NASA's Mobile Launcher Moved to Launch Pad

The mobile launcher that'll support NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) has moved from the Vehicle Assembly Building to Launch Pad 39B at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The 355-foot-tall ML, which took about two years to construct, is
being modified to support the heavy-lift rocket that will launch astronauts farther into space than ever before. SLS also will create high-quality jobs here at home, and provide the cornerstone for America's future human space exploration efforts.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• NASA
• Mobile
• Launcher
• Travels
• to
• Pad
• 39B

[strangernmoscow]

About NASA still using this type of fuel and not advanced propulsion. NASA is severely underfunded. It only gets 1/2 of 1 penny of our tax dollars, probably a little less than that now. If NASA was properly funded, we'd be a lot further along with our space technology. NASA is very important and our government should cut waste and invest in agencies that sparks job growth, technology and interests youth. Look at us now, a long way to go before American human spaceflight again.

[Nomoreidsleft]

All erected, and nowhere to put it into.

[iamanwer]

Jay walking at 9:31!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[zzzIdividedbyzerozzz]

@djtowo No it wouldn't, the primary reason for starvation throughout the world isn't the lack of food but distribution of it. Most countries that suffer from large scale hunger problems are those that have either weak or corrupted governments, and also have problems due to their geography.

[HeadSHOT604]

@strangernmoscow The Aerospace industry employed 1.5 million people in the 19-90s now it's around 700,000-In America of course- the exploration of space and creation of space technologies is one of the most important thing for humanities survival and future. But nope they would rather try to censor the internet and destroy Youtube.Facebook, and twitter so that people would buy more Hollywood movies..(If you don't know what I'm talking about it's the Protect IP act Google it.)

[AgrivatedKillah]

@ltcolhammond the nuclear rocket wasn't that bad and the radiation wouldn't be that much.

You know the space program is a joke when it isn't willing to take risk.

[ltcolhammond]

@AgrivatedKillah define 'advanced propulsion'. In space, we do use some cold gas thrusters or electric propulsion systems, but they don't produce nearly enough thrust to be practical. The only thing that does a remotely better job is a nuclear thermal rocket, and we don't want to leave behind an exhaust of radioactive hydrogen, so that's a no.

[ltcolhammond]

@jekader Having an erector system increases the amount of infrastructure needed at the pad. Also, since they do a lot of work and processing at the assembly buildings, not assembling the rocket horizontally means you don't need to worry about shear and bending stresses on the interstage - only compression stress. Plus, it's just the way we've always done it.

[djtowo]

@strangernmoscow if everybody in the world would pay once 1 dollar to help the hunger,and the money would be properly spent, All of hunger would be gone.........

[jekader]

why are all american rockets transported to launch site in vertical position?

[dec041]

It is amazing what they can do. I once saw a clip where in Germany (I think) they actually moved an entire church from one street to another.