How NASA Drives The $144 Million Vehicle That Transports Rocket Ships | What It Takes
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 04. 2022
- Before a rocket can blast off into space, it must travel 4.2 miles from the Vehicle Assembly Building to the launchpad in Cape Canaveral, Florida. That's where NASA's crawler-transporters come in. They're the largest self-powered vehicles on the planet, and they're designed to transport rockets to the launchpad. We got an inside look at how NASA's preparing and operating the crawler for the 16-million-pound mobile launcher and Space Launch System, NASA's largest and heaviest rocket to date.
MORE WHAT IT TAKES VIDEOS:
How Stunt Drivers Are Trained | What It Takes
• How Stunt Drivers Are ...
What It Takes To Survive Whitewater Raft Flips | What It Takes
• What It Takes To Survi...
How Aerial Firefighter Pilots Are Trained | What It Takes
• How Aerial Firefighter...
------------------------------------------------------
#NASA #WhatItTakes #BusinessInsider
Business Insider tells you all you need to know about business, finance, tech, retail, and more.
Visit us at: www.businessinsider.com
Subscribe: / businessinsider
BI on Facebook: read.bi/2xOcEcj
BI on Instagram: read.bi/2Q2D29T
BI on Twitter: read.bi/2xCnzGF
BI on Snapchat: / 5319643143
Boot Camp on Snapchat: / 3383377771
How NASA Drives The $144 Million Vehicle That Transports Rocket Ships | What It Takes
What an absolute marvel of engineering...mindblowing.
Too inefficient.
@@i3_13 let’s see u design soemthing better 🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@i3_13 that more eficient than lift a whole rocket in launchpad
@@i3_13 then redisign it will ya
Overengineered piece of crap
Could've just used 2 railway locomotives joined to do this job like ISRO
That's why ISRO is way more efficient
"This machine requires quick thinking mate. In the hands of a skilled driver, she can reach a whopping 1 mile per hour."
"That's mind blowing."
One big risk to be falling asleep behind a wheel
"That's equivalent to 17 football fields!"
To be fair that’s way faster than I could push it
@@DEWANGGOGTE xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxzzzz
🤣🤣
Being qualified to operate the crawlers has to be one of the biggest professional flexes out there.
That’s why they let that 12 yr old girl drive it.
I’m currently working at KSC as an engineer and seeing this in person is mind blowing. The fact they designed and build this before the ability to use CAD(Computer Aided Drawing) is so impressive. I’ve gone on it while it was running, heating and smelling those Diesel engines is unreal. You get a sense for how much power this thing has.
will it fit in my miata?
Kerbal space center?
@@tj9959 Kennedy
@@abaddon3863 you might have to do an ac delete at the very least :/
Can you find out the MPG? I can't find that stat anywhere.
This is absolutely incredible to see. I wish there more features of NASAs engineering showcased cause the tech is just amazing to see.
I wanted to become an astronaut :(
@@doctorpanigrahi9975 I did too but sadly I never got the chance and I don’t think I’m smart enough 😔
Thats nothing compared to military spending 700 billion usd.
@@droidwest90 SpaceX doesnt have one
@@doctorpanigrahi9975 Requirements:
US, Russian, European, Indian, Chinese citizen, or you must be very lucky (for example, a Malaysian citizen was trained to become a astronaut because of a collaboration between Malaysia and Russia, he flew to the ISS onboard a Soyuz)
Decent eyesight
Healthy
Good piloting skills
High G-force tolerance
Good survival skills
A degree in something (Engineering, Aerospace etc.)
A lot of luck
Thank you for this video. I didnt think much about the intricacies in just getting the space rocket to the launch pad. I mean, usually the focus is on the rockets, but such videos makes me appreciate the granular details which i dont even think of. Way to go!!!
Bsdk welcome
Excellent video. Really neat to see how this is still being used after more than 50 years!
That thing is freaking amazing! It's a massive building (almost sky scraper when loaded with a rocket) on wheels! So amazing that 60 years ago this thing is still running good/better then new and looks amazing while doing it...
This is an engineering marvel, but I’m surprised the technology hasn’t developed over the last 50 years.
Hasn't been a very big market to drive development.
They would for sure be able to make an improved version from scratch nowadays, but why would they spend that much money when they all ready have 2 working ones that do the job fine?
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it
@@tijnterpstra1986 I can think of one reason: if they needed crawler-transporters in another location.
Bro how else they gonna move that thing?
