Apollo 11 Launch Tower Rescue Effort

Apollo 11 by Can+it+run+Linux · 2004-02-09 04:31 · Score: 4, Interesting

Did you know that there was more computing power in the original Palm Pilot than was used in Apollo 11 to get the astronauts to the moon? I think that's pretty cool. I mean, they were able to NAVIGATE OUTER SPACE with less technology than we use to KEEP A DATEBOOK.

So I'm thinkin', can it run Linux?

Re:Apollo 11 by kfg · 2004-02-09 04:57 · Score: 5, Insightful

I keep my datebook in a pocket spiral bound notebook I picked up in a drugstore for $.69. I find it superiour technology for the task. Pen ready and everything.

Sometimes we use our technology because it's there, not because it's really ideal for the task.

Comes to that I keep the exact same model slide rule the astronauts carried on my desk. If you know how to use one it's still sometimes faster and easier than a calculator or a computer, and the batteries never wear down.

It also keeps me a bit sharper than I might otherwise be. Slide rules require an understanding of mathematics to use. I quote from my user manual:

"When people have difficulty in learning to use a slide rule, usually it is not because the instrument is difficult to use. The reason is likely to be that they don't understand the mathematics on which the instrument is based, or the formulas they are trying to evaluate. "

I don't recommend that people dispose of their calculators, but I do think it would be instructive if everyone at least learned a bit about using a slide rule. It has a way of showing whether you really understand the the math you're doing, or whether you're using the calculator as a crutch for said understanding, as opposed to using it as a tool.

KFG
Re:Apollo 11 by malraid · 2004-02-09 05:09 · Score: 5, Funny

That's good...That's why my datacenter is made up of abaccuses. Not a single blue screen. And considering how stupid our users are, it doesn't make much of a difference. They don't understand the "underlying math" It's fun when you implement a brand new buzz word compatible service, and everyone is happy to have it, but none has the slightest clue what it's for, much less how to use it.

You really need very little technology to get by. Pentium 4 3GHz and 512 MB of RAM to play freecell??? Come on...

--
please excuse my apathy
Re:Apollo 11 by dnoyeb · 2004-02-09 05:13 · Score: 1

dude, calculators perform very simple mathematics. One has to understand the math to even use the thing.

as for a palm pilot, its far superior to your silly pen and paper. i could give you a long list of valuable usages, but if all u need is pen and paper, i fear your responsibilities are low, or your available time is high anyway.

This is akin to the "design webpages in notepad" philosophy.
Re:Apollo 11 by Basehart · 2004-02-09 05:22 · Score: 1

"exact same model slide rule the astronauts"

Pickett N600-ES
Re:Apollo 11 by kfg · 2004-02-09 05:24 · Score: 1

On the other hand it requires a certain mathmatical understanding to play freecell if you expect to win.

Learning to use an abacus would have been the correct way of going about teaching the "New Math," which was otherwise a bit of a failure.

Perhaps better still would be learning Chisenbop, since it's harder to misplace your fingers than an abacus, and you can convert to octal by simply removing two of them.

Chisenbop

KFG
Re:Apollo 11 by Saeed+al-Sahaf · 2004-02-09 05:31 · Score: 1

Which calculator do you have? I still use my HP-41CV, it have many complicated calculations that I've programmed into it, including advanced calculus... Bought it in '82 for $450, new.

--
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
Re:Apollo 11 by kfg · 2004-02-09 05:38 · Score: 1

Another advantage of liking "obsolete" technology is that it can be had cheaply. I think I'm going to have to add a circular to my collection, and maybe replace the bamboo K&E that someone walked off with.

KFG
Re:Apollo 11 by Buran · 2004-02-09 05:42 · Score: 4, Interesting

The miniaturization of modern computers was originally done so that the Lunar Module could be fitted with a computer to allow it to reach the lunar surface. This computer had to process data from the landing radar as well as allow the astronauts to control the spacecraft.

Apollo 11 very nearly did not succeed in landing when the rendezvous radar (meant to be used only during rendezvous with the orbiting CSM) was accidentally left on, triggering a computer overload; these are the famous 1201 and 1202 alarm codes that you can hear called out in audio recordings of the final descent.

--
i am a soviet space shuttle
Re:Apollo 11 by kfg · 2004-02-09 05:50 · Score: 1

. . .if all u need is pen and paper, i fear your responsibilities are low, or your available time is high anyway.

Or my mental abilities are rather above yours.

Your volley.

KFG
Re:Apollo 11 by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 06:00 · Score: 0

You must have quite the mental abilities to beable to perform sin, cos, sqrt, e^x, ln, etc, in your head.
Re:Apollo 11 by Greedo · 2004-02-09 06:12 · Score: 3, Funny

I'd like to see you abacus-powered datacenter get /.-ed!

"Argh ... my fingers are bleeding!"

--
Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
Re:Apollo 11 by kfg · 2004-02-09 06:30 · Score: 1

You must have quite the mental abilities to beable to perform sin, cos, sqrt, e^x, ln, etc, in your head.

Indeed. Many have remarked on this ability, although it certainly isn't unique. If you understand the math you don't actually have to memorize the complete tables, just a relative handful of values and the rest can be produced from them. I'll note I do so a bit quicker with a slide rule though.

The applications of these functions to my date book are fairly trivial though (Hey, meet me for lunch at the cotangent of noon, 'K?), although combining my paper, pen and slide rule I can certainly wangle my way through computations complicated enough to send a man to the moon.

We all could back in the day you know.

Yes, if need be I can make a fire by banging two rocks together. The skill has even come in handy a few times. Using a match is easier though. I greatly prefer that technology. Using a TIG welder is is bit much though, don't you think?

KFG
Re:Apollo 11 by harrkev · 2004-02-09 07:21 · Score: 1

Yes, but I can switch a calculator between decimal and octal in a couple of keypresses.

With your method, going from decimal to octal is easy, but going the other way requires a visit to the emergency room. And I would not try it more than once. And if you leave it in octal mode for more than an hour, forget about ever going back to decimal.

I think that I will keep my calculator.

--
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
Re:Apollo 11 by lionchild · 2004-02-09 07:26 · Score: 1

I think if we took a close look at the technology in use today, it might frighten some folks to realize how much little leading edge technology is used.

Why? Because we really don't know what strange things are out there in space still. We're still afraid that invisible cosmic rays could blast through our spacecraft and flips the bits on our fancy hard drives. Some of our technology that we used in the Apollo missions we still use today, or slightly updated version of it. It works; thus it isn't broken; thus it shouldn't be replaced.

And frankly, when it comes to cost, you really don't want to gamble a multi-billion dollar craft on whether this new drive works in space, or is shielded enough. Perhaps with the off-the-shelf parts used for our Mars remotes, that'll change, and we'll become more confident with the hardware we take more and more for granted today.

But, until then...KFG's right, the slide-rule will always work, even in zero-gee.

--
Awk! Pieces of eight. Pieces of eight. Pieces of seven... ERROR: General Protection Fault. [Paroty Error.]
Re:Apollo 11 by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 07:27 · Score: 0

Oh, my bad... I thought you were talking about doing math stuff on pen and paper, not just date book stuff.
Re:Apollo 11 by Ralph+Wiggam · 2004-02-09 07:34 · Score: 1

"If you find this instrument difficult to use, it is because you are stupid, not because the instrument is difficult to use".

That should be standard text in all instrument manuals.

-B
Re:Apollo 11 by kfg · 2004-02-09 07:55 · Score: 1

Well, that's what you get for stepping right into the middle of a good, old fashioned, my dick is bigger than yours flame war. :)

However, having grown up using nothing but pen and paper, electronic calculators not yet existing, I learned the tricks of doing so, and yes, using certain superior mental abilties to work in my head.

Having already put in the time to do so I find the use of a cheap scientific calculator and a small notebook to be superior to a PDA on all counts.

I'm a great fan of spreadsheets though. I put them to all sorts of uses, some of which are "improper."

When I do so I find a either a paper ledger or a laptop superior to a PDA.

This is not to say that in the future I don't think a PDA that would attract my attention couldn't be made, but I tend to doubt one will be, because my usage will not likely match the "consumer market" for such devices.

KFG
Re:Apollo 11 by AhBeeDoi · 2004-02-09 08:07 · Score: 1

I'm still dumbfounded by Russell's paradox. But I'm gonna figure this out, ya know.
Re:Apollo 11 by kfg · 2004-02-09 08:09 · Score: 1

Well, I'd at least agree that that should be the only warning label that's required on ladders and hammers. Or at the very least "If you find this instrument difficult to use the people who raised you were stupid."

KFG
Re:Apollo 11 by kfg · 2004-02-09 09:29 · Score: 1

Well, if I want to leave the joke out you can switch to octal chisenbop by simply ignoring your thumbs. Duodecimal's a bit harder though, and you look a bit funny waving your elbows about or grabbing your tits while wiggling your fingers.

I think I'll keep my calculator as well.

I'll note, however, that on my bluewater boat I may carry a handheld GPS and I'm working on my own design of nav computer, but if you think I'm going out of sight of land without a sextant, slide rule, almanac and log table you're nuts.

The electronic stuff will fail; what's more it will most likely fail under stress, i.e. when it's proper functioning is most critical to survival.

When the lights went out this summer most of the stores in my city simply had to close. One convienient store whose manager remembers the "old days" got out some notebooks and simply started making sales manually. A lot of people were greatful for the ice.

If you have business records or a datebook that are absolutely critical, the stuff where you just have to close up shop if anything happens to the data, go ahead, back them up, but also print them.

Yes, I know that's heresy in the digital age, but it's what works.

KFG
Re:Apollo 11 by Stween · 2004-02-09 10:03 · Score: 1

Lovely; that's exactly what I wanted to say. I work in excess of 70 hours a week (full time uni, part time job), and pen & paper is all that's required.

It's surprisingly efficient. Ultimately disposable, too.
Re:Apollo 11 by mitheral · 2004-02-09 10:09 · Score: 2, Insightful

I keep my datebook in a pocket spiral bound notebook I picked up in a drugstore for $.69. I find it superiour technology for the task. Pen ready and everything.

Hard to grep a dead tree though.
Re:Apollo 11 by kfg · 2004-02-09 12:02 · Score: 1

Equally hard to riffle through a PDA.

KFG
Re:Apollo 11 by register_ax · 2004-02-09 21:02 · Score: 1

I think the stuff is mostly likely to fail when its proper fuctioning is most important is a result we are much more dependent on the device at that point. In other words, we are especially attentive to deviations in the device, and on a whole, very keen of any mishaps. Of course the device may just as well be functioning erratically when it isn't needed as well, we are just now aware of this fact, unfortunately a fact we would rather let go undiscovered.
That and we're much more keen to remember the failures rather than all the other times we have used it and it has succeeded in its task.
Anyway, our giant grocery store lost its power too for the afternoon a few summers back. The clerks got out the calculators and started making the sales without the 'beep ... beep ... beep ... ka-ching'. It was funny because the people had to stand in lines of 15 people long to get checked out and they were all upset. It was as if they were in hell or something. OK, to be fair, it was a bit hot, but what was it like 50 years ago? I wished people could have stopped and enjoyed that brief 20 minutes where time slowed to a crawl as it was back in the good ole days(TM).
I'm not some environmentalist freak, but people ought to enjoy life rather than being so damn bitter. It was as if they enjoyed that right of being able to complain. Yuck.

OMG by SparafucileMan · 2004-02-09 04:32 · Score: 2, Funny

"save this piece of America's history"

Great, just what America needs, another huge-assed phallus.

Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 04:34 · Score: 0

Why? Does the giant ding-dong shape make you feel inferior?
Re:OMG by Mononoke · 2004-02-09 04:35 · Score: 0, Flamebait

Great, just what America needs, another huge-assed phallus.
Well, we lost our two best-known ones. We'd better act fast.

