Someone had to do something.A Kickstarter campaign had been launched by me.Spread the word. Widely.The monies collected (if any) will be 100% used to stop the vehicle's imminent destruction and to transport it to a suitable home at a yet to be determined location.The main point of this campaign is to demonstrate to the powers that be, the National Museum of the USAF and the Canadian Museum of Science and Technology the the public cares about this vehicle and to hold off the bulldozers and torches and fund the maintenance of the vehicle in its current state until a proper move can be accomplished.If you cannot donate I completely understand. No one has deep pockets for this sort of thing. If you cannot donate then call/message the USAF museum and the Canadian museum to tell them to hold off destruction.Public outcry backed up with a plan is the only thing that's going to save this Atlas from the scrapper.Thanks.https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/287720970/save-the-atlas
That is a good idea - and does no one else want it? What about for the new space wing going up at the Air Force museum in Ohio?
HGM-16F Atlas is on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, Ohio. For years the missile was displayed outside the museum. In 1998 it was removed from display. It was restored by the museum's restoration staff and returned to display in the museum's new Missile Silo Gallery in 2007. The white nose cone atop the museum's Atlas is an AVCO IV re-entry vehicle built to contain a nuclear warhead. This nose cone actually stood alert in defense of the United States, as it was initially installed on an Atlas on 2 October 1962 at a Denton Valley launch site near Clyde, Texas.(The National Museum of the United States Air Force does not have an Atlas on display currently; they do have two in storage, these are visible on the Behind the Scenes Tour.)Atlas 5A (56-6742) is on display on the lawn in front of the Canada Science and Technology Museum in Ottawa, Canada.(5A was on display throughout the 1960s at the former location of the Air Force Museum, at Wright-Patterson AFB Building 89 near Xenia Drive in Fairborn, Ohio. Formerly a static-test article, it is the only surviving Atlas in the original A-series configuration, before the boat-tail modifications that solved thermal issues which caused the early termination of the first two Atlas test flights, 4A and 6A.)Atlas 8A is displayed in front of the Strategic Air and Space Museum in Nebraska; reconfigured as an Atlas D.Atlas 2E is on display in front of the San Diego Air & Space Museum at Gillespie Field, El Cajon, California.Atlas 2D mounted with a Mercury capsule is on display in the Rocket Garden at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex, Merritt Island, Florida
Maybe a $1,000 for shipping. Another $2k to stabilized and ship?
Presumably it also needs the leaks plugged before anything can be done with that. And you'd have to disconnect what is probably an electric compressor and attach another compressor that was transportable, maybe battery powered.
Something like this?This is a "Lost Ottawa" picture from it's arrival in 1973. It looks to be about the right size for a legal road trailer.
Quote from: John-H on 02/17/2015 12:43 amSomething like this?This is a "Lost Ottawa" picture from it's arrival in 1973. It looks to be about the right size for a legal road trailer.Note the nozzles, conical vs bell shaped.
But... how many of those trailers are still in existence? They are sort of non-multi-purpose designs.I'd guess the trailers are significantly more rare than intact Atlas missiles.
Here's a link to a newspaper picture of the collapsed Atlas missileat the U.S. Air Force Museum in Dayton, Ohio in 1986. (scroll up to view damage)http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1356&dat=19860620&id=s85PAAAAIBAJ&sjid=-gYEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4506,2122999Story of AF museum Atlas missile collapse in 1986http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=QfJGAAAAIBAJ&sjid=dfMMAAAAIBAJ&pg=1450%2C2393998
As for the transport trailers, I've seen a couple within the past decade. One was at the Cape. One was at USSRC and was later reportedly moved to Dayton.
Here's a Google Maps picture of a hanger near the Air Force Museum in Dayton, OH. Right next to the hanger is a large yellow trailer-like object that looks like it could be a missile trailer. A distance measurement shows it to be 70 feet (21m) long.https://www.google.com/maps/place/1100+Spaatz+St,+Wright-Patterson+AFB,+Riverside,+OH+45431/@39.7795718,-84.0954049,95m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x8840832fb360e8e5:0x83665be9f601b373?hl=en
Perhaps someone close to ULA could ask if they would like to help save a piece of their space history? Right before every Atlas V launch they always make a speech about the Atlas rocket legacy. Maybe it time to walk the talk... Just sayin'...