I've driven some big stuff in my life, 18 wheelers, mining forklifts, lhs with 2 trailers... a wretch... I would love an opportunity to drive this once in my life...
I rode a bike once
@@leatheljamie I rode in the back of a car once (I never learned how to ride a bike)
Be the most boring drive ever 😂😂😂
An absolute marvel of engineering, especially considering it was made more than 50 years ago!
Now, that was really interesting! I've been wondering things about this machine for years!
1mile an hour was way faster than what I initially expected.
So 10 hours to do 4 miles means a lot of stops on the way?
@@smacksman1 I reckon the turns and slopes add to the time
@@smacksman1 I understand that 10 hours is the combined time to drive to the pickup point and then driving to launchpad (not including the loading time).
I wasn't surprised by 1mph, but I was surprised how _fast_ 1mph looks when you're up close to that thing.
@@epiendless1128 ikr😆
I really want to watch entire documentary of these - behind the scenes - machinery
That's a seriously impressive piece of engineering and top marks to that awesome team who've kept it pristine like that for 40 years
60 years. The 1960s were 60 years ago. The 1980s were 40 years ago. lol
Absolutely love working with this! Walking it to and from the VAB is wicked!
Wow, just mindblowingly awesome!
I saw this first in a NASA documentary, Bridge To Space. It's really cool to finally see the inside of the machine.
awesome presentation of the crawler-transporter. also answered a question I've had for many years, the Slope at the pad, how did it not tip going up (or down). Thank you for the video..
The platform will lift slightly up and adjust the angle and height.
I really appreciate this kind of video. Because as a designer, it helps me to understand some mechanical aspects of new possible designs on this scale. I can imagine that even the designers of Pacific Rim did check this crawler-transporter for the mechas.
stupid design, why not to use rails instead?
@@german_novotiable cuz the launchpad is on an inclined plane. These are some of the best engineers on the planet, so ig they know better than us.
@@xynyde0 they know better how to use the budget very well.... obv corrupted
@@german_novotiable Well the budget is nothing compared to what the army gets... Are you telling me that these folks who work day and night to send these ships out in the space are corrupted? If they were, they wouldnt be in the space industry in the first place. Its one of the last places a corrupt bureaucrat would come looking for money.
@@xynyde0 obv not engineers, but theirs bosses yeah
Awesome!
I saw this and many things at NASA. Everything is just mindblowing!
In 7 tax dollar per person, this so worth
I've been curious about this thing so thank you for this video
That was intriguing! I knew it existed and had a role but I've never seen any content about it's specifics. What a fun video.
_Definitely one of my favourite videos out of the channel so far, I didn't even think of this huge piece of complicated equipment! Never seen it before or heard of it. Really respect the team behind it. Almost wish there was a giant rail system though? Less water usage_
Yes, and there should be potential for electrification too. The Alco and Cummins engines have a 5,000 gallon tank and use 1 gallon per 32 feet (approximately 165 gallons per mile)
according to a NASA fact sheet. With 4 miles one-way, that's 660 gallons to make it to the pad, 1,320 gallons round-trip.
train is the solution to all problems
It sounds feasible, but it's not. If the rail cracks, they have to replace that whole section of rail, though, which means that they got to get cranes in place, welders on standby, and if it's a curved rail section, it would have to have special presses, etc. It's literally more expensive and time consuming than letting it roll over rock. My dad's worked in the railroad industry for 31 years coming in August, and he's seen plenty of incidents happen due to just small cracks in the rail. Plus the rails would not be able to handle that much weight. A train can spread all that weight for more than a mile. But you place all that weight on just 131 feet... It's gonna squash it.
Why not build it where it launches? 😅
_(I know, sterile environment...)_
@@RyanStonedonCanadianGaming _gasp looking at starship_
Couldn't wait for the blast off 🚀
What an amazing team they are ..mind boggling the human potential
Thank you for making this video. It is very informative.
Vehicle I need after a good meal 😋
One of the coolest things I've ever seen. I couldn't believe how big it is when I saw it.
That's what she said?
@@lionelhuts875 yeah
One of two Crawlers built in 1965! No doubt has had multiple re-furbs and updates but quite an Antique!
I’ve never been so immersed! So cool man!
I went to the Kennedy space center and everything is soooo much bigger in person. The road the crawler drives on is crazy big too
Oh Wow, that is some beast. I wonder how many gallon it uses per mile?