--
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
Re:OMG by fleener · 2004-02-09 05:11 · Score: 4, Insightful

Save a historic building? Sure. I can see the economic and cultural benefit to a community. Save a launch tower? I see huge ongoing expenses and very little benefit except to a few museum goers who would just as easily be served by a photo. There are more important, more valuable pieces of space history to preserve. Aren't there?
Re:OMG by Buran · 2004-02-09 05:46 · Score: 3, Insightful

There is little left of the Apollo hardware in its original form. While there are three Saturn Vs still in existence, they are lying on their sides in museums, leaving little real impression of how big the Saturn 5 truly was compared with today's spacecraft. (They are in Houston, Huntsville, and Titusville.) Not until the fiberglass replica was erected in Huntsville (where one of the original rockets still lies to this day) did I really comprehend its size, even though I am a space buff and intricately familiar with many of the details of this vehicle, including the size specifications for it (and today's Space Shuttle.)

The Vehicle Assembly Building, transport crawler, and launch pads still exist but today service the Space Shuttle (and the original red launch towers have given way to the much shorter gray Shuttle towers), leaving only the VAB's sheer size to give a hint of what once was.

I believe this is important to keep. We once took pride in the fact that we could send people to touch the Moon if we chose to. We need to remind ourselves of that, and of the fact that we one day will do it again.

--
i am a soviet space shuttle
Re:OMG by Raul654 · 2004-02-09 05:59 · Score: 2, Funny

Great, just what America needs, another huge-assed phallus.

Yea, but it still doesn't compare to Florida

--

To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
Re:OMG by mbbac · 2004-02-09 06:09 · Score: 1

Name one.

--
mbbac
Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 06:59 · Score: 0

seriously - i woulda thought the one sitting in the white house would keep us set for years.....
Re:OMG by sadomikeyism · 2004-02-09 07:11 · Score: 1

It would be a far more fitting tribute to the Apollo 11 astronauts to invest the $40 million in a company involved in the X-Prize competition. Making space travel an everyday experience for normal people is a much more worthy goal than propping up a toxic hunk of rust as just one more useless Florida tourist trap.

--
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves
Re:OMG by monkeyfinger · 2004-02-09 07:31 · Score: 1

"Florida is America's wang".
Homer Simpson.
Re:OMG by YCrCb · 2004-02-09 07:42 · Score: 2, Interesting

I had an chance a while back to run around the Vehicle Assembly building for the Saturn V 2nd stage. Photos, or anything else can't replace the live experience.

I vote for saving it.
Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 09:40 · Score: 0

"Not until the fiberglass replica was erected in Huntsville (where one of the original rockets still lies to this day) did I really comprehend its size, even though I am a space buff and intricately familiar with many of the details of this vehicle, including the size specifications for it (and today's Space Shuttle.)"

So should the sub base in Groton have a fiberglass replica of the Nautilus standing on end, so people can "comprehend its size"?

That's silly. Size is size.
Re:OMG by SaveTheLUT · 2004-02-09 14:28 · Score: 1

Come to the dedication in a few years time and share a glass of champaign with me at the top of the tower. Then decide for yourself. I've walked on this tower and it inspired me more than the rocket! It's certainly far more complex and to me is even more of a wonder of what we can achieve. And it represents the last item of unchanged, recoverable Apollo Hardware (the only other being the tiny Command Module which splashed into the sea) from the Apollo 11 flight that we could use to pay tribute to one of the most incredible achievements the world has ever witnessed. I think a Monument is appropriate for such a significant event - especially if it can create the kind of inspiration in people which I was able to get... I can't think of a better monument to those people than this. Ross B Tierney, Chief Operating Officer, The Space Restoration Society, www.savethelut.org
Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-10 09:58 · Score: 0

"Great, just what America needs, another huge-assed phallus." Since you asked:
. ____ .// ..7 .(_,_/\ . \ .. \ . .\ .. \ . __\ .. \__ . (,,, \ ,,,) . \_____\__/
Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-10 15:01 · Score: 0

Yeah, so, save a spacesuit, not an ugly mountain of metal that will cost millions just to salvage and decontaminate, not to mention the millions to restore. Yeah, let's burn more money.
Re:OMG by fleener · 2004-02-10 15:03 · Score: 1

Only one? OK. An Apollo spacesuit. Far more important, impressive, and practical than a polluting hunk of metal that NO ONE cares about, or it wouldn't be falling apart and harming the environment. Yeah, let's spend millions to repair the environment and then millions more to restore this, us, metal tower.

I think ... by B3ryllium · 2004-02-09 04:32 · Score: 5, Funny

I think that all of Man's great erections should be cherished.

Re:I think ... by ari_j · 2004-02-09 06:55 · Score: 1

Somewhere I have a baseball cap from Killdeer Erectors in Killdeer, ND, replete with their slogan: "Killdeer Erectors - The Best Erection in Town"
Re:I think ... by thedillybar · 2004-02-09 07:02 · Score: 1

What's the current bid?

Sell it. by heironymouscoward · 2004-02-09 04:33 · Score: 5, Interesting

Cut it into small pieces, 5" square, auction them on ebay. It will raise money and give millions of people a piece of history. I wish someone'd done this with the Berlin Wall, with Sadam's statue, and with the wreckage of the WTC. Come to think of it, it'd be a cool way of disposing of other problems too. Care to buy a small piece of Daryl?

--
Ceci n'est pas une signature

Re:Sell it. by Polkyb · 2004-02-09 04:35 · Score: 5, Funny

Ahhh.. But what is then to stop the Chinese from buying all the bits and reassembling them to launch their own craft...

--
I've never shoed a horse, but I once told a donkey to piss off!
Re:Sell it. by stephenisu · 2004-02-09 04:35 · Score: 1

I assume you are being sarcastic, I have a piece of each. And no I do not want a piece of Daryl. Perhaps a piece of his wife, in front of him, but thats about it.

--
Sigs? We don't need no stinking sigs!
Re:Sell it. by WindBourne · 2004-02-09 04:40 · Score: 1

They did it cheaper with Concrete (and it will last longer).

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:Sell it. by lelitsch · 2004-02-09 04:43 · Score: 3, Informative

Regardless of the fact that the Berlin Wall came down before eBay even existed, that was exactly what happened to it. It got cut up in small pieces and they were sold all over the place. Actually, they still are. Just go to ebay, search for Berlin Wall and you can buy a lot of bits of concrete. Some even authenticated.
Re:Sell it. by roystgnr · 2004-02-09 04:44 · Score: 2, Funny

Care to buy a small piece of Daryl?
Ahhh.. But what is then to stop the Chinese from buying all the bits and reassembling them to launch their own craft...

The smell?
Re:Sell it. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2004-02-09 04:45 · Score: 0, Flamebait

You mean that the Saturn towers - like the WTC steel - constitute criminal evidence that must be disposed of to hide a President's complicity in crime?

--
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Re:Sell it. by Jin+Wicked · 2004-02-09 04:48 · Score: 4, Funny

Yeah, that's all we need is auctioning off rusty, dangerous bits of metal to John Q. Public, so they can cut their thumb on it and have it get horribly infected, then try to sue the pants off NASA. =P~

--
My Webcomic: Asylum on 5th Street
Re:Sell it. by wwest4 · 2004-02-09 04:53 · Score: 1

i think they DID do this with the Berlin wall.
Re:Sell it. by asoap · 2004-02-09 05:11 · Score: 1

I tottally agree with you.
Not many people will go to see this tower. $40 million dollars is way to much to fix it, and that doesn't even count in maintenance.
If any thing is to big to preserve, and if it's not really worth it to preserve in the first place, then cut it up! Sell it to the geeks that want a piece of it. Make some money so they can fund new projects.
I also wish NASA would do this with that funky material that is made up of 99.9% nothing. I'd like to get my hands on some of that stuff.

--
Treat me like a marketing stat, and I'll treat your movie like a series of ones and zeros
Re:Sell it. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 05:11 · Score: 0

I wonder, was this the low UID that was sold? Or, perhaps more likely, conspiracy trolls have been with us from the very beginning?
Re:Sell it. by Tassach · 2004-02-09 05:24 · Score: 1

And those pieces of metal could be sharpened and used as weapons for criminal and terrorist acts! We must have strict metal control laws. Clearly we won't be safe until the general public is forbidden to own any weapon technology more dangerous than a plastic spork.

--
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
Re:Sell it. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 05:44 · Score: 0

It's an idea. Sounds like a number of the most important parts are already on display somewhere (the crane at the top, the white room, etc.) Might be a good way to help NASA with their budget problems and fund a return to the moon.
Re:Sell it. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 05:52 · Score: 0

Worked for Pink Floyd...

http://www.pinkfloydz.com/division_belle.htm

"On 27 June 1994 The Division Belle was destroyed by a thunder storm while attached to a mooring pole. The envelope of the airship, which was a polyurethane-coated polyester fiber was salvaged and sold off to collectors."
Re:Sell it. by Richard_at_work · 2004-02-09 06:16 · Score: 2, Interesting

Yup, I know it well. I have a LOT of the Berlin wall, due to living there when it came down :) Out in my garage atm, I have a 1 meter square portion of the wall with a rather spectacular peice of grafiti on it, cost nearly $300 to get back into the country.

Aside from that, I have bags and bags of the stuff. I really must spread it about sometime, give everyone a peice of history. A friend grabbed an ENTIRE guard tower the day after the movement restrictions were lifted. He jsut wandered down there with his platoon of engineers and took it down, I have no idea what happened to it tho.
Re:Sell it. by 59Bassman · 2004-02-09 07:02 · Score: 1

I don't know that I would have agreed with selling the WTC wreckage (a bit to morbid, maybe?), but I think e-baying the launch tower is a cool idea.
Re:Sell it. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2004-02-09 08:50 · Score: 1

I was "here" before registration existed, and when "Chips & Dips" was hosted at UMich...

--
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Re:Sell it. by Chainsaw+Messiah · 2004-02-09 09:50 · Score: 1

I wish someone'd done this with the Berlin Wall,
They did. Have a nice little cardboard box with a piece of concrete in a small velvet pouch and certificate of authenticity. My friend's parents got it for me when they were on vacation .... in Arizona.

The Crazy Thing Is... by N8F8 · 2004-02-09 04:33 · Score: 5, Interesting

I was flying into Melbourne Florida airpost last week and honestly Cape Canaveral appears barely developed. Hard to imagine they need the room that bad.

--
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power

Re:The Crazy Thing Is... by shystershep · 2004-02-09 04:43 · Score: 4, Funny

RTFA. It's an evironmental issue, not a space issue (no pun intended . . . well, okay, maybe a little bit).

--
The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
Re:The Crazy Thing Is... by nolife · 2004-02-09 04:57 · Score: 1

Ask the petition signers how much they want to donate in cash to maintain the unit in a safe standing. If NASA gets enough money to maintain for a few more years then great.
Problem though is a signature is easier to donate then actual cash to fund the project.

--
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
Re:The Crazy Thing Is... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 05:14 · Score: 0

Ah, no it's not an environmental issue, but a defense contractor issue (i.e. need funds!). Gotta love those govvy contractors with their ideas...
Re:The Crazy Thing Is... by Almost-Retired · 2004-02-09 15:15 · Score: 1

That you are correct!

Many years ago, the color of the paint we were required to use on tall towers for daytime aviation visibility contained rather large amounts of red lead oxide and other such obnoxious chemical dyes. Some of it was so bad that tower painters had skin cancers 2" across on their arms from the constant, getting dripped or rubbed on them, contact. Some of them were so gung ho that they used those big shaggy car wash mitts, and dipped their whole arm in a 5 gallon bucket to paint towers with. My thoughts were, yeah its fast, but at what cost to you personally. I never got the point across to any of them. I presume that it eventually killed them because I never saw the same painters 2 paint jobs in a row until the paint itself was changed.

Even though that paint has been supplanted now with alkhyde resin stuff with a slightly different orange color that is twice as brite due to self flourescense, the same effect that makes your white shirt really really bright white, and now lasts 2 to 3 x longer, the amount of that old paint that leached off into the ground around those towers means that it will be another 40 years before we can actually have good grass growing there. At one tower I'm familiar with, the grass on the downwind side is now about 10 feet closer to the tower than it was 20 years ago. With another 20 feet to go. And yes, we've repeatedly seeded the area.