Quote from: edkyle99 on 02/17/2015 03:03 amAs for the transport trailers, I've seen a couple within the past decade. One was at the Cape. One was at USSRC and was later reportedly moved to Dayton.Do you know when it was moved? It was still there the last time I was in Huntsville (summer 2009).
I am in touch with the Vandenberg AFB Historical Museum about the Atlas. They are interested but money was the very first issue that came up. They are however, interested in it, which is a start. I'm going to visit the director tomorrow to discuss.
Quote from: Herb Schaltegger on 02/17/2015 12:56 pmQuote from: edkyle99 on 02/17/2015 03:03 amAs for the transport trailers, I've seen a couple within the past decade. One was at the Cape. One was at USSRC and was later reportedly moved to Dayton.Do you know when it was moved? It was still there the last time I was in Huntsville (summer 2009).I believe that it was moved around the time of the Saturn V move, so perhaps it was just relocated to provide space for that work. A search shows images of the Atlas back in place in 2012, if not later, so it seems to still be in Huntsville. - Ed Kyle
Someone on another thread was questioning the weight of the electronics on a rocket. Look at the size of some of these connectors and the fixtures supporting them
The big plugs weren't for the computer, they were for connecting to ground support.
These days you could theoretically get away with two power pins and a Bluetooth chip. How many pins and wires are actually used to connect more modern rockets to the stand?
I took some more detailed pictures of the (soon to be removed) rocket today. The base is closed off by a cover, but I stuck my camera in a hole and took a random shot of the engines.John
One thing I don't get... If this is all about a safety concern, why not just display the rocket horizontally? Something just doesn’t sound right especially coming from a museum. Their concern should be about preserving an artifact...
Quote from: John-H on 02/18/2015 07:31 pmI took some more detailed pictures of the (soon to be removed) rocket today. The base is closed off by a cover, but I stuck my camera in a hole and took a random shot of the engines.JohnIt does have those conical nozzle engines! Wow. The number of engines of this type still in existence is almost zero. Soon, it will be even closer to zero. Rocketdyne was still learning how to when it delivered these, and it still had a lot to learn. And Convair still had a lot to learn about turbopump exhaust recirculation effects, ect., when it delivered this rocket.Your images of this beautiful, rare machine are bringing tears. - Ed Kyle
Quote from: Rocket Science on 02/19/2015 09:33 pmOne thing I don't get... If this is all about a safety concern, why not just display the rocket horizontally? Something just doesn’t sound right especially coming from a museum. Their concern should be about preserving an artifact...I don't believe a word of it either. They are also removing the oil well pump ( the green object in the background) due to "safety concerns" after 40 years. I'm beginning to think that every press release these days has to include some version of "think of the children".
Quote from: John-H on 02/19/2015 09:54 pmQuote from: Rocket Science on 02/19/2015 09:33 pmOne thing I don't get... If this is all about a safety concern, why not just display the rocket horizontally? Something just doesn’t sound right especially coming from a museum. Their concern should be about preserving an artifact...I don't believe a word of it either. They are also removing the oil well pump ( the green object in the background) due to "safety concerns" after 40 years. I'm beginning to think that every press release these days has to include some version of "think of the children".I believe it. The Atlas has to stay pressurized or it crumples and can fall over..........