About a lake Ontario
Yes
125.7 U.S. gal/mi according to Wikipedia
It chugged so much fuel that they needed refueling area's strategically placed along it's route to where they can refill if it would run low which it often did because it goes so slow and the amount of power it had made it very thirsty for fuel.
@@benlee4940 soviet union use train
An impressive bit of kit!
The drivers favorite line?
I live my life, a quarter of a mile per hour, at a time.
Always super impressed with people at NASA. Some of the most professional and knowledgeable people on this planet.
If they were they wouldn't have been outsmarted by private space companies.
@@cplcabs Perhaps, but "Worked at NASA" always looks good on a LinkedIn profile.
@@wickywills well, about as good as 'worked at Boeing" which isnt good given both their histories of incompetence which cost people their lives.
@@cplcabs What's Britain upto these days, huh? Nothing useful, that's for sure.
@@rajuaditya1914 trading, sending arms, equipment and funds to Ukraine, sending funds etc to poorer countries, creating/inventing a load of stuff, contributing heavily to space industry and so much more. Your point?
The main engines are the same model the US Navy used in the Newport class LST ships built in the 1960s and commissioned in the early 70s. 6 of these Alco 251C V16 engines powered each LST and 3 Alco 251E V8 ran the gensets. I worked on them in the mid 80s.
Great vid
Man, when that guy started going "look at the thing with the thing" levels of trying to look busy I was just thinking that outsourcing the task to an oil rig or construction company could probably shrink the hours from 10 to 2 with 1/3rd of the crew and none of the degrees necessary.
The Soviets used a railroad to the launchpad, but that meant there was an awkward process of lifting the rocket upright.
The rail system seems like it would be cheaper than the crawler long term
@@kenji-san4681 Rail makes more sense imo
Rails can't handle the weight of massive rockets like these. Look at the dry mass of Soyuz vs the dry mass of SLS. If the numbers I'm quickly looking at are right, just one of those white boosters on the side of SLS weigh twice as much if not more than Soyuz.
@@aarong.4691 Sure they can if you developed a larger rail system.
@@Skiller71Studios sure but that would probably be just as expensive as it would be a custom track that would need servicing for the smallest of defects. Someone with family in the railroad industry in another comment was saying how for just the smallest cracks you need to replace that section which means cranes, welders, etc all on standby. Vs just letting it roll on rock which is pretty cheap. NASA doesnt have the budget to develop an entire new train track system rails etc A lot of the smaller rockets that can be supported by normal rails are carried on rails. ULA's Atlas V does this for instance (rolled out vertically as well) but it is a much smaller rocket.
NASA engineering just truly blows my mind
$144mil crawler with a $1billion+ rocket on top and the steering is calibrated with a white paint pen. I love it!!!
So many things has to come together to make this work, impressive.
I wonder how much electricity it consumes in a year just sitting, being plugged to the circuit keeping the systems on. That cable looked beefy af.
One correction: These may be the largest self-propelled land vehicles in the world, but not the largest self-propelled vehicles in the world if you don't restrict to land vehicles.
@UCbx6J1s8Gq7cclqgMDNrH8A just about every large container ship is larger, along with supertankes and the like. The Pioneering Spirit crane vessel is currently listed as the worlds largest vessel by gross tonnage and also moves under its own power.
Neeeerd!🤓
@@nkvkc 🤡🤡
actually, the bagger 288 excavator is the largest self propelled land vehicle in the world
@MaybeItsBrandonMabe ok, I understand now, but u actually just copied and pasted a Wikipedia paragraph
Amazing engineering!
Simply fantastic!
Wow. American engineering. American prestige. Salute to all the NASA employees for making this happen.
🤣🤣
🤣🤣
Mortal engines, ma gad, the future is here.
The 'future' has been since the sixties, ya numpty.
Gonna be thinking of this machine during launches from now on
loved this. well done business Insider
Absolutely love NASA and SpaceX. To think it was just a little over 100 years ago people were strapping wings to their arms tryna flap their way into the air to now we consistently launch people and satellites into space successfully insane.
Just in my lifetime I've seen the price of sending a crew to the ISS decrease by an order of magnitude. Also, turnaround time is less than a third of what it was in the 90's-the Space Shuttle took several months of repair and preparation in between missions, whereas the Falcon 9 takes only a few weeks. In the near future we could very well have rockets which can make multiple trips to orbit in a single day
@@nameismetatoo4591 It's funny because NASA created a re-usable rocket in the 90's that was able to be reused in as short as 26 hours...which is monumentally better than what SpaceX can dream of right now. Unfortunately, politics got in the way and the program was scrapped in favor of the shuttle.
