - we should have gotten the shuttle. And our Rocket Park is a joke compared to KSC's. KSC is a very impressive facility but once the shuttle retires and there's a lull in manned space flight, I'm wondering if the popularity of visiting there will go down. Will as many people make the trek out to the Cape from Orlando when all the buzz of shuttle launches is gone?At least we have our Saturn V... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 How is anyone even arguing against one of the Shuttles coming to Houston. I understand playing devils advocate, but c'mon. Is it even neccessary to discuss the reasons why? If someone has the time maybe they can give a break down of what JSC has meant to the American Space program over the last 45ish years.This has payback written all over it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.