5 ms·

It seems silly (and expensive) to move it and there are, no doubt, politics involved. But it may be worth pointing out that this annex to the Smithsonian Air an

by ghaff 1y ago

It seems silly (and expensive) to move it and there are, no doubt, politics involved. But it may be worth pointing out that this annex to the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum is out by Dulles and not very convenient for visitors to access. To be clear, there's not a good reason to move it as far as I can tell. And the default should just be to keep it where it is.

ceejayoz 1y ago
They don't even properly take care of the one they've got; the high-fidelity Shuttle replica and the 747 carrier aircraft already at Houston are outside in an area that gets hurricanes. https://spacecenter.org/exhibits-and-experiences/independence/ https://spacecenter.org/exhibits-and-experiences/independenc...
- potato3732842 1y ago
  Having seen the Kennedy space center museum and Dulles Smithsonian (and downtown Smithsonian) I think that having the vehicles outdoors in the "natural climate" in which they operated makes them hit way harder even if it's worse for preservation.
  - ceejayoz 1y ago
    The "natural climate" for the Shuttle was something like 99.5% indoors in a hangar / VAB, 0.4% space, and 0.1% outside. And they definitely didn't leave it out during hurricanes. I'd rather it hit pretty hard for much longer.
    - potato3732842 1y ago
      I've seen it in Dulles and I've seen Kennedy Space Center museum and I'm telling you that looking up at a rocket in the Florida sun is a far more impactful experience than seeing the shuttle in Dulles. If it were up to me I'd park it on a taxiway (or stick it in the parking lot at Dulles, lol) and give tours.
      - ceejayoz 1y ago
        And I'm telling you that looking up at a decrepit, collapsing rocket in a few decades would be a bit less impactful. Short-term (and subjective) benefit for long-term complete loss of the Shuttle eventually. The Smithsonian wants to be able to show this thing off a thousand years from now, if they can. Outdoor storage for priceless, fragile artifacts is just plain odd.
        potato3732842 1y ago
        Move it indoors in 50yr then. There will be new artifacts.
        ceejayoz 1y ago
        > Move it indoors in 50yr then. After irreparable damage? > There will be new artifacts. There are unlikely to be new Shuttles.
        potato3732842 1y ago
        All the stuff in the rocket garden is doing fairly fine. You're making a mountain out of a mole hill here to justify a preconceived opinion.
        ceejayoz 1y ago
        > All the stuff in the rocket garden is doing fairly fine. Those have required extensive repairs from weather-induced corrosion etc. (https://www.collectspace.com/news/news-070218a-saturn-ib-rocket-restoration.html https://www.collectspace.com/news/news-070218a-saturn-ib-roc...) or complete replacement (https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna39387412 https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna39387412 "deemed too far gone to be refurbished") and are far less fragile than the Shuttle to the elements. Even then, there's a time limit and they're hoping to move them inside: "'We have discussed enclosing it, but those plans are not finalized yet,' said Protze. 'We brought the best of the best in to redo the rocket, inside and out, and so I feel confident that if it was to stay outside, it would be good for another 20 to 25 years.'"
- jkestner 1y ago
  ! That's high-fidelity enough that I didn't realize it was a replica when I visited (but yeah, nagged at the back of my head that it was sitting out there). If it weren't for the cost of moving and admission and care, I'd say sure, Johnson Space Center deserves one of them. I'd rather spend the money on new probe launches.
the_snooze 1y ago
It's unclear how you'd even move the thing safely. The shuttle-carrier 747s are literal museum pieces now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuttle_Carrier_Aircraft#Retirement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuttle_Carrier_Aircraft#Retir... I guess they can disassemble/reassemble it or move it whole with huge flatbed trucks, but both risk damaging the vehicle.
- bamboozled 1y ago
  When the lord is on your side, you can work wonders my son.
- ceejayoz 1y ago
  They'd likely move it via barge; that's how Houston got their current Shuttle (replica) from Florida. Getting it to the Potomac would probably be the toughest bit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Independence#Space_Center_Houston https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Independence#Spa...
saghm 1y ago
Given that the current administration literally issued an executive order claiming that the Smithsonian is bogus, it seems plausible this is just part of an attempt to diminish its stature: https://www.npr.org/2025/03/ https://www.npr.org/2025/03/ Not long ago it would have been hard for me to imagine a president having a vendetta against specific museums, but given how transparent the executive order is, the only question is whether he's petty enough to try to do something like this. Unfortunately I think it's pretty clear from past precedent that this is pretty plausible.
- water-data-dude 1y ago
