As you may know, the Space Shuttle Discovery is at risked of being relocated from her current home in Virginia to Houston. I, like many others, are vehemently opposed to the move and pray it doesn't happen. I write this post as a semi-objective look at the situation and to make a few things clear. None of this is to definitively say the relocation will never happen, but to say that it's not as inevitable as you may think.
- Many have the impression that the move was Trump's idea and thus, it's guaranteed to happen. This is not true, as the idea originated from Texas senators John Cornyn and Ted Cruz. Their failed statewide attempt to move Discovery led them to include a provision for it in July's OBBB act. Trump has never publicly said he supports the move, much less that he is aware of it. In fairness, Trump has made clear his opposition to the Smithsonian, but that has more to do with the content of their other museums. The trend of this administration has been congressional Republicans doing whatever Trump wants, not the other way around.
- Newly-confirmed NASA admin Jared Isaacman said earlier this month he would support the move. This was disappointing to hear, but there is a decent chance this was an empty promise to the Texas senators in order to get confirmed. Seeing as Ted Cruz is a leader of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation committee, and Isaacman's nomination already failed once, it's likely he wanted to avoid saying anything that would jeopardize it again. Not to mention NASA transferred full ownership of Discovery to the Smithsonian in 2012. Still, it's not yet clear what Isaacman will do.
- Perhaps the most important point is that while the 85 million dollars for moving Discovery was authorized, it has not been appropriated yet. 2026 funding bills for the Smithsonian and NASA have not been signed yet, and members of both parties have shown disapproval of the relocation. In July, the Republican-controlled House Committee on Appropriations overwhelmingly passed an amendment cancelling the funding. Also of note is that Virginia will have a Democratic governor and attorney general come January, and they are likely to be sympathetic to the shuttle's plight.
Again, nothing is for certain yet. I unfortunately wouldn't be surprised if the relocation happens after all and Discovery is heavily damaged in the process. Still, whatever her fate may be, we will always admire those who built and flew her for thirty years, and always be thankful for her service to our country and mankind.
Clearing things up about Space Shuttle Discovery getting moved
byu/ToeSniffer245 inspace
13 Comments
She should never have been sent to Virginia at all. **Mission Command**’s state deserves her more than any other state except Florida.
There should be some very strong legislation that prevents any state from attempting to steal artifacts from the Smithsonian, a National entity. I don’t know what political capital has to be expended to make this possible, but it’s insane to me that this intitive has been allowed to progress this far.
Texas has no right to deny the people of America the historic preservation of our national heritage.
All that will happen, if it does, is they will destroy it, move most of the pieces to Texas, and after a bit of delay and obfuscation those pieces will turn up in private collections.
The people who stole from the Louvre could have used this information.
The National Air and Space Museum is an excellent home for Discovery, and they should keep it.
At the end of the day it might be pragmatism that decides Discovery’s fate, as I believe that the ONE 747 capable of transporting it has been decommissioned, or has at least been put out to pasture for some time. Creating a new transport plane might cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Seems an awfully steep cost for a cheap political stunt.
I don’t understand why people care so much about this. I thought it was a trump thing, but the post says it really isn’t. So, what gives?
If Texas takes Discovery, I think the Alamo should be moved to Los Angeles. Including the basement. Or maybe gift it to Mexico, instead.
[The OBBB](https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1/text) did include special appropriations for NASA:
>‘‘§ 20306. Special appropriations for Mars missions, Artemis missions, and Moon to Mars program
>>‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—In addition to amounts otherwise available, there is appropriated to the Administration for fiscal year 2025,
out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $9,995,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2032, to use as follows:
>>>(1) […]
>>>[…]
>>>(6) $1,000,000,000 for infrastructure improvements at the manned spaceflight centers of the Administration, of which
not less than—
>>>>(A) […]
>>>> […]
>>>> (F) $85,000,000 shall be obligated to carry out subsection (b), of which not less than $5,000,000 shall be obligated for the transportation of the space vehicle
described in that subsection, with the remainder transferred not later than the date that is 18 months after the date of the enactment of this section to the entity
designated under that subsection, for the purpose of construction of a facility to house the space vehicle referred
to in that subsection.
____
$85 million is not remotely enough. [Earlier this year](https://virginiamercury.com/2025/10/01/virginia-u-s-sens-kaine-warner-seek-to-keep-discovery-space-shuttle-in-the-commonwealth/) the Smithsonian estimated that just moving the Shuttle would cost $50-55 million plus $25 million for contingencies, and that building a facility in Houston to house it would cost $250 million. More recent estimates by the Smithsonian and NASA (e.g., [as reported by Spacenews](https://spacenews.com/senators-spar-over-plans-to-move-shuttle-discovery/)) are a much higher $120-150 million for the transportation alone. Congress only appropriated $85 million. The language used (“of which not less than $5,000,000 shall be obligated for the transportation of the space vehicle”) implies that only a small fraction of the $85 million was expected to go into transportating the vehicle.
There is also the little matter that NASA no longer owns Discovery. The Smithonian does.
Furthermore, the OBBB does not actually specify Discovery or a Shuttle, the Smithsonian as the source, or (necessarily) Houston as the destination. It dictates that a “space vehicle” which has “flown into space” and “carried astronauts” be “transferred to a field center of the Administration that is involved in the administration of the Commercial Crew Program” and “placed on public exhibition at an entity within the Metropolitan Statistical Area where such center is located.” Hyoothetically, sending an Apollo capsule from another musuem to KSC would fulfill the letter of the law. (*cough* And trade it for the Apollo 14 CM already there.).
>Newly-confirmed NASA admin Jared Isaacman said earlier this month he would support the move. This was disappointing to hear, but there is a decent chance this was an empty promise to the Texas senators in order to get confirmed. Seeing as Ted Cruz is a leader of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation committee, and Isaacman’s nomination already failed once, it’s likely he wanted to avoid saying anything that would jeopardize it again. Not to mention NASA transferred full ownership of Discovery to the Smithsonian in 2012. Still, it’s not yet clear what Isaacman will do.
He also stated moving it “in one piece”, which pretty much forces it into an empty promise to actually move it
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I’ve seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|——-|———|—|
|CST|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules|
| |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)|
|[JSC](/r/Space/comments/1pperjt/stub/nun2pg1 “Last usage”)|Johnson Space Center, Houston|
|[KSC](/r/Space/comments/1pperjt/stub/nun2pg1 “Last usage”)|Kennedy Space Center, Florida|
|[STS](/r/Space/comments/1pperjt/stub/numsbji “Last usage”)|Space Transportation System (*Shuttle*)|
|[USAF](/r/Space/comments/1pperjt/stub/numlstm “Last usage”)|United States Air Force|
|Jargon|Definition|
|——-|———|—|
|[Starliner](/r/Space/comments/1pperjt/stub/numgc3w “Last usage”)|Boeing commercial crew capsule [CST-100](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CST-100_Starliner)|
Decronym is now also available on Lemmy! Requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
—————-
^(5 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/1pogjtv)^( has 16 acronyms.)
^([Thread #11986 for this sub, first seen 18th Dec 2025, 03:07])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Putting a space shuttle in Texas would be like putting a Rembrandt in a cow pasture.
I live in Houston and we definitely deserve a shuttle. Â But not that one. Â We should have been third choice, behind the Smithsonian and Cape Canaveral. Â And way ahead of LA and New York.
Isaacman said just enough to get him approved and nothing more. He knows the Shuttle really cannot be moved without tearing it apart.