The whole point of this story is that when that went up back in the 60's, the required by the FAA paint was indeed some ugly fscking stuff when looked at environmentally. Considering the sheer amount of it in that structure, I'm not in favor of continueing the insult to what is already a somewhat fragile piece of real estate I've been able to look at personally, particularly when its inside a designated wild life zone. Let the recyclers worry about how to remove that paint safely before its stuffed back into the furnace polluting the hell out of the neighborhood the recycler has to live in. Just make sure the recycling contract has such safe paint (and the galvanizeing under it) disposal written into it.

--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)

Money by WindBourne · 2004-02-09 04:34 · Score: 5, Insightful

I would rather see NASA devote money to building new towers and new space crafts that will get us to deep space with large payloads, then to see them spending money on saving this.

If these groups are truely interested in this, They should put their money where their mouths are.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.

Re:Money by pointzero · 2004-02-09 04:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

You got it all wrong. It would cost money to destroy it anyway... so technically, saving this doesn't cost anything.
Re:Money by Jin+Wicked · 2004-02-09 04:45 · Score: 2, Insightful

It costs money to clean up the environmental mess that it's already made, and it will cost more to keep it than dismantle it if you consider that it's only going to continue breaking down, rusting, and polluting the land around it and water table below. I'm sure the costs of restoration and upkeep far, far exceed the costs of simply destroying and dismantling it, or they wouldn't go to the trouble to begin with.

--
My Webcomic: Asylum on 5th Street
Re:Money by Billy+the+Mountain · 2004-02-09 05:15 · Score: 4, Interesting

Artificial Reef:

Decontaminate it and sink it into the bay. That way, it will do two things: 1. Create fish habitat, encouraging the growth of endangered species of fish and 2. Provide a diver's mecca with historical significance.

BTM

--
That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
Re:Money by pocopoco · 2004-02-09 06:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

The article says 2 million to clean it up, 40 million to preserve it. So the "saving this doesn't cost anything" post above is wrong by a factor of 20...
Re:Money by josh_freeman · 2004-02-09 08:21 · Score: 1

That would probably not be a bad idea. It certainly would be a boon to the local diving industry if the drop it on the Atlantic Coast, since there is very little good diving in North Florida. They are already going to have to decontaminate it to sell it for scrap. The only disadvantage for NASA is that the wouldn't get the revenue from selling it for scrap or on E-bay.

The big technical problem would be getting the structure deep enough to sink it, and getting it there in one piece so it isn't a pile of scaffolding when they get it on the bottom.

--Josh
Re:Money by kitzilla · 2004-02-09 09:45 · Score: 1

I'm a diver and love artificial reefs. But I wonder about the suitability of a launch tower. It's contaminated, and could be ferociously expensive to sufficiently decontaminate for sinking. There's also the nature of its construction: can you imagine a more efficient diver trap, with all those struts, crossmembers, and protrusions?
Gotta think it would be cheaper and safer to sink *several* retired vessels, instead. The Navy is just days from designating a site for the decommissioned aircraft carrier USS Oriskany to be sunk as a reef, and there are a couple more old flattops in the pipeline. Those will be more interesting dives, i think: less environmentally risky, and not as likely to claim the lives of unwary divers.

--
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
Re:Money by thogard · 2004-02-09 12:33 · Score: 1

It didn't cost that much to save the stuff at the Air Force museum thats just a few miles away from where the tower is now.

It sounds like there are have been a few gravy train proposals so far and thats where the figures come from. If NASA published this under the SBIR program, I'm guessing you could find solutions that cost far less.
Re:Money by SaveTheLUT · 2004-02-09 13:45 · Score: 1

For the record, this will NOT use any of NASA's money. We want NASA to dediceate their resource to the job of putting people and craft 'up there' just as much as anyone. This is a privately funded restoration effort we are working on right now. Ross B Tierney. Chief Operating Officer The Space Restoration Society www.savethelut.org
Re:Money by WindBourne · 2004-02-09 13:53 · Score: 1

If this is privately funded, I think that it is a great idea. I would find it hard to believe that NASA would say no to it.

Good Luck with it

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.

Sign the petition by shystershep · 2004-02-09 04:34 · Score: 4, Insightful

There's just over 2000 signatures on their petition. If there aren't ten times that many by lunch, I'm going to lose all faith in Slashdot.

--
The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein

Re:Sign the petition by happyfrogcow · 2004-02-09 04:42 · Score: 3, Interesting

Is it really that important to save? Recycle it, sell it, maybe. But save it? Bleh. Save rainforests, but old peices of construction? Take a chunk out and put it in a museum somewhere.
Re:Sign the petition by shystershep · 2004-02-09 04:56 · Score: 4, Insightful

Golly. I can't imagine what it would be like if anybody actually RTFA!! Nobody is asking NASA to foot the bill for the preservation. They are simply trying to get a stay of execution for the LUT to give them time to raise funds.

"Oh, but it's old and useless. They should just get rid of it, and maybe keep a chunk for a museum." Sure. It's nice to know people have some historical perspective. Pyramids? Pah, they're just taking up space. Sistine Chapel? Just take a picture and junk the original. It's too much bother keeping it in good shape. Textbooks are so much more engaging than actually getting a chance to physically see a piece of history, after all.

--
The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
Re:Sign the petition by joebok · 2004-02-09 05:06 · Score: 2, Insightful

I'm a sci-fi buff and I would like nothing better than to see us get back into manned exploration. Even so at first I was dubious about the merits of saving a rusted tower... but then I remembered my visit to the Kennedy Space Center several years ago. The center, and especially the Saturn V exhibit was fantastic - informative and inspirational. Preserving the tower would remind us of the scale and reality of what we have achieved was. Amidst movies and special effects I think it's easy to forget how hard we worked to get to the moon - and how much more work there is to do.

That being said, I'm not sure it should be NASA's money to do it - people like me ought to pony up some bucks to make it happen!
Re:Sign the petition by AeroIllini · 2004-02-09 05:50 · Score: 1

It seems like this is more of an environmental issue than it is a preservation issue. But just because the parts are lying rusting in the grass, that doesn't mean we should abandon what could conceivably be the most important piece of human history to future generations who are living on Moon Base Alpha. If they would spend all this money to disassemble it and cart it away, why not cart it to the backyard of the National Air and Space Museum in D.C.? I'll bet the museum would be proud to display it, and the country would love to see it. It's 20% shorter than the Washington Monument, so there would be no competition there (I seem to have heard that there are no skyscrapers in Washington because of the monument -- correct me if I'm wrong, though).

The moon landing was the single largest civilian effort in modern history, and we should be proud to display our trophies.

And, of course, we can't forget the tram tour of Tranquility Base from Moon Base Alpha. I'll be first in line.

--
For security, the MD5 hash of this message and sig is 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
Re:Sign the petition by farrellj · 2004-02-09 05:53 · Score: 2, Insightful

Like the song "You don't know what've got 'til it's gone", this piece of history *is* important. We may not see it now, or in 100 years, but people will look dimly on us as we canabalize history...imagine if the various US flags that many hold so dear had been recycled into rags?!?!?! The Launch Tower was the finger that pointed to the Moon for all mankind...it should be saved!

ttyl
Farrell

--
CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
Re:Sign the petition by CriX · 2004-02-09 06:22 · Score: 1

Are there such things as anti-Petition Petitions?

I'd like to sign one against this waste of money. I like the previously mentioned idea of sinking it to make a nice fish habitat and historically significant diving ground. :-) Now that's clever! We should not divert any money from the new Moon/Mars vision.

--
Moderation: +1 pwnage
Re:Sign the petition by HedRat · 2004-02-09 06:28 · Score: 1

Amidst movies and special effects I think it's easy to forget how hard we worked to get to the moon

And we did it with Fortran programming and the lowest bidder hardware...quite a feat!
Re:Sign the petition by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 06:48 · Score: 0

You're saying a big chunk of scaffolding has the same historical significance as the Sistine Chapel or the Egyptian pyramids?
Look, this thing isn't terribly significant in the grand scheme of things. The last couple remaining Saturn Vs? Yeah, let's keep those. Those are historical.
I'll wager that the number of people interested in trekking to a Florida swamp to see a pile of rusted pipes and girders is quite a bit smaller than those who would like to see the pyramids or the Coliseum. Seeing "a piece of history" is all well and good, but this is like preserving the easel Da Vinci used to paint the Mona Lisa...
Re:Sign the petition by el-spectre · 2004-02-09 06:54 · Score: 1

Well... it's not only old and useless, but very likely unable to stand. If this were something that we had faith could stand for years, OK. But as is, it's been rusting for twenty+ years, and would probably fail during construction.

Reminds me of the folks who wanted to raise the titanic... never mind the fact that it'd probably disintegrate on the way up...

--
"Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
Re:Sign the petition by LWATCDR · 2004-02-09 07:39 · Score: 1

" Is it really that important to save? Recycle it, sell it, maybe. But save it? Bleh. Save rainforests, but old peices of construction? Take a chunk out and put it in a museum somewhere."
Your right, while where at it lets bulldoze the Pyramids they are after all nothing but giant tombstones. We could also clear out that stinking eyesore Stonehenge. What a waste of space for a calander. it is only an old pice of construction.
One of the shames of the human race is that we do not value our own history until it is two late. Someday people might look at that launch tower and think, this is where for the first time in all of history the human race left this planet and went to another clestral body. The first step off of Earth started here.

--
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Re:Sign the petition by Atryn · 2004-02-09 08:15 · Score: 1

...the most important piece of human history to future generations who are living on Moon Base Alpha
I agree completely. We shouls ship it to Moon Base Alpha at once and let them deal with it.

Seriously though, I agree with other posters that I am sick and tired of going to museums and watching documentaries on what we have done in the past. I am now much more interested in what can be done in the future with resources like the $40M cost to preserve the tower.

For example, that money would pay for 4 $10M X-prizes, right?

--
Come play Moral Decay!
Re:Sign the petition by happyfrogcow · 2004-02-09 08:50 · Score: 1

Thats a rediculous analogy... might as well save the carbon monoxide, or whatever toxic gasses were given off at launch time, as well. Those were the first gasses given off to propell the human race into space the first time we traveled to a different celestial body. There's no use for them, they are broken down from their original form and no one can reconstruct them, but there they are.

What would be better than to keep those results of the chemical process of burning rocket fuel would be to maintain a historical record of what that rocket fuel was and how it was made.

The same for the launch tower. Maintain a historical record of it's blueprints and other specifications. The original is not needed anymore.
Re:Sign the petition by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 09:11 · Score: 0

The Launch Tower was the finger that pointed to the Moon for all mankind...
Actually, the launch tower was the middle finger we raised to Ivan and his bleeping Sputnik. We might have made a lot of noise about it being for all mankind, but it was a gesture of America's military might.
"One small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind - except those dirty Commie bastards."
Re:Sign the petition by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 09:13 · Score: 0

If this kind of thing doesn't matter, then why are so many people building replicas of the Wright brothers' first working airplane? Maybe it doesn't matter to you, but it matters to me, and to plenty of other people, too.
Re:Sign the petition by Skuld-Chan · 2004-02-09 09:41 · Score: 1

It is important in the sense that mankind's greatest, most historical journey (some would even argue technological triumph) at the very least took off from that very tower.

To me in that perspective yes it is an important monument to our legacy and the history of USA.
Re:Sign the petition by sh00z · 2004-02-09 10:43 · Score: 1

I'd like to sign one against this waste of money.
As a space geek, I concur. There's a bad analogy in the story. It says "Made up of space history buffs, the group [Space Restoration Society] likens the Launch Umbilical Tower -- also known by the NASA acronym LUT -- to the piers from which Christopher Columbus set sail from in Palos de la Frontera, Spain with the Nina, Pinta and Santa Maria."
Not so. The "piers," or launch pads, are still in use by the Space Shuttle program. The LUT's are more like the ropes that held the ships to the piers. Let 'em go, I say.
Re:Sign the petition by LWATCDR · 2004-02-10 04:50 · Score: 1

Why is rediculous? Stonehenge serves no useful function at this time. The VAB , lauch tower, and Block house are all historical places.
Why not just take pictures of Stonehenge? The origanal is not needed anymore and it could make a good location for a Burger King. Why not? Because it is old and a reminder of the effort, skills, and hopes of the people of that time. Much the same as the launch tower.

