NASA topples towers used to test Saturn rockets, space shuttle(arstechnica.com)

48 pointsby bookofjoe6 hours ago8 comments

schiffern4 hours ago
Mourn not. These were purpose-built structures erected in record time to support a single program (and pressed into service for Shuttle & friends). They were first so they were by definition pioneering, but we've learned a lot since then.
The sad part isn't that they're gone. The sad part is that we didn't make them obsolete until just recently.
- icegreentea23 hours ago
  To be clear, NASA has an entire field center dedicated to rocket testing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stennis_Space_Center). This is where everything gets tested now. You may remember the "green run" tests of the SLS - those happened at Stennis.
  Stennis didn't exist at the start of the space race or Apollo. Marshall is colocated on Redstone Arsenal, a legacy of parts of NASA being bootstrapped out of the Army ballistic missile program. Marshall had test stands because that era of NASA (aka von Braun) sought to colocated engineering, prototyping and test.
  One challenge with continuing tests at Marshall is that... it's actually really close to population centers. Large engine tests would be ridiculously disruptive. There are comments in the Ars article noting that people living in Huntsville could hear the demolition work.
  - pavon3 hours ago
    Yes, the replacements for this equipment has been around for a long time. The Propulsion and Structural Test Facility was built at Marshall in 1957 and used for design testing of the Saturn engines, and by 1966 the A1 test stand was built at Stennis, to perform production qualification of Saturn engines. And unlike the PSTF, the A1 and A2 test stands at Stennis have been maintained over the years, and continue to be functional today most recently being used to test the new RS-25 engine design that the SLS will use when we are out of SSMEs.
pfdietz4 hours ago
In a steady state economy the metal going into infrastructure is balanced by metal recovered from obsolete infrastructure. Demolition and recycling is part of the economic lifecycle.
Almost 70% of US steel production is from recycled metal. Structural steel is recycled at a 98% rate.
bluGill4 hours ago
As your mourn, remember that this space can now be used for something else. It is easy to see what we lost, but it is hard to see what we lose by not getting rid of something obsolete.
These structures were not something we could reasonably make into a museum (too much work required to make them safe/useful for that, and there already is a nice museum in the city that I strongly recommend you visit instead), so it is time to move on.
recdnd3 hours ago
It’s worth remembering that these were extremely purpose-built facilities. Preserving them as museums sounds appealing, but making structures of this scale safe for public access would likely cost more than their original construction. At some point, demolition and documentation is the more responsible form of preservation.
baggachipz2 hours ago
I had the privilege of visiting the building and going to the top of the test stand a few years back. They were huge and amazing structures, clearly done in 1950's style. Lead paint, exposed elevators, grates where you could see all the way to the ground, etc. It was terrifying and incredibly interesting at the same time. I have relatives in Huntsville who heard them being demolished.
Can't wait to see what they build there next.
hdjdndndba4 hours ago
That footage of the demolition was actually really interesting to watch. It is impressive to see how they bring down such massive structures safely.
amelius3 hours ago
Did they make a 3d-scan before taking them down?
NooneAtAll34 hours ago
on one hand, "ha-ha artemis was made to reuse shuttle program and now look at this"
on the other... judging by the pictures nobody did the maintenance anyway, so it's straight up safety precaution and hazard removal