I guess the most significant point I have to make in this case is the Air Force’s role with the Shuttle Program…a point you have ignored all along. How much has NY contributed to the Shuttle Program other than its taxpayers contribututions? I can proudly say that the USAF has contributed in countless ways…developmentally, operationally, fiscally etc.,etc,etc. We are still supporting the program! Wouldn’t it be nice to have an orbiter or Enterprise surrounded by all the research aircraft that NASA/USAF flew gathering the info that actually helped develop it. They’re all at the Nat’l Museum of the USAF. Three of the four test pilots that conducted approach and landing tests with Enterprise…you guessed it…USAF! Service with the most Shuttle Astronauts…you guessed right again…USAF! Plus Ohio can boast first American in Orbit and Man on the Moon! It just doesn’t seem “right” (not Wright, like Orville and Wilbur…a couple of other famous Ohioans) that the Jewel in the Crown of (recent) aerospace history does not reside at the Nat’l Museum of the USAF.

This may sound bitter, but I hope it is a long, long time before Maj Gen (Ret.) Bolden is inducted into the Aviation Hall of Fame…which is also located in our museum. His decision making processes were wrong and politically motivated. Maybe the USS Intrepid/NYC can honor him instead? I respect Maj Gen (Ret.) Bolden for his service, but as the NASA administrtor Mr. Bolden’s a political appointee and thus responsible for the (bad) politics behind his decisions.

I think the defense of NYC on sheer numbers is frankly lame. NYC is a great town, but not a space or aviation town. After a while Enterprise will lose its luster and the Intrepid will resume its place as one of the lesser aerospace museums and NYC attractions. Other than its selection as a shuttle site the only headlines the Intrepid has made lately was for getting stuck in the mud.

Only time will tell who is right on this.

Lt Col Rob Hecht

I think we may be in what my engineer friends would call “violent agreement,” so I’ll let it drop. One small note, though: Not that it matters much, but NYC is not in New England, nor is any part of New York. New England includes Connecticut (where I live), Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine.

;^)

I am going to try and put this to rest.

“They do not go for aviation and space history. ”

I do agree and this is the point. Tourist of all shapes and forms come to NYC if they happen on a Shuttle well so much the better to me. Those tourists we are trying to attract will NOT go to Dayton regardless how grand an aerospace museum they have. Of course your family has already seen all there is to see about aviation or so. Seems natural to me since you are an AF officer. See I am a pilot, not military, still I have visited places where usually no one goes unless well they are pilots or enthused with aviation. But at some point your family or mine when they grow up will either be “space cadets” or not. They will most likely go to NYC with their friends or LA for that matter.

“Your defense of the shuttle locations and NYC seems to indicate that you agree with the decision to place them there.”

I agree with the location but suggesting that I think “middle America”, as you put it, does not count is nonsense. I want to see the largest number of people have a peek at a Shuttle. The numbers show that most people go to NYC rather than Dayton. Period. I asked if you were a pilot because I see you being very emotional, overly so. I would expect more cold blood from a pilot, that is all. Unless you are trying to make an opportunistic issue of this (?) but I don’t believe so. Usually “fierce” is not equal to cold blood. My opinion.

“I would think you would appreciate when a military member fights for his/her service especially if in the interest of their history.”

I have the utmost respect for people who dedicate their lives to the defense of our nation, not even a question. Here though I think your fight is ill placed because it is not about defending the USAF history or tradition or anything. I also believe that if you are so attached to history then NYC is a great symbol of our nation more so than Dayton. I believe that having one of the greatest technological achievement of the USA supported by NASA and the USAF and others on display at NYC is a great thing. It shows to the world that our great nation cherish its achievements and put them in NYC for every one to see. NYC that has suffered an unprecedented attack deserves a little more attention than other places. You ought to be proud that such a symbol represents the USAF if you so believe in NYC. It’s yet another thumb nose at those who defy us. They cannot take away our pride. They did some damage and now we are coming back even stronger. We put even more symbols where they attacked us. See there are many ways to interpret something.

So again, it is not whether it is proper or not to have a Shuttle in “middle America”. It is just that it is better to have it in NYC than Dayton.

Possibly so BUT Dayton does not come close to compare with NYC for tourists! Come on, you MUST know that.

Common Sense you are right about tourists, but folks go to NYC to see Ground Zero, Empire State, Broadway, Statue of Liberty, the Met etc., etc. They do not go for aviation and space history. I took my family there last summer and when I mentioned going to the USS Intrepid I got shot down. “We can see that stuff anytime Dad I was told.” BTW my kids have been on the USS Yorktown, to the Smithsonian, KSC and the Nat’l Museum of the USAF so I can justify their reasoning, but the Intrepid will remain at the bottom of of the list of NYC attractions visitors go to see. Placing the shuttle there just to temporarily pad their annual attendance numbers doesn’t cut it.

And considering geopgraphy I guess middle America doesn’t count huh?”
I don’t remember saying anything like that, now did I?

– Your defense of the shuttle locations and NYC seems to indicate that you agree with the decision to place them there.

Again you are being emotional. Are you a pilot?

– No I’m an intelligence officer with a master’s in history and my certification as a history archivist (and can hopefully focus on my PhD after I complete Air War College). After my military days are done I hope to work in a museum or endeavour to teach our youth about our history.

And I’m not emotional. I’m just a fierce advocate and member of my chosen military service…the US Air Force. I would think you would appreciate when a military member fights for his/her service especially if in the interest of their history. As I also wrote the USAF did more than any other service in support of the space shuttle to include using a respectable part of its budget to support development and operations. We (the USAF) have strong ties to the Shuttle program – more than any other military service and will support right up to the final flight!

