Red tag sale: NASA cuts space shuttle price

msnbc/AP ^ | 1-15-10 | Marcia Dunn

[Vaquero]

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) -- Here's a recession bargain: the space shuttle. NASA has slashed the price of these 1970s era spaceships from $42 million to $28.8 million apiece. The shuttles are for sale once they quit flying, supposedly this fall. When NASA put out the call to museums, schools and others in December 2008, seeking buyers, about 20 expressed interest. NASA spokesman Mike Curie expects more interest, what with the discount.

[Vaquero]

We could give 'em to the Haitians, I suppose.....

[Vaquero]

PING

[driftdiver]

I’ll take two! All those high tech 286 era computers should be worth a lot for resale.

[norraad]

Who wants to go into space in an old flyin’ breadtruck?

[BenLurkin]

It’s a death trap.

[freedumb2003]

[NonValueAdded]

I do

[ThomasSawyer]

"It’s a death trap."

Probably couldn't pass a vehicle emissions test either.

[Road Warrior ‘04]

Since NASA got into the cocaine business, they can cut the price of the product they produce.

[Vaquero]

It’s a death trap.

it belongs to America....and it needs to be used till we get a replacement on line....

[Balding_Eagle]

YES!

[Waverunner]

I sure the Chinese will spend some worthless American dollars for them...

[almost done by half]

“Who wants to go into space in an old flyin’ breadtruck?”

Love it! I hate to fly in planes that are older than most cars on the road too!

[El Gato]

I’ll take two! All those high tech 286 era computers should be worth a lot for resale.

They are actually IBM 4 Pi computers. They were called that because their architecture is that of two IBM 360s.

A Little Engineer Joke. You figure it out. :)

Back in the day, I was a USAF engineering officer, reviewing an IBM reliability report on a version of the computer, the AP101, used in another application on the B-52. One of the estimates of failure rate for a new component was said to be an "onager-aheuristic estimate".

Now, a heuristic is a rule of thumb or a guess.

This is an onager.

Onager (Asiatic wild ass) - Equus hemonius

Who says engineers have no sense of humor? :

[El Gato]

Love it! I hate to fly in planes that are older than most cars on the road too!

That would be pretty much the entire USAF inventory, except the few F-22s and the T-6 trainer. Even the T-6 is getting close to that standard. The pilots of the B-52 sometimes fly the same aircraft that their grandfather flew. Flying one their father flew is routine. The last one came off the line in '64.

I've only had one car that was made before that, my first, a '62 Pontiac Tempest, which I acquired in '68 and got rid of in '71. Its floor was completely rusted through and the tunnel which the drive shaft ran through was cracked completely through as well. At the end the tunnel was held more or less aligned by a couple of boards and some baling wire, well actually old metal coat hangers. (The car was a front engine, RWD, but the trans-axle was in the rear, so the drive shaft was solid and ran at engine speed. It was flexible too.)

[peteram]

I want to be able to test drive it before I’ll sign anything. By the way, would this qualify under the Cash for Clunkers program?

[Jagermonster]

Double groan ... ;)~

[almost done by half]

I had forgotten about the B52’s. That really is pretty scary they are still flying those things no matter how well they have been maintained. As you indicated about cars, at least they don't kill you unless the brakes give out at the wrong time. As a kid I can remember working on cars on Weds or Thurs to patch them together for the weekends. At least we didn't have to worry about minor fender benders as long as we had a hammer. lol

[El Gato]

That really is pretty scary they are still flying those things no matter how well they have been maintained.

I think the -135 series, mainly the KC-135 tanker, are even older on average... Nope, just checked as of last May, the average age of the BUFF force is 46.8 years, while the average age of the KC-135s is 46.6 years. Even the T-38 fleet is not that old (mainly because they boneyarded the older ones) it's 41.2 years.

I was wrong about the T-6, the average age of those is 3.8 years.

Source Air Force Magazine May 2009 Almanac Issue

But it's not a matter of merely being maintained, or even just overhauled. Rebuilt and updated would be closer to what they've done with 'em. Sort of like those Shelby Cobras rebuilt starting with a frame, or an axle or somesuch, adding more modern electrical and electronic systems along the way.

Too bad they could never get Congress to re-engine the BUFFs. The tankers have been re-engined, some with new very high bypass ratio turbo fans, others with old airline engines, pretty much the same engine that the -G model B-52s have. Those are mostly or all in the Reserve and Guard, but even they have some of the ones with new engines.

[almost done by half]

You sure know your military planes. I’ve always thought the B-52 wasn’t replaced because they really aren’t sure if they need a plane like this. They can carry large bomb loads but they are so large they also require long runways to take off and land. With the advances in rockets, and drones it would seem to me (a layman) that a smaller bomber might be more useful. As to the takers, this has been back and forth between Boeing and Airbus for years. Last I heard they were redefining the criterion to give Boeing a better chance at winning the contract. In Oshkosh WI there is a company that rebuilds DC-3’s. They totally rebuild then and fit them with more advanced engines and in some cases actually stretch them. They still are great on small runways in third world countries.