--
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.

Please excuse the igorance. by bad+enema · 2004-02-09 04:34 · Score: 0, Interesting

As a non US citizen, I'm quite confused as to NASA can't get to the moon in less than 15 years when we've already gotten there 35 years ago.

If someone would briefly explain why, it would be appreciated.

Re:Please excuse the igorance. by sean.peters · 2004-02-09 04:36 · Score: 4, Insightful

The program has been dormant for so many years that a lot of the infrastructure, institutional knowledge, etc, has been lost. NASA will essentially have to start from scratch. Sean
Re:Please excuse the igorance. by Hemos · 2004-02-09 04:36 · Score: 3, Interesting

Because the rocket systems that NASA used to get to the Moon in the first place were discontinued, basically.

--
Yeah, I'm that guy.
Re:Please excuse the igorance. by WindBourne · 2004-02-09 04:37 · Score: 1

Even better, is the fact that we did it in under 9 years. Truth is, to get there faster requires more money up front and less politics (and less political appointees). Neither of these will happen based on how things work these days.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:Please excuse the igorance. by Pionar · 2004-02-09 04:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

Simply because we don't have anything today that can do that. The shuttle can't land and take off from the moon.

Also, the 15 years includes Mars, not just the moon. I personally don't see any reason to go back to the moon. What else is there to learn about it that requires us to risk human life?
Re:Please excuse the igorance. by bad+enema · 2004-02-09 04:42 · Score: 1, Interesting

You mean they didn't bother to document anything?? Doesn't this mean that NASA's progress has not only stagnized since the end of the Cold War but may have been pushed back a step or two?

Yes, I suppose back then that the political pressure to win the space race must have sped things up. But even today, with better technology, more efficient fuel sources, it's a shame to see that co-operation cannot get us further faster than competition.
Re:Please excuse the igorance. by rootus-rootus · 2004-02-09 04:54 · Score: 3, Interesting

Well, there are a LOT of reasons to go back to the moon, from mining and He3 collection, to a stable RF isolated place to listen to the universe with radio telescopes, to having a 1/6 G environment that means building and launching craft from Luna will be many times cheaper ( a space elevator on the moon to Lunar orbit won't be nearly as tall as one here on earth (we desperately need one here)or using nuclear or chemical rockets... All of these things, both economic and scientific, mean that the moon is a Great place to build a base and eventually a community. It is truly the jumping off point for the Solar System. Mars may hold scientific curiosity, but what does it mean to getting even further out? Building the craft to explore the Solar System (and eventually exploit resources out there) can't be done from the surface of the Earth. Just too damned expensive.

--
The moral of the story is: "Always remember to mount a scratch monkey."
Re:Please excuse the igorance. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 05:11 · Score: 1, Insightful

OF COURSE everything is documented! But what do you do with a schematic that calls for a core memory, General Radio connectors and 93 ohm balanced transmission line?
You have to build the factories to build core memories, re-tool to make GR connectors, and figure out who will make that cable!
"Just use modern stuff" you say? Do you have any idea what is takes to make something space-rated? Who's going to take responsibility for changing things on a 40 year old design that worked?
Re:Please excuse the igorance. by LionMage · 2004-02-09 08:07 · Score: 1

One of the problems is that the last big space race took place during the Cold War. As a result, knowledge was compartmentalized; no one person had enough knowledge to build an entire Saturn rocket. As I recall, there were three engineers who, together, had enough knowledge to reconstitute any part of the Saturn rocket program. (The Saturn was the launch vehicle used for the Apollo missions.) Of those people, most are dead.

Yes, there's documentation locked up in various places -- again, there isn't one single place for everything. You'd have to scour the entire country for the various pieces of plans and documents necessary to reconstitute the program.

And the fact is, much of the technology that was relied upon for our space program back in the 60's and 70's is now obsolete. It's unfortunate that NASA takes so long to go from concept to implementation -- usually by the time a design is approved and has gone through the necessary review and revision, much of the technology relied upon in said design is already obsolete. With the current pace of technology, this problem is exacerbated. So really, there are two problems -- one is to reduce the turn-around time on designs for space vehicles and other space-rated equipment, and the other is to come up with space-worthy replacements for the old technologies our space vehicles used to rely upon.

Already gone by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 04:35 · Score: 4, Interesting

Looks like the damn thing is already disassembled. Looks like the horse is already out of the barn. Space history is super-cool, but I find the spacecraft and human history to be much more compelling than all the nuts and bolts of the logistics. I guess I'm not a geek as I don't find this mostly-disassembled toxic tower to be very compelling.

Re:Already gone by Buran · 2004-02-09 05:55 · Score: 1

It has been disassembled for many years. This effort is to save it and possibly reassemble it for future exhibit, rather than melting it down or otherwise destroying it.

I have not read this linked article, but I am a space buff and have read about this on several other in-depth space news sites, so I'm familiar with this tower and just how long it has been lying there.

--
i am a soviet space shuttle
Re:Already gone by bwy · 2004-02-09 06:05 · Score: 1

I agree.

I've visited KSC several times as well as many other museums that have Apollo artifacts, capsules, etc. I think there is adequate tangible historical representation of the Apollo program to make sure that future generations do not forget this accomplishment. Some rusty launch tower isn't going to mean anything to anybody except perhaps a handful of geeks that have some other motive such as their direct involvement in the space program, etc.

My Earth to the Moon DVD box set means a hell of a lot more to me as a space geek than some rusty piece of crap. We could probably fish out the toilet paper the Apollo astronauts wiped with too but why would we?
Re:Already gone by SaveTheLUT · 2004-02-09 13:59 · Score: 2

I had the priviledge of examining the tower up close in the storage yard behind the O&C building at KSC last June and I'll guarantee you that the main structure is in good shape still. I have some photos from that visit here. Sure there's rust (its been sat in KSC's salt air for 21 years!)- but it's all surface stuff and nothing that can't be removed relatively easily. LUT 1 had to be taken off of the grey Launcher Platform so that it could be re-used for Shuttle launches. But the same happened to the other two LUT's too - most of those towers today form the backbones of the structures out at the Shuttle Pads and are still strong enough to withstand the effects from the shuttle SRB's during launch - even though they too were 'cut up' in a similar fashion to this. Ross B Tierney. Chief Operating Officer The Space Restoration Society www.savethelut.org

Re:It's just one tower. by andih8u · 2004-02-09 04:39 · Score: 2, Informative

"Florida Today has this story about the disposal of the last remaining Apollo Launch Tower

eesh

--

slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots

Saw it up and sell the pieces on EBay by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 04:40 · Score: 2, Interesting

Sure it's a piece of history, but it's also a huge hunk of metal that is no longer needed by NASA. Why shoul NASA be forced to spend money on preserving something that is taking up a lot of "space" (heh) and isn't being used?

A little overboard by FortKnox · 2004-02-09 04:41 · Score: 4, Insightful

The capsule is already in the smithsonian, so I think this is a bit overboard. Honestly, what is the advantage in saving the tower? If they pay for removing it and putting it somewhere else, then I say go for it. If it'll cost NASA more to save than destroying it, I say 'bring on the TNT!'

--
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!

A Piece of Darl by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 04:41 · Score: 0

Maybe one of his testes, to put on a fish hook and use for bait.

Re:A Piece of Darl by Psiren · 2004-02-09 04:47 · Score: 1

Maybe one of his testes, to put on a fish hook and use for bait.

I'm sure there are laws against contaminating rivers with industrial waste... ;-)

What about the money? by rjstanford · 2004-02-09 04:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

If they don't want it, don't just bitch and moan - pony up some cash (collectively, presumably) and buy the damn thing. We shouldn't force government agencies to keep large, expensive, hazardous equipment around for notstaligic reasons. That's what museums are for. Its the same with some "classic" buildings - for example, when the Dr. Pepper plant in Dallas was going to be knocked down by a developer, he offered to sell it back the "outraged community" for the bargain price that he paid for it - so that the new owner could do with it as they saw fit and, presumably, not demolish it. There were no takers. Funny how when its someone's money rather than just their signature, that support for these vague initiatives just dries up...

Besides, what would you do with it? Other than try hard to keep your liability insurance paid up while not letting anyone get to close to it, of course...

--
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!

Re:What about the money? by garcia · 2004-02-09 04:58 · Score: 4, Interesting

funny... U-Lands, Gopher Munitions the University of Minnesota "bought" this land from the government years ago after it was abandoned, unfinished, after WWII. Multiple parties have been interested in buying the land but have been ignored. So why should this particular "piece of history" be preserved w/o being torn down?

Side note, I visited the unfinished sister version of this structure in Rosemount, MN (see here and here). It's in ruins, covered in graffiti, and is just rotting away.

Why on our dime (the University of Minnesota is a state funded operation mind you...)?
Re:What about the money? by cubicledrone · 2004-02-09 05:08 · Score: 1

Funny how when its someone's money rather than just their signature, that support for these vague initiatives just dries up...

Well, there might be some money for it if half the population wasn't working part-time stocking the paper towel shelf at Wal-Mart.

--
Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
Re:What about the money? by swb · 2004-02-09 06:55 · Score: 1

Part of the Rosemount site was used as a storage facility by the U, at least until 1990 when I last visited. I worked for a U department and one very cold winter day, another student worker and myself took the department van loaded with shit (an old folding machine, a mimeograph machine, etc) down there to "store" in what looked like an old wooden Army barracks.

I seem to recall reading in the local paper that the site has some problems with contamination (PCBs, maybe?) from old junk dumped there.

What was kind of funny was that our equipment, while old, was still working, and the building we could get into was filled with tons of usable if outdated office equipment, but none of it could be resold.

After dropping off our stuff, we kind of snooped around a little and then split (it was like -20F and even the van wasn't very warm).
Re:What about the money? by garcia · 2004-02-09 07:33 · Score: 1

I figured it was far worse than just PCBs but I guess it would have been set up as a Superfund site otherwise.

It was of no surprise to me that the military wanted to use property in a little town in the middle of no-where Minnesota for some sort of nuclear experiments.
Re:What about the money? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-11 06:49 · Score: 0

The University of Minnesota is in the process of tunrning the land into a huge agricultural research facility. The contaminants were from junk, garbage, and toxic chemicals, but the U did a major cleanup in the mid-1990's. See this wesite for more info: http://turbo_six923.tripod.com/rosemount
Re:What about the money? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-11 06:55 · Score: 0

Nuclear experiments? You dumbass. The local natinal guard uses it for training sometimes, the only thing nuclear around is a (former) NIKE missile site about 30 miles to the south. And it's not exactly the middle of nowhere, the town of Rosemount's pop. is over 100,000 and it's only a 15 minute drive from downtown St. paul.

Again, see here: http://turbo_six923.tripod.com/rosemount

This is my website, I did a three year long research project on the property.

I have to agree by AKAImBatman · 2004-02-09 04:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

It's one thing to save the Saturn V, or the Apollo crew module, but why does anyone find the tower significant? It's a bit like trying to save the construction elevator for the Empire State Building, long after the building is gone.

I understand that the tower has certain sentimental value to the astronauts. After all, their craft sacrificed themselves to send astronauts into orbit, or to the moon. The tower is all that's left of those glorious machines. But isn't that like keeping a death grip on a ring or hair locket long after a spouse has died? Physiologically, one has to accept the fact and move on. Doing otherwise would only be detrimental to the individual.

Shouldn't the astronauts let go of the tower and spend their time instead promoting one of the hundreds of high energy propulsion methods available? Wouldn't the best testament of the Saturn V be a thrust into space rather than shaking our heads and saying, "it was fun while it lasted?"

NERVA, GCNR, Nuclear Salt Water, Orion, Daedalus, Fusion rockets, terrawatt laser launchers, etc., etc., etc. We have the technology for crying out loud. Let's make the Saturn program proud. Let's go forward!

--
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade

Re:I have to agree by AKAImBatman · 2004-02-09 04:48 · Score: 1

Physiologically, one has to accept the fact and move on.

