Enterprise floating in New York Harbor

[Zachstar]

Seeing the damage up close, I can say it's easily repaired. They can fix it up to the point where you can't even see it was ever broken.

And you can make a replica look exactly the same except it has no real historical value.

Enterprise has a long history. And even the work done on it to help the RTF effort is historical.

Now they will try to fix it. One way or another it will look off and of course it will be the brunt of late night talk show jokes for the next month.

Thanks for nothing New York.

Yeah, it's less damage than I thought at first. Seems to be just the very tip of the wing. Still, though... it's the damn space shuttle you just knocked into a pier...

Oh I am sure they will be saying "Nah we just damaged a flight test version" when in reality it was only a few historical events (The loss of Challenger and the banning of NASA using the shuttle of its primary purpose of commercial cargo transport to orbit) that prevented Enterprise from being converted into a full Orbiter.

 

[Aeadar]

I say don't repair it. It is now a part of the Enterprises history. Except perhaps to prevent any exposure to hazardous materials(ie; insulating materials, etc.), I think it would be as legitimate to leave it 'as is' as it would be to repair it.

 

[Andy44]

Add this to my list of reasons to dislike New York. Indifference and unprofessionalism at its finest. And you know those river pilots get paid mad money for that job, especially in an overpriced city like New York. "I broke a historical artifact, LOL."

Bonus rant: I agree with the poster who said they should take it away from NYC and give it to Houston. Just as with any child who breaks his toy before he even gets it home from the store, you take it from him until he learns to take care of it.

 

[Hielor]

Exactly. It is a historical artifact now, and some bozo just trashed a part of it.

If you read into some of the other articles, you'll see that it was a sudden gust of wind, not just incompetence...

Oh I am sure they will be saying "Nah we just damaged a flight test version" when in reality it was only a few historical events (The loss of Challenger and the banning of NASA using the shuttle of its primary purpose of commercial cargo transport to orbit) that prevented Enterprise from being converted into a full Orbiter.

Source?

Wikipedia disagrees:

Originally, Enterprise had been intended to be refitted for orbital flight, which would have made it the second space shuttle to fly after Columbia.[2] However, during the construction of Columbia, details of the final design changed, particularly with regard to the weight of the fuselage and wings. Refitting Enterprise for spaceflight would have involved dismantling the orbiter and returning the sections to subcontractors across the country. As this was an expensive proposition, it was determined to be less costly to build Challenger around a body frame (STA-099) that had been created as a test article.[2] Similarly, Enterprise was considered for refit to replace Challenger after the latter was destroyed, but Endeavour was built from structural spares instead.

 

[Zachstar]

It was a post on NSF talking about the programs past from one of the experts there. The idea was it would have become part of the main fleet after the demand was there. However any chance of that ended when they yanked NASA out of the business.

As for "sudden gust of wind" again that goes to the point that they were trying to move the craft under the bridge with such tight tolerances. Such utter disrespect for the craft so that they can save money or hurry it up there for the tourism bucks. I say take the Orbiter from them and put it in a more fitting location.

 

[Hielor]

As for "sudden gust of wind" again that goes to the point that they were trying to move the craft under the bridge with such tight tolerances. Such utter disrespect for the craft so that they can save money or hurry it up there for the tourism bucks. I say take the Orbiter from them and put it in a more fitting location.

I don't think there was a better option for getting it from one place to the other...

 

[Zachstar]

Then maybe they should not have received it in the first place if they could not prove it could be safely transported.

 

[Codz]

It was just an unfortunate accident. As long as it's an easy fix and the shuttle itself is fine, I don't see the problem.

 

[Hielor]

Then maybe they should not have received it in the first place if they could not prove it could be safely transported.

I absolutely agree that they should not have received it in the first place. What exactly has New York done for the space program?

 

[Codz]

I absolutely agree that they should not have received it in the first place. What exactly has New York done for the space program?

Their taxpayers payed for some of it and it's one of the largest cities in the US. You could also ask why D.C. got Discovery.

 

[Zachstar]

Yet Washington has atleast some ties to the shuttle program. New York has none.

And please do not just "excuse" them for this. As doing so is just continuing to dishonor a part of this nation's history. Would you react differently if it was the Discovery or the Endeavour?

 

[Pablo49]

Their taxpayers payed for some of it and it's one of the largest cities in the US. You could also ask why D.C. got Discovery.

National Air and Space Museum?

 

[Codz]

And please do not just "excuse" them for this. As doing so is just continuing to dishonor a part of this nation's history. Would you react differently if it was the Discovery or the Endeavour?

No, I wouldn't. I value Enterprise just as much as any of them. Would you react differently if this accident happened in Houston or KSC?

---------- Post added at 06:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:26 AM ----------

National Air and Space Museum?

Still not related directly to the space program, which is apparently the criteria for getting a shuttle.

 

[Hielor]

Their taxpayers payed for some of it and it's one of the largest cities in the US. You could also ask why D.C. got Discovery.

D.C. has the Smithsonian, so it makes perfect sense to send one there--plenty of unique aviation and space related things go there. New York, on the other hand, has some random air museum whose only claim to fame is that it's on an aircraft carrier.

As for the taxpayers thing--really? New York is what, less than 3% of the US population (based on Wikipedia population numbers)? Compared to the tens of thousands of people in Houston who have been working on the shuttle program for the past four decades, and the strong connection that Houston has to the space industry, New York has no claim at all to the shuttle.

---------- Post added at 00:55 ---------- Previous post was at 00:54 ----------

Still not related directly to the space program, which is apparently the criteria for getting a shuttle.

See:

D.C. has the Smithsonian, so it makes perfect sense to send one there--plenty of unique aviation and space related things go there.

 

[Ghostrider]

I absolutely agree that they should not have received it in the first place. What exactly has New York done for the space program?

It's politics. It always boils down to it.

 

[Urwumpe]

And you can make a replica look exactly the same except it has no real historical value.

That is your western materialist view of historical value. I remember the anecdote of a japanese temple, that is over 1000 years old and full of traditions. The building was burned to the ground a few times in these 1000 years, the oak logs needed replacement every other dozen years, but for the people there, it is still the 1000 year old temple.

Same I see it with the Space Shuttle. You can replace everything, including the wooden SSME mockups on the Enterprise, if you just keep the essence of the building alive.

Or, in other words: You likely have no atom in your body that spend more than 10 years inside it. How old are you now? :lol:

 

[N_Molson]

Also, New York is one of the first touristic destinations in the USA and in the World. So Enterprise is more likely to make more money there I guess.

 

[Hielor]

Also, New York is one of the first touristic destinations in the USA and in the World. So Enterprise is more likely to make more money there I guess.

Somehow I don't think that people who go to New York as a tourist destination are going there to see an air museum...

 

[Lord Wasteland]

That is your western materialist view of historical value. I remember the anecdote of a japanese temple, that is over 1000 years old and full of traditions. The building was burned to the ground a few times in these 1000 years, the oak logs needed replacement every other dozen years, but for the people there, it is still the 1000 year old temple.

Same I see it with the Space Shuttle. You can replace everything, including the wooden SSME mockups on the Enterprise, if you just keep the essence of the building alive.

Or, in other words: You likely have no atom in your body that spend more than 10 years inside it. How old are you now? :lol:

Exactly! The USS Constitution, one of the oldest sail vessels, has hard parts of her replaced over the years. So? Do we value her any less? NO WE DON'T! So why should we care if it is different, the essence of history is the same!

 

[mojoey]

From context, I thought the thread title referred to CVN-65.

Her time is yet to come...