It's about time they get all those school building out of the Hangar, now there is room to park an airship inside again!

So now the question is what private sector people can afford to and will help save this incredible structure? We could use a world class aviation museum similar to the Smithsonian and if not then some other use would be easy to imagine. It just should be saved and really there should be something to honor our vets involved as well as being a place people would come to from all over the world. We could use the economic boost. We also have the chance to keep the history of those magnificent dirigibles alive.
FLY NAVY!

Two months isn't much time to make something happen....

Get rid of the EPA and keep the the hangar. End of story.

Comment: The building can't be heated

Truth: A similar hangar in snowy Bonn Germany is now a tropical garden and water park used year round.

Truth: Smithsonian Stephen F. Udvar Hazy Hangar in Dulles, VA is maintained to a temperature of 72°±2°. A constant temperature is less harmful to artifacts that are kept in the building than one that rises and falls; thus, the 2° spread. In addition the humidity level is kept at 35%-45%.


Comment: Of all the projects crying out for $, this is the most idiotic waste of resources.

Truth: Preservation often is less expensive than rebuilding from weeds. In this specific case, the Navy, responsible for the environmental cleanup, has found that the preservationists have been correct, and the cost of the cleanup has been far less expensive than the slash and burn approach the Navy originally recommended. Tax savings have been achieved, simply because taxpayers required the Navy to be diligent.

Truth: The preservationists have demonstrated through their interaction that they are interested in saving historic integrity of a National Historic Site not prevent appropriate environmental cleanup. It was the sheer size of the building and runway, along with the ideal location protected by coastal mountains and its proximity to a large waterway and major city that caused Charles Lindberg to recommend that a sister west coast research facility to Langley be located at Moffett Field, far from the reach of German bombers. The National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics in 1940 opened NACA Ames, eventually renaming itself to NASA Ames in 1958.


Comment: I'm looking forward to the day it is demolished so we can enjoy broader views of the Bay.

Truth: The only broader view of the bay for the average citizen that would be gained, would be one from Highway 101, likely quickly be compromised by new cheap development. A restored roof is in the cards, and it would not only bring about a fresh structure, but even might allow a visitor a trip to its roof top and a view of the South Bay available only to pilots today. In addition, a visitor would see NASA Research Park from a perspective few see today, as well as get an opportunity to appreciate the depth of the research facility. Most people don't realize that two National Historic Sites exist at Moffett Field, The Hangar and the Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel.

In the end, we as citizens owe our fellow countrymen the truth, fiscal prudence not rhetoric, and a way to understand our past and a desire to envision a better future for future generations. Tearing down the past like Chauchescu, Hitler, and Stalin in wasteful haste is clearly not a model for our sustainable future on this planet.

Please, help your fellow citizens understand the truth.

The whole structure is toxic, ugly, useless, and a big waste of money to maintain. Just get rid of it already!

I could argue that the old saying that beauty is in the eye of the beholder and that one man's junk is another's treasure, so we should preserve Hanger One for the sake of hitory if for no other reason. We have seen so many structures torn down in the march to future development and now realize they are forever lost, at the time only seeing brand new as the way to go. We think we build great edifices of design genius, but to many these modern buildings start out as an eye sore. It's all about priorities and money and this is a project worth the money if for no other reason than historic value. We can keep this piece of history and use it well if it gets done from the start as a place of interest to many and an air museum appeals to most people as a place to visit. NASA and the Navy could do some great education and history things as well as show the public where the public benefits from them. They should put resources in to this, but the overwhelming contributions should come from the private sector as there are so many other needs for government funds. If there were to be a public drive to raise funds and save the hanger I have no doubt that it could help and would possibly raise private sector awareness to the point where a lage contributor would be found. It seems that most of us want to save the hanger, but no one wants to help pay for it. It is too bad, as somewhere down the road, future generations might not get to see up close and in person these massive stuctures that housed the biggest flying machines ever built.

"The Navy has been planning to send the windows to a landfill rather than clean off the caulking that may contain toxic PCBs. Preservationists say that disposing of the windows may not be the cheapest way for the United States Navy to meet its environmental cleanup responsibilities..." I don't think these preservationists have a clue how difficult,time-consuming, expensive and manually labor-intensive it would be to decontaminate the corrugated windows and replace the PCB-impacted material next to the windows. The Navy isn't exaggerating. If there are PCBs above 50 ppm PCBs, the whole process would have to be done in compliance with TSCA, and the entire facility would need to be remediated to a 1 ppm PCB standard. These preservationists have almost certainly never done an abatement under TSCA, or they wouldn't think it's less expensive than offsite T&D.