We also have self landing rockets
@@Alex_Aramayo And reusable spacecraft.
And ULA
It reminds me of the Pacific Rim where these crawls carry the Jeagurs to fight. IDK the directors probably took inspiration from this.
It's not inspiration bro
Only these things can carry it 😅
What an amazingly simple control layout in the cab, for such a colossus. I've driven specialized fork lifts with a bigger panel. :0
Interesting. Need to make one for my science project.
I've seen this thing in person, it's freaking *HUGE*
You must feel blessed!
@@Beun007 Idk about blessed, it was mind blowing to see it in person though. It wasnt moving or had anything on top of it at the time and it's still massive
@@Beun007 Feel blessed because he saw an inefficient waste of material?
@@samueltaylor9935 yeah the entire manned-spaceprogram hast just been a massive giant useless unproductive moneylaundering scheme. None of it produced anything in 60 years aside from satellites(produced on land and shot into space) that is useful to any of us. I dont even know what satellites are really useful for as Phones use Celltowers and I dont live on a secluded Island
That's what she said!
Seeing those guys walk so closely to those treads gives me anxiety.
The cinema in this video is very clear. I very much enjoyed the analysis behind the "project."
Solid video Business Insider
I’m surprised they went with a track crawler instead of a train track. Seems like for something this large a track would work better. But still that’s amazing
The launch pad sits on a hill, because that part of the coastline is a swamp and building things like the flame trenches into the ground is difficult. The hill means you can't use rails (incline is too steep). To make a rail system possible, they'd have to build the VAB at the same elevation as the launch pad, and build a dike between the VAB and pad. That may have been more expensive than building the crawler.
Rails also need more groundwork to spread the load.
@@h.dejong2531 finally someone speak English
@mclaine33 No dude , that would be efficient , what's wrong with you!? and build the VAB closer to the pad?! are you crazy????
@@h.dejong2531 I believe Russia use rails without issues.
@@cplcabs Yes, that's right. Baikonur isn't built on a swamp, so there's no problem digging a large pit under ground level, which means your launch pad doesn't have to be on a hill.
For such a complex vehicle, the controls in the cab are extremely simple.
Probably intentional tbh, less controls/more automation = less chance of driver error I’d imagine
I would think NASA is a big proponent of the K.I.S.S. design principle.
@@KenMochii the crawler has like 70000 individual components lol
@@saeedthwalhath they we're talking about the cabin controls
I was always curious how a rocket or satellite is moved or transported from assembly to launch pad, now I got the answer, thanks for informing.
7:05 I LOVE IT! LOL reference to a Home PC - its never shut down. XD
This crawler moved the mighty Saturns to the pad in the 1960s. Beautiful engineering. How about a bit of trivia. My father worked with both, later a similar crawler was built to transport refinery modules in Al Jubail, Saudi Arabia.
Number one state sponsor of terrorism? The one that supported 9/11?
I have seen this immense vehicle. Every run is an engineering run because it is so complex with so many parts. I was wondering for a long time why NASA did not put it on rails that makes things a lot more efficient, much easier and a much smooth ride with minimum risks. The distance is fixed with a clear point A to B. Why the road is not a straight line?
The road isn't a straight line because there are multiple launch pads
I was thinking the exact same thing, why don't they use rails instead?
I’m pretty sure the Russian use somthing similar to large trains on tracks to move their rockets . Googling russian rockets at the moment doesn’t bring up what I’m looking for !
Yeah great idea, but I guess that it would require a large investment and introduce risks which nasa doesnt like. That’s why innovation often requires competition. They're stuck with a really old machine that requires 50 engineers to even run it haha
@@MrJellekeulemans Yes but also putting a rocket sideways to be transported can put pressure on places that we may not want pressure to be.. Transporting it vertically on the launch pad allows the rocket to be at maximum working capacity when it counts
Super cool job to have!!
Them exhaust pipes are dope
Is $144 million today's replacement cost, or is that the cost of one crawler back when purchased in the 1960's?
I was fortunate enough to have taken a tour of NASA in Florida back when the Apollo program was in full swing. It was great to have been able to go into the Vehicle Assembly Building and see one of the stages of an Apollo rocket inside.