  The current administration is trying to emphasize certain parts of our history and diminish others. If I had to take a wild guess, I'd say it's something along the lines of "this was something the public sector did with taxpayer money that advanced science. We should deemphasize anything positive that came out of it because it casts public sector projects and science in a good light"
fluidcruft 1y ago
If they're going to move any of them to Texas, it should be Enterprise. It's already on the top deck of an aircraft carrier.
- peaseagee 1y ago
  In a climate controlled hanger on a museum.
  - fluidcruft 1y ago
    Significantly cheaper and safer to move it to a barge/boat/whatever and float it most of the way.
moron4hire 1y ago
However, the Udvar Hazy annex is an amazing space. It's absolutely huge, with lots of amazing pieces on display. It's also where the Smithsonian performs restoration on the aircraft in its collection. I doubt it would be possible to put something like that in DC.
potato3732842 1y ago
>But it may be worth pointing out that this annex to the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum is out by Dulles and not very convenient for visitors to access. It's also the better campus IMO. The one in DC is basically a speed run of the stuff you see in a kids book that just highlights all the "firsts". The one at Dulles has all the cool displays of big or technologically unique stuff. I agree access isn't great if you're trying to shoehorn it into a visit to all the typical DC monuments type stuff.
- ghaff 1y ago
  Oh, I don't disagree. Though it took me ages to get there because I sort of needed to arrange a long enough layover in Dulles to grab an Uber and spend a few hours. You need a lot of space for a really good aviation museum. It's no coincidence that the one in the Seattle area is on a Boeing campus near their big plant.
  - rtkwe 1y ago
    Yeah it's impractical to have a big aviation museum in a downtown, the planes just take up so much space. Another really good one is the Air Force museum in Dayton Ohio.
- dabluecaboose 1y ago
  Having been a frequent patron of both while living in DC: my opinion is that the Udvar-Hazy center has a much better collection, but I'd argue the NASM on the Mall is the better museum. There's a lot more information and things to learn versus just relying on the presence of artifacts. I felt that I had to take a guided tour at the Udvar-Hazy center in order to get the full experience.
  - waterproof 1y ago
    Those guided tours are so good though! You can learn so many cool stories and details and it's a different experience every time, so it's always fun to go back.
runako 1y ago
Also worth noting that it's free to go see the shuttle now. The proposed location charges $30-40 for adults and $25-$35 for children. $150 for a family of 4 to see the shuttle[1] feels steep? But also somehow taking a thing that is free/low-cost in most countries and making it expensive is on-brand for America, I guess. 1 - Yes, there are other things there, as there are at the free Smithsonian where the shuttle currently lives. For comparison, the Metropolitan Museum of Art is in New York City and kids enter free (adults are $30). Also, residents of the region are allowed to pay what they want for entry.
_heimdall 1y ago
The default should always be to leave something the way it is without good reason to change it. People really should follow that rule more often.
rtkwe 1y ago
If you're considering it that puts yet another reason to NOT move the shuttle, the situation in Houston isn't better. For Udvar Hazy you can get there purely on public transport 7 days a week unlike in Houston, there's only a bus option in Houston and it doesn't run on the weekends and takes even longer than the equivalent trip out to Udvar-Hazy (90-120 vs 120-180 minutes for Smithsonian [0] vs Houston locations [1]). [0] https://airandspace.si.edu/visit/udvar-hazy-center/directions https://airandspace.si.edu/visit/udvar-hazy-center/direction... [1] https://www.tripadvisor.com/FAQ_Answers-g56003-d669494-t2695887-Hi_Is_there_any_public_transportation_to_get.html https://www.tripadvisor.com/FAQ_Answers-g56003-d669494-t2695...
mcphage 1y ago
It's not that far out of Washington, it's still free (like the other Smithsonians in DC, although you have to pay a small fee for parking), and is an absolutely fantastic facility that will keep anyone entertained for hours if they have any interest at all in aircraft.
elil17 1y ago
I mean, the Space Center in Houston isn't really convenient for visitors either. It's about as far from Houston as Udvar-Hazy is from DC.
- rtkwe 1y ago
  Farther if you're looking at public transit travel times. It's ~90-120 minutes by the train-bus combo you have to take for Udvar and 120-180 for the bus only service (no weekend service afaik) for SC Houston. The one upside may be that if you're visiting Houston you're probably already renting a car because their public transit is worse than DC's.
singleshot_ 1y ago
> not very convenient for visitors to access. Seems like a great reason not to put it all the way out in Texas

by ghaff 1y ago

ceejayoz 1y ago

They don't even properly take care of the one they've got; the high-fidelity Shuttle replica and the 747 carrier aircraft already at Houston are outside in an area that gets hurricanes. https://spacecenter.org/exhibits-and-experiences/independence/ https://spacecenter.org/exhibits-and-experiences/independenc...

