NASA sets 'impossible' ground rules for relocation of 'flown space vehicle'
- Reference: 1774263673
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2026/03/23/nasa_rfp_shuttle_relocation/
- Source link:
The agency emphasized it was seeking feedback on transporting something like a flown Orion capsule as well as a Space Shuttle orbiter.
Administrator Jared Isaacman has yet to name the vehicle moving to Houston under the Trump administration's budget. Space Shuttle Discovery was not mentioned in the bill, although several US lawmakers have long sought to relocate the retired orbiter to Texas.
[2]
In a [3]statement , US Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) said: "My law authorizing and funding the Space Shuttle Discovery's movement to Houston is being set into motion thanks to NASA's announcement, and I applaud Administrator Isaacman for keeping this process moving.
[4]
[5]
"Today is real progress in our mission to bring Discovery home, and I look forward to welcoming the shuttle home to Space City soon."
NASA's request signals movement on the issue, if not full resolution. It should also clarify how a vehicle transfer would be conducted and at what cost, though the agency has stopped short of asking bidders to commit to a specific price.
[6]NASA nominee 'committed' to uprooting Shuttle Discovery for Houston trophy piece
[7]How do you solve a problem like Discovery?
[8]Senators accuse Smithsonian of 'illegal lobbying' over Discovery squabbles
[9]Space Shuttle war of words takes off as senator blasts 'woke Smithsonian'
The request also contains language that should give bidders pause. It describes the vehicles as "irreplaceable national assets requiring preservation-focused handling." This is a standard that demands careful consideration before committing to a bid.
The Keep The Shuttle group was "delighted" with the document, however, a spokesperson told The Register : "NASA has instructed that any proposal to move Discovery keeps the shuttle intact – no 'disassembly' allowed. However, there is no way to move an intact shuttle ~40 miles to Quantico (as NASA suggested) or anywhere else on the Potomac. In short, NASA's first RFP is asking for the impossible."
[10]
Moving an Orion capsule is a far simpler task. The spokesperson pointed out: "NASA has used USAF cargo jets to move Orions in the past, and the RFP indicates that this will be the likely solution."
"So we're delighted, because NASA has committed to keeping the shuttle intact, and is on a direct path to send Artemis II to Houston – with a stop at the Moon first of course!"
The equipment NASA used to transport the Space Shuttles has long been retired or scrapped, meaning that something as large as an orbiter will require considerable effort and likely cost considerably more than allocated. An Orion capsule, less so. ®
Get our [11]Tech Resources
[1] https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/57ca8b9cc3934dfcac19e1a8d87d3778/view
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2acFxto1KkVqxTcX2fXUXcgAAAIs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://www.cornyn.senate.gov/news/cornyn-praises-nasa-soliciting-bids-to-move-shuttle-discovery-to-houston/
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44acFxto1KkVqxTcX2fXUXcgAAAIs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33acFxto1KkVqxTcX2fXUXcgAAAIs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/02/isaacman_discovery_relocation/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/24/how_do_you_solve_discovery_route/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/23/discovery_doj_lobbying_letter_cornyn/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/09/cornyn_smithsonian_shuttle_comments/
[10] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44acFxto1KkVqxTcX2fXUXcgAAAIs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[11] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: You keep using that word…
Indeed. Someone should tell the dipshit from texas that if Discovery has any home outside The Nation's Attic (where IMO it should stay), it would be Palmdale, California.
Moving Discovery is ludicrous, Huston has a real Shuttle transporter (good luck trying to get that flying again) and a detailed mock orbiter. They also have a Saturn V. And its not a open museum, you have to request access, are they going to change that ?
In Texas
The bigger the impossible, the better!
‘merica!
Re: In Texas
Might want to take note that the rest of America (note spelling) is quite tired of texas' antics. Judging by recent voting, so is Texas.
BTW, Huston wasn't the first choice for mission control and manned space centre. The original choice by NASA was a ex-air force base, however the air force decided not to close the base so Huston was a second choice.
Make them an inflatable copy of an orbiter. Fill it with Helium. Call it NASA DiProton DiNeutron Anti Gravity Technology. Tow it to Texas. Get the signature on receipt and run away. By the time it starts looking a bit flacid and in need of a pump up, it will be too late.
Don't suggest that.
That Tango Twat genuinely thought he could inject sunlight and bleach in to the blood stream to cure COVID. He'd probably go for this.
Well, that Twat survived COVID and judging by his more recent pronouncements, he might indeed have injected bleach into his head.
"Well, that Twat survived COVID"
Most people did but his followers might have had less chance than others.
The story of my life
By the time it starts looking a bit flacid and in need of a pump up, it will be too late.
Re: The story of my life
I am glad I had just set down my coffee before the implicit context of that clicked for me. Crisis averted. -->
Thanks to trump’s disastrous war helium is in short supply. You’ll need to some some other lighter than air gas.