Hmm... sometime even spell checkers can bite you in the ass. That should read "Psychologically, one has to accept the fact and move on."

--
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Re:I have to agree by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 05:01 · Score: 0

NERVA, GCNR, Nuclear Salt Water, Orion, Daedalus, Fusion rockets, terrawatt laser launchers, etc., etc., etc

And V'Ger, Can't forget V'Ger.
Re:I have to agree by AKAImBatman · 2004-02-09 05:18 · Score: 1

And V'Ger, Can't forget V'Ger.

You're not funny.

--
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Re:I have to agree by SaveTheLUT · 2004-02-09 14:14 · Score: 1

Get ready to hear their opinions from their own mouths. We are arranging a series of interviews with the astronauts who flew from this tower and the other two. Watch this space (excuse the pun!). Ross B Tierney. Chief Operating Officer The Space Restoration Society www.savethelut.org

Saving American History by JungleBoy · 2004-02-09 04:42 · Score: 4, Insightful

I'm all for saving American History, but this shouldn't be NASA's job. This sort of this is the responsibility of institutions like the Smithsonian. Nasa should be spending its money on new projects. I know I'm nostalgic about the glory days of the space race, but eventually NASA will become overburdened with this sort of thing.

--
"You never know when some crazed rodent with cold feet might be running loose in your pants."
-Calvin

Re:Saving American History by Reality+Master+101 · 2004-02-09 05:24 · Score: 3, Funny

Exactly. And what are we trying to preserve, anyway? I mean, I could see saving the capsule, or spacesuits, or whatever, but a tower? It's just a freaking pile of I-beams! What's so interesting about it? Where does it stop?
"This toilet was personally used by Buzz Aldren while he was undergoing a urine test during the space program."
Sheesh.

--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Re:Saving American History by ZoneGray · 2004-02-09 06:25 · Score: 1

The responsibility is clearly specified in the Tenth Ammendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to grandstanding politicians."
Re:Saving American History by SaveTheLUT · 2004-02-09 14:04 · Score: 2

NASA is NOT spending its money on this. In fact we're trying to save them some of the $2m they have to spend on the disposal effort, so they can use it to develop new rockets instead! This effort will be completely privately funded. Ross B Tierney. Chief Operating Officer The Space Restoration Society www.savethelut.org

Berlin Wall? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 04:43 · Score: 0

You want a piece of the Berlin Wall? Man how fortunate for you that I'd happen to read your comment.

I can sell you a whole fucking brick for... let's say.. 200.. uh no... 2200 Euro...

It's not just history, it's dangerous...! by Jin+Wicked · 2004-02-09 04:43 · Score: 5, Insightful

The article says the thing is causing some serious environmental hazards. I know they keep the Saturn moon rockets, and the other rockets sitting around in the visitor's centres at Kennedy, and here at Johnson in Houston, but it looks less an issue of space and more of keeping the thing from poisoning the land around it. If a third party wanted to house and restore the thing, that's one issue, but I don't think it warrants just signing a petition and telling NASA "Hey, find a way to save this." NASA has already been under so many budget cuts, I don't blame them one bit for dismantling it. The structure will always live on in photographs and film, and it's not as if it will ever launch again.

I think a better testament to the history of space exploration would be to quit using the 20 year old shuttle fleet and start doing some real innovation again, rather than hanging on to a big chunk of rusting steel and paint to make a monument that honestly, not too many people will even bother to go see.

--
My Webcomic: Asylum on 5th Street

Not just American history by tr0llb4rt0 · 2004-02-09 04:44 · Score: 1, Insightful

This is a piece of global history.

I've signed the petition as I'd like to see anything that remains of the Apollo program preserved.

--
Worst .sig ever!

Man, people get a grip.... by Lawrence_Bird · 2004-02-09 04:46 · Score: 5, Insightful

there are some things that are just not worth saving, especially when they cost many millions of dollars. This is like somebody doing spring cleaning and refusing to toss out that favorite letter jacket from high school. Think about it: $40 mio is what they want to raise. Yet two (failed) Mars probes - Polar Lander and Climate Orbiter cost $165 and $125 mio. Its time we stop all this nostalgia bs - there is plenty of video, tech specs and what not already. If you want to contribute something to the space efforts, make it something that pushes things *FORWARD* not back.

Re:Man, people get a grip.... by tommck · 2004-02-09 04:56 · Score: 3, Insightful

Yeah... the same people who push for this type of thing turn around and, in the next breath, say "Man, I am so sick of paying all the friggin' taxes! The government is too bloated!

Well, how the heck do you think we pay for this crap?

--
---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
Re:Man, people get a grip.... by josh_freeman · 2004-02-09 09:16 · Score: 1

Good point. I would be far more likely to give $100 to fund the Beagle 3 mission to Mars than to pay for this. It's not that the launch tower isn't a monument to human history, but that amount of money could do so much more.

The big problem that the vast majority of the public are not excited by space travel. You aren't going to get people excited by maintaining a scaffold. I like the e-bay idea. Auction off small pieces encased in Lucite, and use the money to fund a rover on the Moon. THAT will get more people excited. They're going to see their paperweight (or whatever) and know that they have played a part in Lunar Prospector '09 or whatever they call it.
Re:Man, people get a grip.... by SaveTheLUT · 2004-02-09 14:10 · Score: 1

I'd like to just clarify something - this will be funded 100% by private donations, NOT by the government and so NOT by the Tax-payer. We are already speaking with a number of serious people and organizations who want to save this piece of America's history from being turned into just paperclips and razor blades. Ross B Tierney. Chief Operating Officer The Space Restoration Society www.savethelut.org

Junk it by laing · 2004-02-09 04:47 · Score: 5, Interesting

I've been "pad hopping" down at KSC. I've seen most of the rusty run-down and abandonded launch facilities. The only thing worth saving is the Apollo 1 memorial there. It's not available for public viewing, but that may change someday. It's a small display case with photos letters and news clippings off in one corner of the pad. The rest of the pad is as bad as most of the others. There's not much worth saving at any of them. It's just a lot of rusted metal and concrete.

Re:Junk it by dschuetz · 2004-02-09 05:56 · Score: 1

There's not much worth saving at any of them. It's just a lot of rusted metal and concrete.

Yes, but it's cool rusted metal and concrete.

I've been pad hopping a few times, too, and would love to spend a day or so just going over one or another of the sites in detail. But I'd be afraid of many things -- contamination, twisted rusted metal that could give me a nasty cut, and, of course, snakes and alligators.

It seems to me that major chunks of this tower have already been preserved. I'm not really sure that all the bits in the middle are as important as, say, the gantry they walked across to get into the capsule.

If someone can cheaply clean it up and move it to the visitor center, great, but they'd better not increase the cost of admission any -- that's already the worst bargain around. And I won't even mention how annoyed I was at not being able to visit the Memorial Wall last year after Columbia, without paying the $20 to get into the visitor center. Sure, okay, charge for a museum, but never for a memorial.

Make it a ride? by semifamous · 2004-02-09 04:48 · Score: 2, Funny

Sell it to Disneyworld. They can attach a ride to it or something like the spaceship "ride" they used to have at Disneyland...

Except they'd have to come up with a ride that's actually better idea than Rocket to the Moon or the slightly revamped Mission to Mars. Otherwise, they'll be getting rid of it pretty quick for lack of interest...

save the waters by happyfrogcow · 2004-02-09 04:49 · Score: 4, Insightful

Get rid of the thing. The whole areas waterways are so cool. The banana river, etc. Don't let it contaminate the water. Spare the redfish, sea trout, manatees and dolphins. It's amazing drifting down the nearby barge canal by the canaveral locks and watching the dozens of dolphins feed and manatees bob up and down. The place doesn't need any more contamination and pollution than it already has. It a beautiful span of land and water. Have you ever seen wild boars on the shorelines before sunrise?

Let NASA sterilize it and scrap it. Don't sign the petition.

Re:save the waters by shystershep · 2004-02-09 05:05 · Score: 1

From the article:

The group hopes to raise $40 million -- its estimate for restoring the gantry and then erecting it somewhere on Kennedy Space Center grounds. The most likely site is the KSC Visitors Complex, according to preliminary society plans.

--
The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
Re:save the waters by Buran · 2004-02-09 06:27 · Score: 1

The Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville wanted to build a launch tower to go with their replica. Why not use the real tower there?

--
i am a soviet space shuttle

Re:Why do a manned mission? by ryen · 2004-02-09 04:50 · Score: 1, Funny

because we are "nerds" we need to sign the petition?

give me a break. scrap the thing and use it to build a new/better one. Else if you want it, have NASA tow it to your back yard and you can use it as a diving board.

yeah, an online petition by sbma44 · 2004-02-09 04:53 · Score: 3, Insightful

THAT's the way to get things done

Please. Nobody pays attention to those things. If you want anyone to give a damn, take the time to write a letter. Submitting your email address to a website is not meaningful political speech.

Suggestion by jchawk · 2004-02-09 04:56 · Score: 3, Insightful

Unfortunatley we can't keep everything due to the cost of safely maintaining it. I'm all for preserving the tower, but are you really willing to pony up the money to do it? I for one would rather see my tax dollars spent on new exploration, rather then maintaining a monument to the past.

Re:Suggestion by SaveTheLUT · 2004-02-09 14:36 · Score: 1

I agree and so do the rest of the board of the Space Restoration Society. We are using private funding to save the tower, not government. We DO NOT want tax-payers to foot this bill. Ross B Tierney, Chief Operating Officer, The Space Restoration Society, www.savethelut.org

Or alternately... by Channard · 2004-02-09 05:00 · Score: 3, Interesting

They could sell the bits on E-Bay and you could own your own piece of history. Now which would be more profitable, hmm?

potential National Register eligibility by alleycat0 · 2004-02-09 05:01 · Score: 5, Insightful

IIAHPP (I am a historic preservation professional), and this is my understanding of how part of this will play out:

An Environmental Impact Statement, including assessment of impact to known or potential historic resources, will need to be filed if any of the following are true:

Federal funding will be utilized
A federal permit will be required
The site sits on federal land

It seems to me that at least two of the above apply.

If the tower is deemed to be eligible (or on!) the National Register of Historic Places, steps will need to be taken to 'mitigate' the impact to this structure. The preferred way is to leave it in place (eliminates impact entirely); alternatively, a HABS (Historic American Building Survey) Recordation might suffice, wherein a comprehensive documentary effort, including the drafting of detailed architectural drawings, is undertaken.

Unless they've already taken this scenario into consideration and are prepared for the associated costs and potential delays, perhaps NASA will back-burner the effort to dismantle the tower; or maybe public opinion of the tower's contribution to our nation's historic heritage will help convince them to shelve the idea.

--
I am not a number - I am a free man!

Re:potential National Register eligibility by SaveTheLUT · 2004-02-09 14:42 · Score: 1

Private funding will be used. The tower has already had a Section 106 applied in 1994, so no permit is required. And we are looking at both re-building it on Federal land (KSC) and outside of the Center too. The issue currently is that heavy metals and PCBs are leeching into the soil in the immediate viscinity of the tower, so something must be done and done soon. We plan to clean the tower up, encapsulate it and rebuild it somewhere. Hopefully EPA will give us a little bit of leeway because we are talking to potential donors already. -Ross B Tierney, Chief Operating Officer, The Space Restoration Society, www.savethelut.org

Save the Rockets, not the Platforms by FatHogByTheAss · 2004-02-09 05:07 · Score: 4, Interesting

Go see the things. NASA has a fully restored Saturn V rocket on display at Kennedy Space Center, set to Smithonian standards. It's an awsem thing to behold.

The launch platforms themselves are boring, not realy historically relevant, and apparently a hazard to the environment. Scrap them, and use the space for something else.

--

--
You sure got a purty mouth...