Quote from: John-H on 02/19/2015 09:54 pmQuote from: Rocket Science on 02/19/2015 09:33 pmOne thing I don't get... If this is all about a safety concern, why not just display the rocket horizontally? Something just doesn’t sound right especially coming from a museum. Their concern should be about preserving an artifact...I don't believe a word of it either. They are also removing the oil well pump ( the green object in the background) due to "safety concerns" after 40 years. I'm beginning to think that every press release these days has to include some version of "think of the children".I believe it. The Atlas has to stay pressurized or it crumples and can fall over. That requires the generator and compressor to remain active and maintained (inspected regularly). If the museum is short on cash, they probably don't want to pay the grounds keeper to do the inspections. And if the Atlas is leaking they probably know that they need to do something to fix the leaks. Whether or not they have actually done a formal assessment and figured out the costs, they can at least guess that it is going to cost money that they do not have. Why not display it horizontally? Because that requires them to lower it to the ground and build a mount for it. That also costs money. And they still have to plug the leaks and pay somebody to check on the compressor and generator regularly. Again, they're short of cash.Plus, you don't know anything about their insurance liability. They may have an insurance policy that says that if something has been identified as a safety risk and they do not fix it within X months, the insurance will not cover it, or the premiums skyrocket.The one sure thing about demolition is that it is a fixed, one-time cost: pay it and they're done, and maybe their insurance rates go down.
Quote from: Blackstar on 02/20/2015 12:47 amQuote from: John-H on 02/19/2015 09:54 pmQuote from: Rocket Science on 02/19/2015 09:33 pmOne thing I don't get... If this is all about a safety concern, why not just display the rocket horizontally? Something just doesn’t sound right especially coming from a museum. Their concern should be about preserving an artifact...I don't believe a word of it either. They are also removing the oil well pump ( the green object in the background) due to "safety concerns" after 40 years. I'm beginning to think that every press release these days has to include some version of "think of the children".I believe it. The Atlas has to stay pressurized or it crumples and can fall over..........What Blackstar said. They're called balloon tanks for a reason.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balloon_tankThey are very thin, large stainless steel skinned structures, not relatively thick iso-grid aluminum.When sticking a Mercury capsule instead of the designed-for warhead on top, they originally had to use a "belly band" steel belt around the upper part of the rocket so that it could handle the new shock wave without structural failure
Now if we see some property development happening on that site then we‘ll know the truth...
The museum is broke. They have closed. Sitting outside is a rocket that requires an air compressor and a generator to keep working or it will collapse, possibly falling on somebody.This is a pretty simple and straightforward explanation.
For whatever reason, they don't want this artifact, yet last year they acquired hundreds of artifacts, several big and costly. They're going to display a Titan 4, for example. It isn't about money.
Quote from: Rocket Science on 02/19/2015 09:33 pmOne thing I don't get... If this is all about a safety concern, why not just display the rocket horizontally? Something just doesn’t sound right especially coming from a museum. Their concern should be about preserving an artifact...I don't believe a word of it either. They are also removing the oil well pump ( the green object in the background) due to "safety concerns" after 40 years. I'm beginning to think that every press release these days has to include some version of "think of the children".John
I'd like to see this Atlas A survive, but if you put yourself in the shoes of these institutions (the Canadian museum and the Air Force Museum) you can see that there are legitimate reasons why it may not be saved.
I will kick in money to help save this vehicle if it could be organized...
Quote from: Rocket Science on 02/20/2015 10:18 amI will kick in money to help save this vehicle if it could be organized...Trying to put something together out there with the Vandenberg museum, They'd like to have it on a theoretical level but getting pushback now."We have no space to display it inside""USAF Museum is against outdoor displays""Money""Bureaucracy"The sad thing is I tweeted ULA a couple days ago asking if they'd like to help and the response I got from ULA chief Tory Bruno was positive."Derrick.Stamos @Helodriver2004 Feb 17@torybruno An old Atlas-A In Canada needs a home. Last of its kind. Vandenberg museum could use it, can't afford to move it. Can ULA help?Tory Bruno @torybruno Feb 18@Helodriver2004 Message me contact info and my people will be in touch to see if we can" ULA@ulalaunch @Helodriver2004 If you have information/a proposal, please send it to [email protected] and we'll take a look.If we could stave off the missile's execution for a few more weeks I bet we could save it. Whether it goes to Vandenberg or back to Dayton (where it used to be and really belongs again) or the Cape or a ULA building, it does not matter really so long as its saved. The feeling I'm getting is that destruction is a matter of being convenient, not necessary and its the perception that the public just doesn't care enough to do the necessary work.