potato3732842 1y ago
Having seen the Kennedy space center museum and Dulles Smithsonian (and downtown Smithsonian) I think that having the vehicles outdoors in the "natural climate" in which they operated makes them hit way harder even if it's worse for preservation.
- ceejayoz 1y ago
  The "natural climate" for the Shuttle was something like 99.5% indoors in a hangar / VAB, 0.4% space, and 0.1% outside. And they definitely didn't leave it out during hurricanes. I'd rather it hit pretty hard for much longer.
  - potato3732842 1y ago
    I've seen it in Dulles and I've seen Kennedy Space Center museum and I'm telling you that looking up at a rocket in the Florida sun is a far more impactful experience than seeing the shuttle in Dulles. If it were up to me I'd park it on a taxiway (or stick it in the parking lot at Dulles, lol) and give tours.
    - ceejayoz 1y ago
      And I'm telling you that looking up at a decrepit, collapsing rocket in a few decades would be a bit less impactful. Short-term (and subjective) benefit for long-term complete loss of the Shuttle eventually. The Smithsonian wants to be able to show this thing off a thousand years from now, if they can. Outdoor storage for priceless, fragile artifacts is just plain odd.
      - potato3732842 1y ago
        Move it indoors in 50yr then. There will be new artifacts.
        ceejayoz 1y ago
        > Move it indoors in 50yr then. After irreparable damage? > There will be new artifacts. There are unlikely to be new Shuttles.
        potato3732842 1y ago
        All the stuff in the rocket garden is doing fairly fine. You're making a mountain out of a mole hill here to justify a preconceived opinion.
        ceejayoz 1y ago
        > All the stuff in the rocket garden is doing fairly fine. Those have required extensive repairs from weather-induced corrosion etc. (https://www.collectspace.com/news/news-070218a-saturn-ib-rocket-restoration.html https://www.collectspace.com/news/news-070218a-saturn-ib-roc...) or complete replacement (https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna39387412 https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna39387412 "deemed too far gone to be refurbished") and are far less fragile than the Shuttle to the elements. Even then, there's a time limit and they're hoping to move them inside: "'We have discussed enclosing it, but those plans are not finalized yet,' said Protze. 'We brought the best of the best in to redo the rocket, inside and out, and so I feel confident that if it was to stay outside, it would be good for another 20 to 25 years.'"
jkestner 1y ago
! That's high-fidelity enough that I didn't realize it was a replica when I visited (but yeah, nagged at the back of my head that it was sitting out there). If it weren't for the cost of moving and admission and care, I'd say sure, Johnson Space Center deserves one of them. I'd rather spend the money on new probe launches.

the_snooze 1y ago

It's unclear how you'd even move the thing safely. The shuttle-carrier 747s are literal museum pieces now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuttle_Carrier_Aircraft#Retirement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuttle_Carrier_Aircraft#Retir... I guess they can disassemble/reassemble it or move it whole with huge flatbed trucks, but both risk damaging the vehicle.

bamboozled 1y ago
When the lord is on your side, you can work wonders my son.
ceejayoz 1y ago
They'd likely move it via barge; that's how Houston got their current Shuttle (replica) from Florida. Getting it to the Potomac would probably be the toughest bit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Independence#Space_Center_Houston https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Independence#Spa...

saghm 1y ago

Given that the current administration literally issued an executive order claiming that the Smithsonian is bogus, it seems plausible this is just part of an attempt to diminish its stature: https://www.npr.org/2025/03/ https://www.npr.org/2025/03/ Not long ago it would have been hard for me to imagine a president having a vendetta against specific museums, but given how transparent the executive order is, the only question is whether he's petty enough to try to do something like this. Unfortunately I think it's pretty clear from past precedent that this is pretty plausible.