NASA doesn't own Discovery. The [1]Smithsonian does.
I really hope they just palm them off with whatever capsule they use for the next Artremis mission as that would fit the letter of the law as written.
“My job now is to make sure that we can undertake such a transportation [of Discovery] within the budget dollars that we have available. And of course, most importantly, ensuring the safety of the vehicle,” said Isaacman in an interview with CNBC. “If we can’t do that, you know what? We’ve got spacecraft that are going around the moon with Artemis II, III, IV, and V.” (From [2]here. )
[1] https://www.collectspace.com/news/news-041912a.html
[2] https://arstechnica.com/space/2026/03/nasa-issues-draft-request-for-moving-space-shuttle-discovery-or-orion-capsule/
USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) ?
I suspect these texan galahs know as much about the US space program as they do about anything else viz SFA.
A decent painted plywood shuttle sized prop of the above Starship would probably satisfy these texan clowns and amuse the real space aficionados elsewhere.
(I think the original suffered a "wheels up" landing on some obscure planet.)
It is nigh impossible to take this nonsense seriously especially when there is so much American nonsense that is deadly (and) serious.
Re: USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) ?
"(I think the original suffered a "wheels up" landing on some obscure planet.)"
It did not. The 'original' Constitution-class refit Enterprise NCC-1701 was scuttled in orbit above the Genesis Planet. Large pieces of it - especially the Engineering Hull - may have reached the surface intact, but none of those impacts would be legitimately described as 'landings', wheels-up or otherwise.
You may be thinking of the Galaxy-class Enterprise NCC-1701-D, the Saucer Section of which made a 'controlled' landing on Viridian III after detaching from its Drive Section (necessitated by an impending warp core breach). That landing, however, was not a 'repeatable' design intent - no wheels, struts, skis or other support structures were implemented, making any such flight-termination event less of a landing and more 'crashing with style'.
Re: USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) ?
You do know that the whole landing was faked on a sound state?
Re: USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) ?
You're thinking of the Apollo missions. And those were shot by Kubrick, but he insisted on location shooting.
Re: USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) ?
By the way, Marina Sirtis defended Deanna's command of the saucer section "That planet just came out of nowhere" - and it probably didn't use its indicators before making a turn around its star.
Re: USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) ?
If I recall Generations correctly there were combined elements of lithospheric and biospheric braking (it hit rocks and trees)
Re: USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) ?
Water would have been better. It could have got a lot of skips.
Re: USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) ?
Later it was removed to prevent cultural contamination and the whole NCC-1701D was rebuilt.
Re: USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) ?
The original USS Enterprise is already hanging in the Smithsonian. They wouldn't want to lose that either, surely?
https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/model-starship-enterprise-television-show-star-trek/nasm_A19740668000
But talking of Enterprise... I gather the prototype shuttle Enterprise was on display at the Smithsonian until Discovery arrived there, at which point Enterprise was bumped to the Intrepid Museum in New York. So they've already moved a decommissioned shuttle elsewhere once before. Ironically the modified 747 that made both those delivery trips is now on display in... Houston.
Re: USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) ?
National Capital Crisis #1701 -- are we up to that many already? Probably not, but it sure feels that way.
National Capital Chaos: ongoing and unrelenting.
And we're only 14 months in!
*shudder*
(No disrespect intended to Star Trek. Rather, dismay at how far we still are from the world its creators envisioned -- and at how resolutely determined some people are to drag us in precisely the wrong direction.)
Re: USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) ?
(No disrespect intended to Star Trek. Rather, dismay at how far we still are from the world its creators envisioned -- and at how resolutely determined some people are to drag us in precisely the wrong direction.)
I'm not sure [1]we're that far off , [2]are we?
[1] https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Sanctuary_District
[2] https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/World_War_III
An ... Orion Project?
I feel that this problem could be solved by the detonation of a few tactical warheads (Prior art by Freeman Dyson)
Crashland the ISS in the Gulf of Mexico. Enough pieces may be large enough to salvage and display.
Gulf of 'Merica, please.
"(I think the original suffered a "wheels up" landing on some obscure planet.)"
It did not. The 'original' Constitution-class refit Enterprise NCC-1701 was scuttled in orbit above the Genesis Planet. Large pieces of it - especially the Engineering Hull - may have reached the surface intact, but none of those impacts would be legitimately described as 'landings', wheels-up or otherwise.
You may be thinking of the Galaxy-class Enterprise NCC-1701-D, the Saucer Section of which made a 'controlled' landing on Viridian III after detaching from its Drive Section (necessitated by an impending warp core breach). That landing, however, was not a 'repeatable' design intent - no wheels, struts, skis or other support structures were implemented, making any such flight-termination event less of a landing and more 'crashing with style'.