The whole program in the 1960s was 3 billion dollars an Apollo era NASA engineer told me. This is back when a 4bd 2 bath house was $15,000-17,000 in suburban Washington DC. A full sized Chevy was around $1400. That's how much they've stolen from us with inflation over the years. I think 144M would be about right for today. This is in money pre-Biden's inflation.
Those days there is no left-left specialist or right-leg specialist. Now each part will be sold separately because of the greedy corporate mentality of people. Maybe if they build one it would be $1440.99 million only without tax.
@@mars-cs4uk Eh
Honestly i feel like greedy companies may have a different idea from their eyes
I just had that thought
Hm
Who knows
Hi, you say you actually went into the VAB? We also have done the full tour, but no way was we allowed into the VAB! Yes we were there in 2006, when the Shuttle was on launch pad 39 A, and also another one inside the VAB, we were shown Inside the building that was assembling the various units for the ISS, and also the Apollo building, where a Apollo 5 rocket is stored lying full length of the building, the site is vast, and we started at 11.30 am, but still didn't see everything by 5.30 pm!
I think it’s the price it cost to build the crawler back in the 60s, including RnD adjusted for inflation. So probably around $20 million 1960s dollars.
If this was built 50 years ago, imagine what we can build in the next few years :o
We are building the same but with max clock speed of 2mph.
@@PradhumnShandilya who is
why would we?
It's my blowing to see a very old technology alongside new ones
That was a great video.
After the flawless deployment of the James Webb Telescope it will be exciting to see what the NASA team can do in the future.
I'm so excited for Webb's first real pictures in summer. Great so see some new action in space exploration
@@mrsbelcher Even the test pictures look amazing.
Imagine having to drive for 10 hours for a 4 mile drive
Its amazing what we can build i would like 2 see a timelapse of it being built
This crawlers looks like something out of Arrakis. So cool!
Why not platform on a rail and cut down all the maintenance and complex machinery given that it goes on the same launch site all the time.
The purpose of it is to allow the fully assembled rocket to move without ever having to be placed horizontally. Doing that by rail would put extreme pressure on a very small area
@@dontworry1302 is it not possible to distribute load on mutiple tracks?
@@sportsonwheelss The number of tracks that would be required to move the entire stack in one piece vertically would be so large as to make it less practical than a vehicle. Another concern may have been that the ground would not remain stable enough for tracks to be a viable solution since it is Florida.
Your videos are always the best💯 I do receive a notification each time you post a new video.. We'll have regrets for things we did not participate in...Investment should always be on any creative man's heart for success in life.
Nice content mate! So happy to announce that I have gained financial freedom by investing in digital currency. Now I know that multi creation of various streams of income is the ideal Principle for financial sustainability.
I have secured financial freedom by investing in bonds, equities, NFT's and crypto currency the most profiting of them all..
I must say crypto is the future and with the way Bitcoin is climbing so high it's really advisable for people to invest now.
I wanted to invest more in crypto, but the fluctuations in crypto value discouraged me into dumping.
@@betheluktu7647 Crypto trading is the best investment anyone could get into. As it could make you rich in a blink of an eye, trading with an expert is the only key to successful trading
Amazing
amazing
This is pretty cool! How does SpaceX do it? Also just a thought I had: This probably releases more CO2 for a single job then a person in their entire life~
Nah compare it to a big container ship and the emissions are next to nothing
Cars are worse
@Phub Bing Because if they spend too much money, they won't have more. For SLS they can always throw more tax money on that. SLS already costs more that developing and launching Falcon Heavy 40 times
It seems to be useless for SpaceX. Looks like time travel.
From what I can tell SpaceX uses ordinary trucks for road transportation and for getting to the pad they have it on rails being pulled by what looks to be an airport tug
Let's make the real question, how mutch power does it make?
The engines used to drive the generators are 2 x 2,750 hp engines. They run 4 x 1,315 hp motors, one on each track set. 2 x 1,065hp engines drive generators that run the hydraulics, controls, steering etc.
@@benlee4940 in other words 1 mph is the fastest it goes. lol
@@fermentedfruit i think it can do 5
@@ZaHandle yeah, going flat out I think it can go over 5 but it is usually limited to a top speed of one mph
absolute madness :D
sick
5 years to change bearings... that definitely sounds like NASA.
Slow and steady wins the space race.
Spending money and giving jobs :)). They don't care about productivity.
@@arcturionblade1077 Win my ass. If there is no SpaceX, ISS will be into Putin and Soyuz. Spending a lot of moneys for obsolete technologies and stuffs are blocking innovation.