Re:Save the Rockets, not the Platforms by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 05:18 · Score: 0

Just imagine displaying the fully restored Saturn V on the newly restored launch platform. That would be an awesome sight to behold.
Re:Save the Rockets, not the Platforms by SaveTheLUT · 2004-02-09 14:47 · Score: 1

Just a thought, but wouldn't you like to go up in the elevator to the 320ft level, walk out on the Crew Service Arm, in the footsteps of the crew of Apollo 11, and look down at a Saturn-V from that unique perspective? And at the same time you could look all around you and see the Shuttle-pads off in the distance all at the same time? Not interested? Oh well, I'm sure looking forward to it! -Ross B Tierney, Chief Operating Officer, The Space Restoration Society, www.savethelut.org

Re:It's just one tower. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 05:10 · Score: 0

http://www.song-lyrics-library.com/nirvana/nirvana -territorial-pissings-song-lyrics.html

looks right to me

But why by nuggz · 2004-02-09 05:11 · Score: 1

But that doesn't answer why we need manned missions.
Do it with Robots, cheaper, easier, safer.
Then after it is built and assembled, we can consider sending people.

Re:But why by presearch · 2004-02-09 10:55 · Score: 1

Yes. White, shiny, mean looking robots. That play cricket.

How is this a troll? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 05:11 · Score: 0

Someone's been leaving the crack out again, and the moderators have gotten into it. sheesh

I vote Save It! by Stitch_626 · 2004-02-09 05:14 · Score: 3, Insightful

This is an important piece of our space exploration history. As long as the cost to restore and preserve it doesn't cost tens of millions of dollars we should save it.

Just imagine the thrill your children, grand children and further down the line would have if they could stop by this tower just before they take their journey to the Moon, Mars or beyond and think "Wow this is where it all started".

--
Ohana means family. Family means nobody gets left behind or forgotten.

Re:I vote Save It! by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 06:00 · Score: 0

Read the article. $40 million and that doesn't include ongoing maintenance. I think it would be better spent elsewhere.

It's a wildlife preserve by seasleepy · 2004-02-09 05:14 · Score: 3, Informative

To elaborate, KSC is also a wildlife preserve...one of the largest in the area, iirc. So keeping things cleaned up is very important.

Actually Saturn V was the largest by enosys · 2004-02-09 05:14 · Score: 3, Informative

Actually the Saturn V was the largest operational rocket ever.

No wonder we no longer look forward by b-baggins · 2004-02-09 05:14 · Score: 1

You'll never make the future happen if all you live on is memories. It's a tower for crying out loud. You want to build a true monument to the Apollo program, get us back on the moon and quit wasting your time trying to save a steel scaffolding.

--
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.

Could have been cool... by Mr.+Underbridge · 2004-02-09 05:16 · Score: 1

The capsule is already in the smithsonian, so I think this is a bit overboard. Honestly, what is the advantage in saving the tower? If they pay for removing it and putting it somewhere else, then I say go for it. If it'll cost NASA more to save than destroying it, I say 'bring on the TNT!'

They should have used it when building the Air and Space museum, or could build something cool out of it in Cape. I agree, if it's just going to be stored somewhere let's kill it, but it seems like something could be done with it so that it's financially self-sufficient.

This is a memorial by UpnAtom · 2004-02-09 05:17 · Score: 1

Why are we sending humans to Mars? The only reason I can think of is to show the 6 billion humans on the planet what we're really capable of. Something we can be proud of, in awe of even...

From the article:

It needs to be rebuilt as a monument to all of the hard work everybody put in to beat Russia in one of the most incredible races that this world has ever seen, said Ross Tierney, chief operating officer of the society.

People sacrificed their lives for this project, and yet, what's going to happen to the LUT now? he said. It's going to be turned into disposable razor blades and paperclips. Is that a fitting end to such a structure? I don't think so.

I think he has a point.

Re:This is a memorial by FortKnox · 2004-02-09 05:29 · Score: 1

People sacrificed their lives for this project

I believe he is speaking of the Apollo project, not the "Apollo 11 Launch Tower Construction." I mentioned before of one major apollo capsule already in the smithsonian where our children can learn their plight, I could also mention the apollo/saturn center in the Cape Canaveral tourism center (that has a fully rebuilt saturn V rocket, along with capsules and basically a complete learning center of all the apollo missions). There is even more than that. I think we are honoring those that sacrificed themselves for the project, and not keeping one launch tower isn't going to desecrate their graves.

--
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
Re:This is a memorial by Buran · 2004-02-09 06:04 · Score: 1

Ed White, Roger Chafee and Virgil (Gus) Grissom died in a fire during a pre-launch test of Apollo 1 on January 27, 1967. Their capsule was filled with pure oxygen and its hatch was a two-part affair which was difficult to open quickly. It is believed that a wiring fault located under one of the seats caused a spark, which in the pure-oxygen environment of the spacecraft became an inferno within seconds; the crew had no chance of escape.

An investigation found shoddy workmanship by the CM contractor (North American) and a number of design flaws; this led to a redesign of the spacecraft (including a switch to a more rounded-rectangular one-piece hatch) within about 1.5 years. The next manned flight was Apollo 7 (there were unmanned test flights in the interim, including the Apollo 4 Saturn V test launch which appears in the Star Trek episode "Assignment: Earth").

The Saturn V Center at the Cape is beautiful (the rocket there is the best-preserved of the three that survive). It was space-geek nirvana for me.

--
i am a soviet space shuttle
Re:This is a memorial by crawling_chaos · 2004-02-09 06:32 · Score: 1

Apollo I wasn't set up on this tower. AS-204 was a Saturn IB, not a Saturn V. All of the manned Apollo launches prior to Apollo 8 were atop IBs, as they didn't carry lunar modules. The IBs were also used to send astronauts to Skylab.
Furthermore, the IBs weren't erected in the VAB. They were erected at the launch complex, outdoors, just like all of the Gemini and Mercury missions were. The mobile launch concept was only used for the Saturn V, and later the Shuttle. There is some argument as to whether or not the VAB was a colossal boondoggle, since we launched far fewer Saturn Vs that was originally planned. If a third launch pad had been built, they probably could have been erected on the pad as well, saving quite a bit of money.

--
You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
-- Colonel Adolphus Busch
Re:This is a memorial by Buran · 2004-02-09 06:52 · Score: 1

Yep, correct on the Saturn 1B assembly. The parent post was about sacrifices in the Apollo program in general.

As for the VAB... well, maybe it wasn't. Originally the Vandenberg pad for shuttle flights was designed for the stack to be erected on the pad, just like most other rockets are. However, it was found that due to tight tolerances, an enclosed assembly building was actually required, to protect from the wind and so forth. Therefore, such a building was built, increasing the cost of the polar orbit program. After the 51-L disaster in '86, the entire thing was scrapped, and it went through a lot of failures (some say SLC-6 is cursed), finally launching a few small Athena rockets and now soon to launch Delta IVs.

So depending on how tight the tolerances were on the Saturn 5, it might actually be a necessity.

--
i am a soviet space shuttle
Re:This is a memorial by rainer_d · 2004-02-09 08:38 · Score: 1

Ed White, Roger Chafee and Virgil (Gus) Grissom died in a fire during a pre-launch test of Apollo 1 on January 27, 1967. Their capsule was filled with pure oxygen
Some months before that particular accident, a similar one happened in the (then) USSR. But as Russia kept it secret, the US were bound to make that mistake, too.
Competition is good, if you allow the others to learn from your mistakes, and vice-versa.
Rainer

--
Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
Re:This is a memorial by Buran · 2004-02-09 08:50 · Score: 1

Soyuz 1. The main and reserve parachutes became entangled with each other and/or were involved in a similar failure. Soyuz 1 hit the ground travelling several hundred kph. Vladimiar Komarov, the capsule's sole occupant, died instantly.

The photos of the crash site are quite horrific.

--
i am a soviet space shuttle
Re:This is a memorial by crawling_chaos · 2004-02-10 02:22 · Score: 1

NASA's own history of the Mobile Launch concept offers a very tepid defense of the concept. In the end, if we had known that only one SV was going to be launched per moon mission, pad erection was the way to go. At the time the launch complex was being designed, the mission mode hadn't been decided. If Earth Orbit Rendezvous had won, as many as four Saturn Vs would have been used per mission to the moon. That would have dictated a much higher launch pace, and would have justified the VAB in full. As it turned out, I don't think the VAB was ever really "finished." At least one of the high bays was never used to assemble a Saturn V stack.

--
You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
-- Colonel Adolphus Busch
Re:This is a memorial by Buran · 2004-02-10 04:24 · Score: 1

The two on the 'far side' haven't really been used in years for much, though tests were done recently to make sure the crawler could still get to them once the crawlerway to one of them was rebuilt.

--
i am a soviet space shuttle

Seems wasteful by Del+Vach · 2004-02-09 05:21 · Score: 1

This seems like a well-meant cause that works against NASA's best interests.

While I can appreciate the historical value of the tower, if you feel like donating cash to NASA, wouldn't it make more sense to contribute to current projects?

They're not the most well-funded organization, and the year-after-year trickle of tourist dollars the tower could bring seems insignificant when compared to the cost of a single shuttle launch.

Re:new towers and new space crafts by phildog · 2004-02-09 05:22 · Score: 3, Interesting

>rather see NASA devote money to building new towers and new space crafts

Yes!

I grew up in FL, and went on a field trip to see a shuttle launch in the late '80s. It was the most powerful thing I have ever seen, both in physical and emotional terms. TV can't do justice to something that shakes the ground like that.

After the launch, we toured the Kennedy Space Ctr. and saw your typical museum fare--impressive but nothing compared to the launch we had just witnessed. One more tired old piece of scaffolding is not going to tip that scale in the slightest.

Honor the past by building on past accomplishments.

--
slashsearch.org - slashdot search. powered by google.

They did it... by imsabbel · 2004-02-09 05:22 · Score: 1

everybody and their dog was running around with berlin wall parts back 90/91. Of course all those were from the surface (with grafitti parts).
Many people believe the whole wall didnt have as much grafitti as the stones they sold each month....

--
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?

sell it on ebay by bear_phillips · 2004-02-09 05:28 · Score: 1

Just clean up the metal. Cut it in little chunks and sell each chunk on ebay. Anyone remember when you could buy little chunks of the Berlin wall?

--
http://www.windmeadow.com/

Save the Vehicles by Khufu01 · 2004-02-09 05:30 · Score: 1

I am as sentimental as the next NASA fanboy, but the remnants of the pad are not high on my list. I think saving the vehicles are a much higher priority. The loss of the Columbia, the first orbiter (ignoring the Enterprise glider deal) was truly tragice, the loss of life aside. That should've been in the Smithsonian.

Too many monuments by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 05:32 · Score: 0

We are a nation with too many monuments. I'm tired of the seemingly constant need to memorialize everything and everyone.

What is the value of preserving a rusting structure that few people can see up front, close and personal. What about the cost in tax dollars required to do this. Wouldn't those dollars be better spent on future space programs? I think we should start a petition to -not- preserve the Apollo 11 launch structure.

Decontamination by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 05:32 · Score: 0

"In the near future, the structures will be decontaminated and then cut up for scrap, if it can't be saved. "

Decontaminated? Huh? I can (almost) see a need to "decontaminate" a spacecraft after having been in orbit. But a launch tower?

What does that mean?

Re:Decontamination by cavac · 2004-02-09 07:16 · Score: 3, Informative

The launch tower came in contact with many hazardous chemicals (including Hydrazine-Fuel from the CM and LEM and huge amounts of Kerosine from the first stage) and has been painted with a heat resiting paint that mainly consists of heavy metals. There are also many moving parts that have been oiled with quite heat resistant grease and moved by hydraulic systems. Don't forget: When they put that thing together, they where in the middle of the space race, so environmental concerns where not even raised....

--
Look, this thing is totally safe! Built it myself, you know. You just press that button like this and then turn that lev

Sporks are full of DANGER by Xoder · 2004-02-09 05:39 · Score: 0, Offtopic

No no no!!!

Sporks have not one, but three sharp POINTS on them.
I would suggest using Spoons instead, but even they have an edge which could be sharpened.

Therefore, we must use spheres in all our daily activities. These spheres must all weigh less than 3 ounces (to prevent them being tossed as weapons) and must be indestructable (to prevent their internal edges from being revealed).

... Why yes, I do enjoy other people telling me what is dangerous.