Hey I can’t do anything about it. Your argument is not with me. You should argue with Bolden. But I will not support a Shuttle in Dayton if it has to come out of a more tourist destination in the US and in the world because I want to see the most possible people see those contraptions. Not the only ones on pilgrimage to Dayton.

– Once again you seem to indicate that locating an orbiter in the interior/center of America is not the proper course of action and I wholeheartedly and respectfully disagree.

“Of course; I didn’t mean to be snarky about your anonymity. But your anonymity does make it difficult, if not impossible, for me to know whether you’re one of the people I’ve interacted with before in fora like this one. OTOH, if you were one of those people, you’d know who I work for.”

No of course you did not mean to be snarky… Anywho.

No I do not believe we’ve interacted. But I ran a little Google to find out one Bill Dauphin who is a technical writer for a major aerospace company. Would it be you? If so good for you but that does not mean you have the expertise to provide an educated judgement on one space vehicle or another now does it? Not being snarky of course.

It is not a philosophical disagreement it is a practical disagreement. If you have a finite amount of money to deal with your problems you prioritize and HSF is down low on this list. Whether you and I philosophically agree or not.

“City X had to make a compelling argument that they could promote it in a way that best showcased the technology and would reach a lot of people.”

Well that sums it up nicely.

That’s the rumor.

For speculation’s sake, let’s say that’s true. If their bid included a falsehood, I can understand why NASA would downgrade them. Houston got downgraded simply because they submitted a poor proposal and promoted it late.

KSCVC put a $100 million upgrade on the table to showcase an orbiter. Did Dayton or Houston or one of the other runners-up do so? It’s not a flippant question, just an observation that the final decision involved more than “City X deserves an orbiter.” City X had to make a compelling argument that they could promote it in a way that best showcased the technology and would reach a lot of people.

I’m glad to see a discussion of this, as it’s important to get away from presumptive decisions, and really think about what it is we’re trying to do.

I accept that you’re defending NYC and CA. It’s just that your personal choice, which you say would have been different from Bolden’s, is somewhat irrelevant. I’m not making a personal choice for me. I’m just saying, and I’ll say it again, that the NASA Administrator wins more for NASA by reaching a larger number of people than by focusing on space-related tourist destinations for “priceless historical artifacts”. I’m just trying to rationalize the decision that Bolden made.

Yes, I think that creating a historical archive is important, which is why the orbiters went to reputable museums, instead of circus tents at amusement parks. That being the case, and to the extent that Bolden is trying to spread the experience of human space flight more broadly throughout the country, it doesn’t take much to see that the population that is served by LA and NYC is larger than that served by KSC/Orlando. I think pretty nearly everyone in Central Florida has been swept off their feet by the awesome displays at KSC. Care to guess how many in New England or California have?

Your point about the word “advocate” is a good one. Perhaps your “advocates” are indeed what I’m calling “fans”, but you mentioned how important it was to turn the latter into the former, so I suspect that’s not quite right.

I want a nation of people who are cognizant and proud of space flight, and national space flight that is not something regional, but is part of who they are, and where they live. You don’t get that by concentrating reminders of space flight in regional tourist destinations that happen to be where the flames came out. Looking at KSC (or JSC) as “the space place” is sort of like looking at Gettysburg as “the civil war place”. Except in the case of the latter we’re happy to see it as having one location (which happened to be where the flames came out!) Again, establishment of regional tourist destinations for human space flight is what regionalizes the whole enterprise. While NASA works hard to spread contract dollars throughout the country, we have places that say — “Nope, human space flight is us. Right here. Not there.” That’s just sad, and it breeds the kind of porkification that has become the hallmark of human space flight.

One writer above has a good point that NYC is not that far away from DC, so having two orbiters that close together may not be in the best interest of maximizing visibility. But DC represents, to the country, something very different than NYC or LA.

I’ve mostly said what I had to say, and I still don’t understand why my fairly easygoing position torques your bolts so much. But this…

When you have a sum of money to try and resolve many problems but far more important problems than human spaceflight then it is normal to cut somewhere.

…assumes that social problems are generally separate and distinct, that each problem has a distinct set of solutions, and that those solutions are invariably in competition with each other. I hold that to be a fundamentally false premise: Societies and their problems are integrated and holistic, and solutions are often systematic rather than particular. This is somewhat philsophical, of course, and there’s plenty of room for philosophical disagreement… but IMHO your vision of a one-to-one map between problems and their mutually exclusive solutions is demonstrably incorrect.

Good for you that you have the luxury to post under your own name. Any idea why some of us cannot? Do you actually work in this business?

Of course; I didn’t mean to be snarky about your anonymity. But your anonymity does make it difficult, if not impossible, for me to know whether you’re one of the people I’ve interacted with before in fora like this one. OTOH, if you were one of those people, you’d know who I work for.

…the advocates do not seem, to me, to support space exploration. Rather they support one rocket or another.

Not what I’m talking about. You’re too hung up on the word advocate; see my reply to Doug.

If you have to drive 40 mn away from Disney with your whole family to go see KSC, you are not a casual fan.

That’s not how Florida tourism works: There are a whole cluster of attractions all within easy driving distance, and lots of people do ‘em all, just because they can. It’s different from visiting Edwards or WSMR or Mojave Spaceport. In those places, you’d be right: Anyone making the effort to get there would be more than a casual fan… but the “Space Coast” is different.

Well, I’m’a bow out of this now, because…

some lecturing comments

…I can’t figure out how “I wouldn’t’a done it that way but I understand why they did” adds up to lecturing. In any case, lecturing wasn’t my intention.

Hasta la vista, y’all….

What has happened to the Texas, truly one of a kind is just tragic. Robert G. Oler