That Famous Space Shuttle Rollout Pic
- Thread starter ZapBrannigan
- Start date
I think Star Trek fans got duped, or possibly just outsmarted themselves, when they lobbied so hard for the "first" Space Shuttle to be named Enterprise. They didn't know that the first one would never go into space, and NASA didn't seem to make any big, public mentions of this fact before "giving in" to the fans' campaign.
If I recall correctly, the fan effort got under way, then came the big victory of getting the thing named Enterprise, and then, much later, we learned that the first one would just do a few 747-launched glider tests and never fly in space. It was subsequently subjected to vibration testing on the ground to see how much stress it took to inflict damage. It's called testing to failure, and I read somewhere that it rendered Enterprise unfit to fly again (but this detail may be incorrect).
I've long thought that NASA kept their plans for OV-101 fairly quiet to get "this Star Trek nonsense" out of the way early, and never have it attached to actual space missions. It's also possible that their plans changed after the naming, for purely technical reasons to do with shuttle design changes.
If I recall correctly, the fan effort got under way, then came the big victory of getting the thing named Enterprise, and then, much later, we learned that the first one would just do a few 747-launched glider tests and never fly in space. It was subsequently subjected to vibration testing on the ground to see how much stress it took to inflict damage. It's called testing to failure, and I read somewhere that it rendered Enterprise unfit to fly again (but this detail may be incorrect).
I've long thought that NASA kept their plans for OV-101 fairly quiet to get "this Star Trek nonsense" out of the way early, and never have it attached to actual space missions. It's also possible that their plans changed after the naming, for purely technical reasons to do with shuttle design changes.
Last edited:
The original intention was for Enterprise to be used as an atmospheric flight and landing test article but then be refit for actual orbital use as the second practical vehicle. However, the results of the Enterprise tests resulted in pretty serious design modifications which made it costlier to re-purpose the existing craft than to simply build a whole new one (which would end up being the Challenger).
Enterprise would be kept around for training and future test purposes. In fact, the investigation after the Columbia tragedy made use of the Enterprise vehicle; projectiles were fired at the wing to determine what sort of damage might have led to the destruction. Those results went on to be used to make the remaining vehicles as safe as possible.
So, even though it was NASA'a original intent to use Enterprise as a flight vehicle, it still was an invaluable asset to the shuttle program even after that proved impracticable.
I don't think it's fair to suggest that they knowingly got "this Star Trek nonsense out of the way." It really was for technical reasons.
--Alex
Enterprise would be kept around for training and future test purposes. In fact, the investigation after the Columbia tragedy made use of the Enterprise vehicle; projectiles were fired at the wing to determine what sort of damage might have led to the destruction. Those results went on to be used to make the remaining vehicles as safe as possible.
So, even though it was NASA'a original intent to use Enterprise as a flight vehicle, it still was an invaluable asset to the shuttle program even after that proved impracticable.
I don't think it's fair to suggest that they knowingly got "this Star Trek nonsense out of the way." It really was for technical reasons.
--Alex
I lucked out and was on a vacation trip with my Father when we went to Huntsville, Alabama and toured the Marshall Space Flight Center. And the Enterprise was there undergoing testing as part of the launch stack. It was NOT undergoing testing to failure. But being subjected to the expected vibrations and stresses of a normal launch. They even had a video animation explaining the entire process. Mostly left over from the Apollo program. my Father worked for a company that did sub contractor work for NASA and the companies that built the shuttles. And I got to see alot of their company publications and newsletters on the work being done. And the air frames of the shuttles were way over engineered and would never fail. The testing done at Huntsville was mainly to test to connecting structures for the external tank and the SRBs.
They're nice articles, but they're not primary documents to address the question of ``did NASA have any name in mind for the orbiters before the Trekkies got involved''. They're fine for showing how well-established the story was by 1976 but that doesn't answer things like when NASA decided to give the shuttles operationally unnecessary names.
Has no one written a decent history of the shuttle at this point covering this?
The articles I posted were from a sober publication devoted to the reporting of aviation and space industry issues. One even predates the rollout by 4 days and does mention that NASA had their own ideas for naming the shuttle before the meeting between Fletcher and Ford. They are of course not the "primary source documents" you seek in order to be convinced, NebusJ, but I have no doubt those exist in the form of memoranda and recorded interviews or meeting minutes / transcripts and I encourage you to look for those on your own if that will be the only thing that satisfies your high standard for "proof". Or I suppose you can just keep asking others to hand you that proof on a platter, lest you (heavens, no) remain unconvinced. Guess what I'm saying is get off your ass and find it yourself.
Last edited:
Thanks for posting this picture of the Enterprise roll-out. I have not seen it in many years!