--
The previous sig has been removed due to /. protecting your best interests

Re:Sporks are full of DANGER by Tassach · 2004-02-09 05:46 · Score: 1

Well, sporks might be OK as long as there are background checks and waiting periods before you can buy one. Oh and to prevent "straw man" purchases, you can only buy one spork a month. It's the only way our children will be safe.

--
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
Re:Sporks are full of DANGER by pixelpusher220 · 2004-02-09 06:16 · Score: 1

I would suggest using Spoons

"Why a spoon cousin?"

"Becaue it's dull you twit...it'll hurt more!"

Now replace Spoon with Bush and you'll understand the last presidential election ;-)

--
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D

Let it go... by sfprairie · 2004-02-09 05:39 · Score: 1

Sometimes I think we spend too much time and energy dwelling on the past. There is a difference between remembering the past to not repeat mistakes and wasting resources and time over nothing. NASA and space exploration is about the future.

I think the 40 mil it would cost to preserve it would be much better spent researching for the future. Money is a finite resource and there are better priorities to spend it on.

I have been to the space center in Florida and enjoyed it. However, I just can't see myself spending my vacation time to see a concrete launch pad with a tower on it.

Just my two cents.

Re:new towers and new space crafts by Buran · 2004-02-09 05:49 · Score: 1

Sometimes we need to remember what once was to inspire us to do it again. I find the mental image of this tower standing, alone, with no rocket beside it, to be a sad one ... but also a silent voice asking me to bring it something to launch. I find it inspirational and sad at the same time, that we once could do so much and turned away from it when there was so much potential before us. We went for political reasons ... but there are so many reasons to have kept going.

--
i am a soviet space shuttle

PPV first, then ebay. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 05:53 · Score: 0

Pack it full of TNT, or something neater like astrolite. Hold a super fear factor meets the surreal life meets survivor PPV event. Something about a tower that ends in a very large explosion.

Then sell the bits on ebay.

Get some money for space and get rid of a few surplus celebs in the process. Win-win.

Sell WTC Pieces? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 05:54 · Score: 0

Sure, what a FABULOUS idea!

Ooh! Ooh! I know! Do a simple analysis of each piece, and if there's a dusting of actual human remains on it, note it on the certificate of authenticity and charge five bucks more! Genius!

Eh, I'm sure the victims' relatives will think this is a swell idea if you cut them in for a couple of points.

Re:Sell WTC Pieces? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 06:12 · Score: 0

what's so special about 'actual human remains'? organic material? some dust? my mother died last week after being hit by a drunk and we cremated her corpse and spread the ashes around a garden. i didn't think those ashes were _her_. the wtc is no more a sacred site than is the front-bumper of the car that killed her.

so stop the bullshit.

Petitions don't mean squat by Rorschach1 · 2004-02-09 05:57 · Score: 2, Insightful

If you want to save it, raise the money to haul it off and put it on display somewhere. Anything less is meaningless.

confused on what we're saving by fikx · 2004-02-09 06:00 · Score: 1

It's kind of historical. But, what are we saving exactly? And what is the petition for? It's already been dissassembled. It's rusting. It's poisonous. What do we gain by keeping it?
Also, what good does a petition do? Am I missing something? From reading the article, the question is more one of money: it's going to cost more and more the longer we keep it. The goal now is to take care of it sooner and cheaper. So how does signing a petition do anything? does each signature include a donation? NASA did the right thing and held off yet again to give interested groups time to act. Act means money. What does the petition do? All that does is ask NASA to do something they can't do for legal (environmental) reasons and for budget reasons. Signing a petition is going to change what? Will that make it suddenly cheaper and more feasible?
My post is sounding kinda negative, but I'm actually curious. I feel the article stated a problem and then brought up a petition which is a solution to some other problem. Is there a connection?

--
AB HOC POSSUM VIDERE DOMUM TUUM

Save the tower!? by teamhasnoi · 2004-02-09 06:11 · Score: 4, Funny

I'm more concerned with saving the props and the soundstage!

But this is where the Journey Started! by DumbSwede · 2004-02-09 06:11 · Score: 1

I don't know about "every problem", but what are the alternatives?

You just seem to dislike open markets. Am I to infer Central Planning is more effective?

You imply laws are passed in a open market fashion, and they maybe after a fashion this is so by side effect of effective lobbying, but no one suggests that this is a correct solution.

You dislike the idea of pollution credits obviously, but fail to show how pollution is increased by use of pollution credits, or fails in its intent to redress certain inequities in the patch work of pollution regulation we have. You just have a gut feeling people shouldn't be given permission to pollute, but this is what regulation is all about, how much and to what end.

Spam is an example of "the tragedy of the commons"
Some type of barrier to access is the only way to solve it. By making it an open market everyone has access, but they indulge their use as makes economic sense. The beauty of open markets is that they are self regulating. Call it an emergent behavior from enlightened self interest.

I am not saying these gentleman have the correct solution for spam, but to just denigrate it because it has open market as a model is unfair. Open or Free markets work well in many situations, they also fail in many situations. Many times failures attributed to open or free markets are really failure of regulation, that only free certain aspects of a market but leave others restricted. The only thing we should be concerned with is does the solution work and is it fair. Lets not discard it simply because you dislike open markets, and may I also infer capitalism?

--
Letter To Iran

Interesting Find by WndrBr3d · 2004-02-09 06:14 · Score: 3, Funny

You know, I find it interesting that even with the Slashdot linkage and the outpouring of support for the Apollo 11 launch pad (~2,800 sigs), there are almost as many people signing a petition to take Ted Nugent off the air (~2,100 sigs).

See, Americans know whats important.

OOPS, here is the Correct Comment (sorry) by DumbSwede · 2004-02-09 06:17 · Score: 1

CUT AND PASTE MISTAKE!
IGNORE PREVIOUS POST -- here is the correct response:

There seems to be an even split on slashdot between scrapping and saving. I for one am for saving. Perhaps I am a little more biased because my 11 birthday was when Apollo 11 landed on the moon.

For people under the age of 40, landing on the Moon may not seem like such a big deal, but for those of us that remember the 60's it was HUGE. So huge in fact that I can't imagine we wouldn't preserve every scrap of relevant hardware in connection with it. An unused Saturn V laying on its side is impressive, but it never made the journey. The Launch pad itself is where the Journey started. Phallic symbol jokes aside, it should be restored to it's original configuration, and has near to its original site as possible, to inspire those that wish to make the pilgrimage to its base and look up longingly and remember the now dim echos of pride and promise of an earlier age.

I don't see this as the financial responsibility of NASA to do the restoration. Government should vote the funds to do the restoration off of NASA's budget -- especially so people don't carp about how much money is squandered on NASA. I don't think Americans in general realize how much prestige and honor and admiration America garnered by going to the Moon. By side effect, the financial rewards were enormous. But regardless, this should be done because this is one of perhaps a dozen of the most defining moment in history. How could you not preserve where it all started?

--
Letter To Iran

Get it a corporate sponsor... by kitzilla · 2004-02-09 06:26 · Score: 5, Funny

Tour guide: "And just to your left is the Viagra/Apollo mission launch tower. It's forty years old and still standing tall -- if you know what I mean. When you're thinking of blasting off, think of Viagra. Common side effects include headache, facial flushing, and upset stomach. Less commonly bluish vision, blurred vision, or sensitivity to light may briefly occur. But -- hey -- it beats not getting off the pad. If you know what I mean."

(Murmurs of approval from the tour group. Flashbulbs go off. A handsome, outdoorsy middle-aged man hugs his attractive, 30-something wife. She beams with pride. Tour bus disappears into a tunnel. Soft focus pan back to launch tower, with the super "ALL SYSTEMS GO" to fade.)

--
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.

Why not build a replica? by starsong · 2004-02-09 06:33 · Score: 4, Interesting

It seems from the article that:
(1) The tower is disassembled,
(2) The paint is toxic and leeching heavy metals into the groundwater,
(3) Having been left to rust since 1983, the tower segments are in highly questionable condition and may collapse if put back together, and
(4) They may have already disposed of or lost several sections.

If you want to spend over $40 mil, why not build a brand-new replica, from the original designs? It would preserve the scale of the original and also avoid the dangers and expenses incurred by trying to salvage the old pieces. Provided it was built with historical accuracy in mind, does it really matter if the physical pieces are the same? Bear in mind that it doesn't need to be as expensive as the original, because it doesn't actually need to fuel and support a spacecraft; it only needs to look like it does. And you could easily modify the design to accomodate tourists at $25 a head.

World history by multipart · 2004-02-09 06:40 · Score: 2, Insightful

...to save this piece of America's history ...

Wtf. "America's history"?! _WORLD_ history!!!

Re:World history by BCW2 · 2004-02-09 06:55 · Score: 2, Insightful

FTW. America built, Americans Paid for it, Americans did it. The world was as usual of little to no help!

For some reason that sounds familiar.

--
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.

'Twould be Nice by ReadParse · 2004-02-09 06:44 · Score: 1

...if our space program hadn't become stagnant over the last 35 years to the point that we need to hang onto relics like this to remember our mighty past.

RP

VR Headset? by Short+Circuit · 2004-02-09 06:57 · Score: 1

Why not virtualize it? Then let people explore it at some museum using a joystick and a VR headset?

Granted, it won't save the smells just yet...

--
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)

Re:VR Headset? by fleener · 2004-02-10 15:05 · Score: 1

Develop a VR headset? Are you kidding? Why, that would take a hundred thousand dollars, or maybe even two hundred thousand dollars, or even a lot, lot less. No, let's spend tens of millions of dollars on the real tower. Yeah, let's do that.

let's slashdot that petition! by SethJohnson · 2004-02-09 06:58 · Score: 0

I'm disappointed in you all. Really, I am. That petition server hasn't received the slashdot effect. Only 3072 signatures as of my signing a minute ago. Let's get to work on that puppy and crank it up to 20,000 before the day's out.

--
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!

It's history (in a good way) by grouchoMal · 2004-02-09 07:01 · Score: 2, Insightful

The tower is part of american history. I've heard americans say so many times that they have no history as you're a (relatively) new country. For (insert name of your religous idol here)'s sake, try and keep something to show the kids and grandkids rather than adopting the "paid for it, used it, now let's scrap it" attitude that seems so prevalent in the world today. Just my 2 pence worth (that's the UK currency, btw (We helped you go to war with Iraq for some reason). Buy an atlas and look at it if you've never heard of the place)

--
"I'll starve my cold, and I'll feed my fever to you"

It was almost for not! by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 07:09 · Score: 0

3123. daniel gruver i fully approve of this effort

Now that we have daniel's approval, we can move forward with this heroic effort!

Not everything is deserving to be saved... by wynlyndd · 2004-02-09 07:28 · Score: 4, Insightful

Personally, I think a more fitting monument would be to get NASA cleaned up and getting us back into space...

--
"Dogs and cats, living together...it's mass hysteria!"

Obligatory Back to the Future reference by FooAtWFU · 2004-02-09 07:56 · Score: 1

SAVE THE LAUNCH TOWER! Save the launchtower. Mayor Goldie Wilson is sponsoring an initiative to replace that launchpad. Thirty years ago lightning struck that tower and the rockets haven't launched since. We at the Hill Valley Preservation Society believe that it should be preserved EXACTLY the way it is, as part of our hist-

There you go lady, have a quarter.

Thank you young man, don't forget to take a flier. Save the launch-tower!

--
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.

Sci Fi Levy?!?! by rudeboy1 · 2004-02-09 08:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

This may be a little offtopic, but, I seem to remember at some point reading an article about a proposition to add a "Space Exploration Tax" to the sale of most Science Fiction merchandise. I also seem to remember a lot of people thinking this wasn't such a bad idea. I, for one, wouldn't mind A.)having a very personal and very direct way to contribute to the space program, B.) coughing a couple extra bucks up for my Firefly DVD set, or Star Wars novel. I don't know what the figure is for the $ amount spent on Scince fiction stuff, but I imagine it's in the tens of millions, at the very least. I think it would be very noble for the people that care about the space program the most to possibly contribute MILLIONS OF DOLLARS to the space program. Does anyone know where I can find out more about this? Or should I start a crusade of my own to get this going?