The actual wording was 5 years to upgrade and test the bearings. You need to stop thinking of large engineering systems as being the same as your everyday Toyota or Mazda. These things have been so well looked after they have been used for 57 years, and probably have another 50 more in them at least.
@@arcturionblade1077 Russia won the space race. They were the first to get into space and get a man into space. The US won (only just) the race to get to the moon
It was designed by a NASA engineer named Garland Johnston who ran the vibration and acoustics lab at Marshal Space Flight Center in Huntsville, AL, for the Saturn V. Until this idea, they had no way to launch the Saturn V.
Good Stuff.
Great piece of technology !
SpaceX would never! It's time for an upgrade.
Space X uses the crawler.
@@n3307v SpaceX don't use the crawler. The booster is transported to the cape by road, then integrated with the upper stage and payload. After integration it's moved to the launchpad by the Transporter Erector Launcher.
Only NASA use the crawler, they're the only ones using the Vehicle Assembly Building and crawler way.
It's amazing how little on that machine is digitalized and how much it relies on human judgement. Also, why spray water everywhere instead of just in front of the tracks? Very cool piece of technology.
It only sprays in front of the tracks as far as i've seen in this video
i mean you could also just make it a clean road like a Runway i guess that would be better. Then they dont have to spray any water
*slaps the track - "You can stack so many rocket stages on this bad boy"
This is really top notch content...those engineers at NASA are something else bravo!
Nasa didnt make it!. A crane company did. Elon uses preexisting machines on wheels that travel over 30kph empty
@@genebohannon8820 That is correct but those engineers have maintain them for over a half century.
But you should turn your computer off completely when you're done using it lol. Letting your computer sleep for long periods of time is detrimental over time
for simple computers, it does not matter. For servers, mission critical computers, high performance PCs, and likewise, mission critical crawler systems, you do not want to do that very often.
Booting up isn't a nice process for computers it seems, I remember in my highschool, the IT team just decided to put all the computers in the school to sleep instead of turning them off
@@okeyhehe1728 exactly. When you do that you open the door to the risk of damaging hardware components and when the system is a 1 of a kind rocket transport vehicle, you don't want to take such a large and unecessary risk. It may seem like a waste to power heating on the engines 24/7 but losing such a unique system is far more costly than keeping the crawler's lights on!
Those annoying Windows updates are going to add up though, lol.
Beautiful piece of engineering. Though I do certainly believe with today technology, experience they could create a crawler 100x more efficient, simplier, due to the 60 year age gap. Nasa hasn't done that most likely due to the slow production of rockets, and no drive in market. Though SpaceX may be the ones to fund that project, since they aim to make rockets with efficiently.
Yeah sure there could be some minor advances, but in the end you will have to move the same million ton rockets miles away from the assembly buildings to the launch pad, and there is no better vehicle than this.
@@scibust a train
@@filbao8113 Trains at most have cars that can hold loads up to a million pounds in weight, while the payloads being carried here are up to 16 million pounds.
SpaceX basicly has no use for something like this, they transport their Rocket (Starship) in 2 Parts (Booster and Ship) on smaler Mammoet Self-Propelled Modular Transporters. Then they just lift it on to the launch mount, no need to transport the whole Tower like with Saturn 5/SLS.
@@filbao8113 The launch pad sits on a hill, because that part of the coastline is a swamp and building things like the flame trenches into the ground is difficult. The hill means you can't use rails (incline is too steep). To make a rail system possible, they'd have to build the VAB at the same elevation as the launch pad, and build a dike between the VAB and pad. That may have been more expensive than building the crawler.
Hats off
door gaan ik vind het wel leuk. je shorts zijn heel goed
I feel like it's easier just to build a straight line road.
Why aren’t you at nasa?!
.. they have probably already considered the possibility of building a straight road between sites. So there is probably a good reason why it's not praticle.
The launchpads have changed over the years and there are several. Oddly enough, concrete and steel experiences high wear and tear when a skyscraper sized rocket goes off on top of it.
@@josezapata9674 That's a non-answer. The OP was not harassing anyone. You could've explained why straight line is not a workable idea, like Samson did above. Being edgy af has brought you 2 likes, that's great of course.
Holy shit dude!! You should work at NASA!
finally a truck to support massive egos!
We maintain and operate to this day, one of those exact engine/gen sets from the same era to supply 3 towns with back up power. Alco, S16-60. V 16 cylinder, 2750 turbo HP.
SLOOOOOOOOWLY!