Apollo 11 Launch Tower Rescue Effort

SaveTheLUT writes "Florida Today has this story about the disposal of the last remaining Apollo Launch Tower - the one which launched Apollo 11 to the Moon in July 1969. The campaign to save the tower has also appeared on InsideKSC, CollectSpace, Space.com and there is to be a TV article about it on Central Florida News 13 channel on Monday morning. The Space Restoration Society has created an on-line Petition which has already managed to gather more than 2000 signatures to save this piece of America's history since NASA announced the disposal of the tower early last week."

Comments

Apollo 11

[Can it run Linux]

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

[Buran]

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.

Sell it.

[heironymouscoward]

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?

Re:Sell it.

[Richard_at_work]

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.

The Crazy Thing Is...

[N8F8]

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.

Please excuse the igorance.

[bad enema]

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.

[Hemos]

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

Re:Please excuse the igorance.

[bad enema]

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.

[rootus-rootus]

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.

Already gone

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Saw it up and sell the pieces on EBay

[Anonymous Coward]

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?

Re:Sign the petition

[happyfrogcow]

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.

Junk it

[laing]

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:What about the money?

[garcia]

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...)?

Or alternately...

[Channard]

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

Save the Rockets, not the Platforms

[FatHogByTheAss]

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.

Re:Money

[Billy the Mountain]

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

Re:new towers and new space crafts

[phildog]

>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.

Why not build a replica?

[starsong]

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.

Re:OMG

[YCrCb]

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.

Sci Fi Levy?!?!

[rudeboy1]

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?