--
Raging in an online forum won't do anything for the world around you. To see change, you must take action.

www.petitiononline.com server overloaded! by SaveTheLUT · 2004-02-09 08:37 · Score: 1

Just to let you all know - the server appears to currently be down. The volume of hits today has been astonishing with over 1200 sigs in just a few hours. If you can't get through right now, please, please try again in an hour or so.

Good post. by bad+enema · 2004-02-09 08:43 · Score: 0

Thanks, you've answered my original question.

I *don't* have to agree by SaveTheLUT · 2004-02-09 08:46 · Score: 1

With all due respect, the Saturn-V rockets on display around the country never flew or participated in the actual missions to the Moon. The closest any of them actually came to a flight was the 1st stage on display at Kennedy - it was the test-firing engineering mule and was at least lit-up. Check this link for what IS actually on display. This tower is the last thing fixed to the ground which Neil Armstrong stood upon before getting into his tiny Apollo capsule (the only real bit of that rocket which we recovered). This tower is the last part of real flight-related Apollo hardware which could be restored to the quality it was in for that historic flight. That's why its important. Virtually nothing of the REAL Apollo hardware exists any more. Apart from anything else I am working with the teams behind the Saturn-V restoration efforts at Johnson and Marshall Space Centers and we are sharing resources. If we can find the money for this project it will be simple to find the relatively small amount required for those projects too.

Re:I *don't* have to agree by AKAImBatman · 2004-02-09 09:03 · Score: 2, Insightful

So it was the last thing Armstrong stood on before be went to the moon. Wow. Should we also cut out the last piece of ground he stood on and move it to a museum? Or how about the vehicle he drove to the pad?

The tower is not an engineering feat unto itself. It has no historical value other than "there was a big rocket sitting next to this at one time, but we can't show you that because it's gone."

For what it's worth, I do wish we had real flight vehicles to display. If the Apollo 11 Saturn V still existed, I'd be the first to say "let's restore it!" But it doesn't, and saving a little bit of scaffolding is not going to bring it back. A much better testament to the hard working men and women of the Saturn program would be to go forward into space. Even Von Braun wanted an Orion to take us to the planet Saturn. (Boosted into orbit on top of a Saturn V, of course.) For all the bad rap people have given him, he wasn't stupid. He knew that the chemical rockets couldn't manage manned interplanetary missions. But they could handle getting things to orbit where a space economy could begin.

--
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Re:I *don't* have to agree by SaveTheLUT · 2004-02-09 14:19 · Score: 1

I'd agree other than the fact it was the very first time we sent a human to another world. That event never happen again. It will be repeated, but it won't be the first time. Oh, and the vehicle he was taken to the pad in actualy HAS been preserved and is currenty on display next to the Saturn-V at the Kennedy Space Center. The Pad, the Crawlerway, the Crawler Transporters, the VAB and the whole of Launch Complex 39 are on the National Register of Historic Places, but somehow the actual tower which launched the rocket itself has somehow slipped through the cracks and is being disposed of. Surely that can't be right... Ross B Tierney, Chief Operating Officer, The Space Restoration Society, www.savethelut.org
Re:I *don't* have to agree by AKAImBatman · 2004-02-09 16:04 · Score: 1

Oh, and the vehicle he was taken to the pad in actualy HAS been preserved and is currenty on display next to the Saturn-V at the Kennedy Space Center. The Pad, the Crawlerway, the Crawler Transporters, the VAB and the whole of Launch Complex 39 are on the National Register of Historic Places, but somehow the actual tower which launched the rocket itself has somehow slipped through the cracks and is being disposed of.

You've *got* to be kidding me. No, wait, I take that back. Historians are notoriously picky. Everything has to be as original as possible.

I guess my difference of opinion is what is actually useful history. You think that everything about the launch should be preserved. Perhaps. But I'm an engineer, not a historian. To me, the vehicle (Saturn V & Apollo module) were the engineering feats that made the mission possible. The people were what made it happen. Those are the things that should be remembered. We can always create replicas of the other stuff, or preserve it for different reasons. (i.e. This is a gasoline powered personnel vehicle, circa 1969.)

--
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade

Re:new towers and new space crafts by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 09:08 · Score: 0

Nobody's tearing down your mental image. You get to keep that, and it's free.

The actual tower is a rusted pile of scrap. It belongs in a foundry, being melted into electric razors and Hyundai engine blocks.

What I learned from Hollywood... by ahrenritter · 2004-02-09 09:19 · Score: 2, Funny

Don't get rid of that launch tower! Some day, all our fancy high tech gizmos with the flashing lights and buttons made out of Styrofoam will mysteriously fail (while all the scientists smack their foreheads wondering how they could have missed such a glaring flaw in their plan). Then, all hope will be lost for our ruggedly handsome astronauts and the one superstar cute girl who just happened to stow-a-way. Until, that is, the quirky hero who forgets to shave regularly and whom everyone discounts because he never fully recovered his sense of self worth after **the accident** will come up with a daring plan to use decades old technology and will blast a new rocket whipped together with spare parts found in broom closets into outer space from that tower, saving the day and restoring everyone's faith in him.. (Also getting him the envied thirty second make out session from the sexy stow-a-way when she lands.)

--

All I wanted was a rock to wind a piece of string around, and I ended up with the biggest ball of twine in Minnesota

Get it right, dammit by Raul654 · 2004-02-09 09:33 · Score: 1

The correct quote is: "Florida?! But that's America's wang." --Homer Simpson

--

To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton

Re:Cut it into small pieces - BRILLIANT!!! by Tandoori+Haggis · 2004-02-09 09:41 · Score: 1

This gives me a great idea!

Cut a log cabin into lots of small pieces. Secure the pieces every 10 feet or so to an extremely long piece of string. Send a rocket to Mars, with the string attached. Once it escapes orbit, the bits of cabin will start to lose weight and be easier to pull.

Er let me think that one over again...

(You know you've been logged on too long when you need to use IP CONFIG to figure who you are... er wait)

--
My hyperlinks aren't worth the paper they're printed on.

Make up your mind by Syberghost · 2004-02-09 09:58 · Score: 1

Do you want an old piece of concrete kept up, or do you want to go to the Moon, Mars, Alpha Centauri, and points North before humanity gets wiped out by a big rock or a gamma burster?

Don't say "I want both" unless you're typing this in one window while, in another window, you're writing out a PayPal to the IRS for more than you owed in taxes.

Memorial to what? by Uncle+Barnard's+Star · 2004-02-09 10:02 · Score: 1

Memorials make sense only if they remind us of things that exist today. Vietnam war memorials make sense because wars are still being waged and young faceless men are still being killed. The Pyramids make sense because massive construction projects (whether for practical or vain purposes) are still being undertaken today.

Since nobody's visiting the Moon nowadays (except in virtual form), the Apollo launch tower doesn't have anything to recommend its preservation as a memorial to anything but space exploration. As a piece of historical space hardware it's no different from the Gemini space capsule or the International Space Station (which is shaping up to be the most expensive space memorial ever). It enabled American astronauts to enjoy the thrills of freefall.

Re:Memorial to what? by Buran · 2004-02-09 10:24 · Score: 1

"Memorials make sense only if they remind us of things that exist today."

Okay ... but with that logic, since smallpox has been eradicated, why keep publishing research about it?

Because if we forget how to deal with it, and smallpox or any other disease caused by a similar poxvirus (there are many), we might not be able to develop a cure in time.

And that's just one example of a way in which the past can shape the future.

So there's plenty of reasons to remember the past. Our future depends on it.

--
i am a soviet space shuttle
Re:Memorial to what? by zangdesign · 2004-02-09 14:37 · Score: 1

Memorials exist to remind us things in the past that were great, not always good, but great. The Lincoln Memorial reminds us of the great words of a perhaps flawed man while the Vietnam Memorial reminds us of the horrible loss of life in a war we didn't exactly win or lose. Some things exist to remind us that we occasionally create amazing, revolutionary inventions or that something which once existed does not exist anymore. Memorials tie the present to the past in a very physical way. While I am all in favor of moving into the future as fast as possible, we can't just shuck the past like a snakeskin.

Some memorials may not make sense to you, but insisting that they only exist to remind of things around today demonstrates a shallow view of history and self-centered view of the scope of our entire existence on this planet.

--
To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.

Bungy! by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 10:32 · Score: 0

Ship it down to NZ and AJ Hackett could start running bungy jumps of it!

A New Petition by CthuluElder · 2004-02-09 10:54 · Score: 1

I've started a petition to sell the launch tower. Lets get those sigs above 5K today! Sell It

Re:It's just one *VERY SPECIAL* tower. by SaveTheLUT · 2004-02-09 13:41 · Score: 1

From Steve Coaster, an engineer fueling Apollo 11 at the Pad on 16th July 1969: http://usna63.topcities.com/home/SpaceMemories.htm "My favorite Apollo memory was performing my final walkdown of the LUT just before launching Apollo 11. We were so aware of the enormity of what we were about to do. The MSS had been rolled back revealing the enormous Saturn V to full view. It was after dark and the spotlights were casting their cones of illumination on the stack. I was virtually alone on the tower as I examined every component of the LH2 system to be as sure as I could that "my" system would do its job. It was just me and the Saturn V with a bright moon overhead. I would look at the moon , then at the rocket and think, "I don't want to be anywhere but right where I am right now" I was twenty-eight years old when we landed on the moon, responsible for loading 600000 gallons of LH2 on the "moon rocket". The managers were in their early thirties and someone over forty was "the old man". Exciting times! "

Funny by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 13:51 · Score: 0

I wonder how many of these people wonder if it was alright to go into Iraq and spend the 80 billion we are spending now.

I also wonder if any of them think it's worthwhile spending a fraction of that to go to Mars.

I would rather see NASA "burn" the tower down if it will mean adding more money to continuing Martian and Lunar exploration budgets.

Re:Funny by SaveTheLUT · 2004-02-09 14:53 · Score: 1

Me too. That's why I'm making sure everyone knows we ARE NOT using NASA's budget for this project - we are using private financing to rebuild the tower. -Ross B Tierney, Chief Operating Officer, The Space Restoration Society, www.savethelut.org

The past. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 14:25 · Score: 0

Yea, yea, thats it. Lets preserve the past instead of moving on to the future.

Wouldn't it be better if your kids went on a 1-day field trip to the moon and saw a small replica of it there?

LUT and Saturn V display by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-09 20:34 · Score: 0

Seems to me the tower by itself is, well, boring, however if it included a replica Saturn V so I could get some idea of the scale, and even better tour the (decomtaminated) LUT then I would fly from australia to see it. A chopped up saturn V lying on the ground is just as boring as a launch tower without a space craft. To me putting the two together would become a major tourist attraction, as it would _look_ like it was ready to go into space.

How to make a palm pilot in 10 easy steps. by edunbar93 · 2004-02-09 21:40 · Score: 1

1. Take a $0.69 notebook.
2. Glue on a wind-up alarm clock. (and remember to set it again for the next alarm)
3. Glue on a calendar.
4. Glue on a phone book.
5. Glue on a deck of cards. Make sure you glue on the box they come in, or they'll be impossible to use.
6. Glue on the "Lord of the Rings", "Code Complete" and "Core Mysql." Be careful not to stick the pages together.
7. Glue on a chess set. Preferrably magnetic for use while travelling.
8. Glue on a calculator.
9. Alphabetize the whole thing and affix color-coded tabs where needed for quick and easy access. Don't ever mess up the organization by putting something in the wrong place.
10. Photocopy the thing periodically for backups.

Presto! You have your very own Palm Pilot that you built yourself! Total cost: $150 (not including cost of books). Time taken: 80 hours (mostly due to excruciating coallation and alphabetization) plus time to dry. Total weight: 18 pounds.

--
"No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert

Maybe they could call it. . . by UFNinja · 2004-02-10 02:03 · Score: 1

The Apollo 1 ride? God that was tasteless. LOL

Slashdot Mirror

Apollo 11 Launch Tower Rescue Effort

250 comments