Echo-co-co-o
"My law authorizing and funding the Space Shuttle Discovery's movement to Houston is being set into motion thanks to NASA's announcement, and I applaud Administrator Isaacman for keeping this process moving."
His law? I thought it was the US's law but it's generous of him to take responsibility. In the meantime, if he believes all that I suppose there's a queue of people with bridges to sell him.
And isn't this turning out to be a particularly good Register Monday morning?
Let him keep his name prominently on show against this law.
Then keep reminding him of what that'll mean if he - or anyone - pushes too hard and they end up forced to deliver a mangled pile of machinery with a "Discovery" plaque sticking out the side.
Perhaps then some politicians may take the engineering of this seriously.
Cornyn thinks the publicity will get him re-elected before it becomes obvious to Texans that this was all paperwork theatre with no intention of actually moving a shuttle.
Isn't This The Point?
However, there is no way to move an intact shuttle ~40 miles to Quantico (as NASA suggested) or anywhere else on the Potomac. In short, NASA's first RFP is asking for the impossible.
Leaving out the "the Smithsonian owns Discovery" argument, surely NASA is complying with the law? And as experts in the field, if they say that the craft that gets transported - whichever craft that happens to be - must not be broken up, then it must not be broken up.
What? That means that Discovery can't be broken up and moved? It has to stay where it is? Oh no! Fancy that! Who would have thought it?!?
But a smaller craft can be moved intact?
Did this Act specify which space craft? No, it did not.
Therefore, they are obeying the letter of the law. They are "agreeing" to move a space craft, subject its conditions being met in full .
If the Texans can't move Discovery without dismantling it, they ain't gonna get it.
Re: Isn't This The Point?
It would seem to me that Discovery certainly can be moved intact, the only real obstacle is money and collateral property harm along the route. People seem to be overlooking the fact that the petulant orange toddler is determined to have his own way, and there's nobody holding him to account, no financial cost that will dissuade him, no piece of heritage or reputation that he won't trash (anyone remember the East Wing the White House used to have?)
Hot on the heels of spending (reasonably guesstimated) $25bn so far on a pointless war to distract from Epstein revelations, I don't think that a vast cost to move the shuttle intact will be any deterrent. And if the private sector won't do it, what's to stop him commanding the army Corps of Engineers to do it?
Re: Isn't This The Point?
If the Shuttle was gold plated, everything inside the gilded cage would be intact.
Re: Isn't This The Point?
Now it ALL MAKES SENSE!
The east wing was demolished to make room for the shuttle transport.
The stable genious in the white house concluded that sacrifices would have to be made in this noble quest, so he decided that the buck had to stop in the White House, and that it was best to lead by example, doing his part in creating clear passage from Dulles to the closest navigable waterway. It is a truly magnificent example of inspirational leadership by someone who could not possibly be a kiddy-fiddler.
Re: Isn't This The Point?
"I don't think that a vast cost to move the shuttle intact will be any deterrent"
All that has to be done is drag out the planning until he's gone.
747?
Does anybody have a spare 747 with dorsal docking clamps laying around and a big-ass movable crane?
Re: 747?
AFAIR from the previous discussions on that topic, the 747s that were able to carry the Shuttle have been decommissionned for a long time.
Re: 747?
Wonder if the plans are still around? Plenty of 747s still available.
Re: 747?
Ok..
Purchase one airworthy 747 of the exact make and model as the original (late model 747s will not do, since a lot has changed ).
Find the plans and the original certification documentation.
Perform the changes and successfully re certify the modified 747.
Find pilots rated to fly this make and model of the 747 and train them to fly with a shuttle on top. You may need to modify and re-certify a simulator to do so.
And then there is the small matter of un-doing all the preservation work and re-certifying the Shuttle for (tethered) flight.
I suggest that alternatively Sen. Cruz can be wrapped in tinfoil and stuffed into the nose-cone of a minuteman that is about to run of.
Re: 747?
And we know what happened to the An-226
Re: 747?
I hear that there is a 747 from Qatar that is currently being "upgraded". A few more special modifications should be doable.
Why a draft RFP?
Isn't there already a term for their object, the RFI?
Time is the critical factor here. Turning a draft RFP into a real one takes time. The proposals have to be evaluated. Questions have to be asked of them. Questions need to be answered. At some point it becomes too late to award a contract before Trump's out, hopefully replaced by someone in possession of some marbles - maybe even a full set.
I prefer a draft IPA
Discovery isn't going anywhere. Just wait until Cruz oozes back into his pustule.
You keep using that word…
"Today is real progress in our mission to bring Discovery home, and I look forward to welcoming the shuttle home to Space City soon." This must be some strange new definition of the word 'home' with which I wasn't previously familiar.