water-data-dude 1y ago
The current administration is trying to emphasize certain parts of our history and diminish others. If I had to take a wild guess, I'd say it's something along the lines of "this was something the public sector did with taxpayer money that advanced science. We should deemphasize anything positive that came out of it because it casts public sector projects and science in a good light"

fluidcruft 1y ago

If they're going to move any of them to Texas, it should be Enterprise. It's already on the top deck of an aircraft carrier.

peaseagee 1y ago
In a climate controlled hanger on a museum.
- fluidcruft 1y ago
  Significantly cheaper and safer to move it to a barge/boat/whatever and float it most of the way.

moron4hire 1y ago

However, the Udvar Hazy annex is an amazing space. It's absolutely huge, with lots of amazing pieces on display. It's also where the Smithsonian performs restoration on the aircraft in its collection. I doubt it would be possible to put something like that in DC.

potato3732842 1y ago

>But it may be worth pointing out that this annex to the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum is out by Dulles and not very convenient for visitors to access. It's also the better campus IMO. The one in DC is basically a speed run of the stuff you see in a kids book that just highlights all the "firsts". The one at Dulles has all the cool displays of big or technologically unique stuff. I agree access isn't great if you're trying to shoehorn it into a visit to all the typical DC monuments type stuff.

ghaff 1y ago
Oh, I don't disagree. Though it took me ages to get there because I sort of needed to arrange a long enough layover in Dulles to grab an Uber and spend a few hours. You need a lot of space for a really good aviation museum. It's no coincidence that the one in the Seattle area is on a Boeing campus near their big plant.
- rtkwe 1y ago
  Yeah it's impractical to have a big aviation museum in a downtown, the planes just take up so much space. Another really good one is the Air Force museum in Dayton Ohio.
dabluecaboose 1y ago
Having been a frequent patron of both while living in DC: my opinion is that the Udvar-Hazy center has a much better collection, but I'd argue the NASM on the Mall is the better museum. There's a lot more information and things to learn versus just relying on the presence of artifacts. I felt that I had to take a guided tour at the Udvar-Hazy center in order to get the full experience.
- waterproof 1y ago
  Those guided tours are so good though! You can learn so many cool stories and details and it's a different experience every time, so it's always fun to go back.

runako 1y ago

Also worth noting that it's free to go see the shuttle now. The proposed location charges $30-40 for adults and $25-$35 for children. $150 for a family of 4 to see the shuttle[1] feels steep? But also somehow taking a thing that is free/low-cost in most countries and making it expensive is on-brand for America, I guess. 1 - Yes, there are other things there, as there are at the free Smithsonian where the shuttle currently lives. For comparison, the Metropolitan Museum of Art is in New York City and kids enter free (adults are $30). Also, residents of the region are allowed to pay what they want for entry.

_heimdall 1y ago

The default should always be to leave something the way it is without good reason to change it. People really should follow that rule more often.

rtkwe 1y ago

If you're considering it that puts yet another reason to NOT move the shuttle, the situation in Houston isn't better. For Udvar Hazy you can get there purely on public transport 7 days a week unlike in Houston, there's only a bus option in Houston and it doesn't run on the weekends and takes even longer than the equivalent trip out to Udvar-Hazy (90-120 vs 120-180 minutes for Smithsonian [0] vs Houston locations [1]). [0] https://airandspace.si.edu/visit/udvar-hazy-center/directions https://airandspace.si.edu/visit/udvar-hazy-center/direction... [1] https://www.tripadvisor.com/FAQ_Answers-g56003-d669494-t2695887-Hi_Is_there_any_public_transportation_to_get.html https://www.tripadvisor.com/FAQ_Answers-g56003-d669494-t2695...

mcphage 1y ago

It's not that far out of Washington, it's still free (like the other Smithsonians in DC, although you have to pay a small fee for parking), and is an absolutely fantastic facility that will keep anyone entertained for hours if they have any interest at all in aircraft.

elil17 1y ago

I mean, the Space Center in Houston isn't really convenient for visitors either. It's about as far from Houston as Udvar-Hazy is from DC.

rtkwe 1y ago
Farther if you're looking at public transit travel times. It's ~90-120 minutes by the train-bus combo you have to take for Udvar and 120-180 for the bus only service (no weekend service afaik) for SC Houston. The one upside may be that if you're visiting Houston you're probably already renting a car because their public transit is worse than DC's.

singleshot_ 1y ago

> not very convenient for visitors to access. Seems like a great reason not to put it all the way out in Texas