Does anyone have an email to someone at the museum so we can plead/beg them to hold off a while?
Quote from: Ronpur50 on 02/20/2015 03:33 pmDoes anyone have an email to someone at the museum so we can plead/beg them to hold off a while?Canada Science and Technology Museum2421 Lancaster RoadOttawa, OntarioCANADA613-991-3044[email protected]I have called and left messages and email but not received a response. Perhaps if more people did we could get them to hold off a little while.
It would be really great if this missile could be saved.Barring a rescue of the entire vehicle, would there be value in saving the aft section as a backup plan? It would be much easier to store and ship. At some point in the future it could be reattached to a structurally stable fuselage replica.
Quote from: Rocket Science on 02/20/2015 10:18 amI will kick in money to help save this vehicle if it could be organized...You now have an email address for the Canada museum. Why not send them your money via PayPal and tell them that it is for saving the Atlas?
More a question, this is the only surviving A model and thus the oldest surviving Atlas. Is that correct?I think that should be pointed out in attempts to save the Atlas.
Why not attempt to get the Cosmosphere in Hutchison in on this? They have V-2 stuff, but little or nothing about US rocketry, other than in support of HSF, as I recall.I shall now go to KickStarter.
My two cents: after from begging Ottawa for time, the highest priority is to find a stretch frame or figure out how to fabricate one. If the rocket is stable and (theoretically) transportable, finding it a new home gets much easier.I'd say the second priority is convincing USAF to at least let it be disassembled and crated rather than brutally shredded.The idea that someone is gonna build an operational ICBM based on an Atlas A is bizarre; better technology has long been available to pretty much anybody.
Quote from: arachnitect on 02/21/2015 05:02 pmMy two cents: after from begging Ottawa for time, the highest priority is to find a stretch frame or figure out how to fabricate one. If the rocket is stable and (theoretically) transportable, finding it a new home gets much easier.I'd say the second priority is convincing USAF to at least let it be disassembled and crated rather than brutally shredded.The idea that someone is gonna build an operational ICBM based on an Atlas A is bizarre; better technology has long been available to pretty much anybody.What you are describing from what I can understand is a strongback. Now it can be left in place or be used to lower the Atlas on to a flat bed trailer. I see this as a phase 2, since we need to address their public safety concerns with a barrier and then such a structure is erected. All this is “if” the museum allows/wants to let it now be safely displayed... Or we could fund repairs and a compressor. I still feel they just want it gone ASAP....
Quote from: Rocket Science on 02/21/2015 05:23 pmQuote from: arachnitect on 02/21/2015 05:02 pmMy two cents: after from begging Ottawa for time, the highest priority is to find a stretch frame or figure out how to fabricate one. If the rocket is stable and (theoretically) transportable, finding it a new home gets much easier.I'd say the second priority is convincing USAF to at least let it be disassembled and crated rather than brutally shredded.The idea that someone is gonna build an operational ICBM based on an Atlas A is bizarre; better technology has long been available to pretty much anybody.What you are describing from what I can understand is a strongback. Now it can be left in place or be used to lower the Atlas on to a flat bed trailer. I see this as a phase 2, since we need to address their public safety concerns with a barrier and then such a structure is erected. All this is “if” the museum allows/wants to let it now be safely displayed... Or we could fund repairs and a compressor. I still feel they just want it gone ASAP....It's more specific than just a strongback. I don't know exactly how it works but the stretch frame puts the fuselage in tension so that it holds its shape without pressurization. There's hydraulics involved.
there are existing purpose built trailers for this task that can be found http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36772.msg1332515#msg1332515
I have not receive any information on how to contact the USAF. They are the key to saving the Atlas.Does anyone have contact information?Seperate issue, do we all think that we want it saved as built and not adapted?
Facebook photos of the rocked being taken down. They might store it until they find it a home.https://www.facebook.com/LostOttawa/photos/a.380380215394542.81184.380334048732492/877938468972045/?type=1&theaterhttps://www.facebook.com/LostOttawa/photos/a.380380215394542.81184.380334048732492/877938475638711/?type=1&permPage=1John
Getting the USAF approval for final disposition (status change) is going to be key and the interested parties should be made aware. Then the Ottawa museum will be cleared of any responsibility and liability.
Quote from: John-H on 02/26/2015 03:43 amFacebook photos of the rocked being taken down. They might store it until they find it a home.https://www.facebook.com/LostOttawa/photos/a.380380215394542.81184.380334048732492/877938468972045/?type=1&theaterhttps://www.facebook.com/LostOttawa/photos/a.380380215394542.81184.380334048732492/877938475638711/?type=1&permPage=1JohnOne from the crane company Facebookhttps://www.facebook.com/1053kissfm/photos/pcb.10153639982862571/10153639980272571/?type=1&theaterJohn
The A models did not have the center engine. They where prototypes to prove the concept. The B models where to prove the stage and a half concept.That is why this rocket was so rare and special.
If sealed and pumped back up, would it re-inflate? This is sad.
What’s the truth about this museum? I get two stories: one closed for renovations for two years another is permanently closed....
Quote from: Rocket Science on 03/01/2015 01:56 pmWhat’s the truth about this museum? I get two stories: one closed for renovations for two years another is permanently closed....This is the main campus of the Science and Technology museum and has been there since the 1960's. Since then they have acquired an Agricultural museum and an Aviation museum, and the Aviation museum in particular has large new buildings, a more focused mandate and has attracted much of the money and management interest. The original building is also rather ordinary and much of their energy has been taken up with making proposals for a new one - thus the old one has been so neglected that the roof leaks and the insulation is mouldy and has been declared a hazard. The building has been closed and they have received $80 million to rebuild it. It is hoped to reopen in two years.John
No professional curator would allow an artifact to meet this fate.
Quote from: Rocket Science on 03/01/2015 02:17 pmNo professional curator would allow an artifact to meet this fate. It's not uncommon at all. Huntsville has a bunch of rockets rotting away in the woods, KSC has had rockets fall over several times in hurricanes, Enterprise was damaged in New York, the Saturn V at JSC is so deteriorated that it couldn't be moved.
Quote from: rayleighscatter on 03/01/2015 04:21 pmQuote from: Rocket Science on 03/01/2015 02:17 pmNo professional curator would allow an artifact to meet this fate. It's not uncommon at all. Huntsville has a bunch of rockets rotting away in the woods, KSC has had rockets fall over several times in hurricanes, Enterprise was damaged in New York, the Saturn V at JSC is so deteriorated that it couldn't be moved.You forgot the Saturn V that sat in the VAB parking lot for some 30 years, allowed to corrode and packed full of nests and bird $hit...
Yes, true, but in the end they just didn't say F*{K it and push them off a truck behind a building. Those rockets were all preserved.
You forgot the Saturn V that sat in the VAB parking lot for some 30 years, allowed to corrode and packed full of nests and bird $hit...
Quote from: Rocket Science on 03/01/2015 04:44 pmYou forgot the Saturn V that sat in the VAB parking lot for some 30 years, allowed to corrode and packed full of nests and bird $hit...Closer to 20, actually (1975-1995)
As of Saturday, the rocket is still in one piece, sort of. It is crumpled quite a bit around the nose, and is stored outside behind a building.John
Quote from: Helodriver on 03/01/2015 04:55 pmYes, true, but in the end they just didn't say F*{K it and push them off a truck behind a building. Those rockets were all preserved.No they weren't. http://airandspace.si.edu/collections/artifact.cfm?object=nasm_A19750832000
Quote from: rayleighscatter on 03/01/2015 05:46 pmQuote from: Helodriver on 03/01/2015 04:55 pmYes, true, but in the end they just didn't say F*{K it and push them off a truck behind a building. Those rockets were all preserved.No they weren't. http://airandspace.si.edu/collections/artifact.cfm?object=nasm_A19750832000There are lots of rockets and missiles in lots of locations, and their conditions vary, of course. Usually museums have a collection strategy that guides their priorities. Generally speaking, it goes something like this:-this museum collects artifacts that are in specific areas-the museum seeks to collect artifacts in its areas based upon their historical basis. For instance, did the artifact itself do something historically significant? Is it the only one of its kind? Is it in some other way unique? Are there lots of others like it in lots of other museums?-how big is it? Will it fit in the existing museum space? -how much does it cost to preserve it? How much will it cost to restore it?So the fact that one missile, like the one linked above, is sitting outside, not restored, is not proof of anything. Are there other similar missiles preserved? Is this part of their core collection? Is it unique? All those factors are important.
Just received from Jennifer""Charley,The US Air Force is still in discussion regarding the Atlas. They are on the fence about whether to even consider lending it to another facility or continuing on its disposal course. They did in fact want the rocket back for themselves, but believed that the condition could not be stabilized/restored. This is why it was marked for disposal, because they believed that it could not be saved, not because they just did not want it. We have sent them another proposal, that if we are willing to send a spacecraft restoration expert out to inspect the condition and give their opinion on whether it can be saved or if the damage is irreparable. We are asking that if we are willing to do this and can handle the cost, would the US Air Force consider lending us the rocket then.I'll keep you updated.Jennifer "
Looks like I am the first backer of this project I also contacted http://www.capemuseum.org/index.html to see if they have any ideas on how to help.
Quote from: Kansan52 on 03/04/2015 06:22 pmJust received from Jennifer""Charley,The US Air Force is still in discussion regarding the Atlas. They are on the fence about whether to even consider lending it to another facility or continuing on its disposal course. They did in fact want the rocket back for themselves, but believed that the condition could not be stabilized/restored. This is why it was marked for disposal, because they believed that it could not be saved, not because they just did not want it. We have sent them another proposal, that if we are willing to send a spacecraft restoration expert out to inspect the condition and give their opinion on whether it can be saved or if the damage is irreparable. We are asking that if we are willing to do this and can handle the cost, would the US Air Force consider lending us the rocket then.I'll keep you updated.Jennifer "Sounds promising Charley, thank you for your effort thus far. Considering what has been done to her, she appears to be holding up quite well.
I suppose we'll never know why NASA Glenn didn't get to inspect this Atlas before it was yanked down and bent. - Ed Kyle
Quote from: edkyle99 on 03/23/2015 02:20 pmI suppose we'll never know why NASA Glenn didn't get to inspect this Atlas before it was yanked down and bent. - Ed KyleMy theory is that they want to initiate construction on that land as the spring begins, hence the rush. We’ll see if it proves true...
I contacted them about us raising money to save the Atlas; they did not ask if the could have the money to restore the missile and keep it there.IMHO, they had made a tough decision and did not want to open old wounds, so to speak.
I'm going to say this again for the last time... If the public was at risk a safety fence would have been put up immediately...
Quote from: Rocket Science on 03/23/2015 05:44 pmI'm going to say this again for the last time... If the public was at risk a safety fence would have been put up immediately...Yeah, and that's an overly simplistic way to look at it. If their insurance company said "this thing is dangerous and if you don't do something about it by X date we will not insure you" then that doesn't require them to immediately erect a fence. It does require them to decide to either put up a fence by that date, risk going without insurance, or tear it down. Just because they took it down instead of erecting a fence doesn't prove it was not risky.
Well, even in its current condition, the Atlas 5A is still in better shape than the WRESAT Redstone.
Could it be one of these? https://twitter.com/FarryFaz/status/1187070744775274497
The un-collapsed Atlas might be a B or C - or even an A modified to host a fake sustainer engine for display, if it has equal-length side pods - its hard to tell from the photos. My guess is that these used to be USAF displays at PAFB and/or at CCAFS that were taken down or damaged. There used to be two Atlases at the CCAFS Museum, then there was one (I saw it during the 1990s - it was an E so isn't the un-collapsed one here), now I believe there is none.