Do you like big trucks? I’m talking about a Really Big Truck. The Biggest Truck in the World. Here it is: the Marion Power Shovel Company’s 1965 Missile Crawler Transporter Facility. It’s 131 feet (40 m) long, 114 feet (35 m) wide and 20 to 26 feet tall, and weighs 6 million pounds. Its bed is the size of a baseball infield. And like a proper CC, after an engine swap and some upgrades to increase its load capacity to 18 million pounds, it’s still in use today. You’ve certainly seen this truck before, though you may not have noticed it under its payload…
Better known as the NASA Crawler-Transporter, this truck has carried complete rocket ships from the Vehicle Assembly Building to launch pads 39A and 39B since the time of Apollo. Last weekend we saw the new Apollo 11 documentary film, which I heartily recommend to all, young and old. It’s based on a large stash of previously unscreened 70mm footage taken during the launch and recovery, and more unseen footage of the flight itself. The countdown, even though I’ve seen it a thousand times, gave me chills. Anyway, the movie starts with closeups of this massive magnificent vehicle, moving along at less than one mile per hour, carrying the Apollo 11 – Saturn V rocket ship and its launch platform and tower to the pad, as tall as a 36 story building. As huge as this truck is, you can hardly see it under that platform.
Here’s a better look at the Crawler-Transporter, carrying a Mobile Launch Platform back to the VAB. You can just see one of its two cabs at its corner. There are cabs on both ends since it goes either direction without turning around. Wheels and tires aren’t up to loads of this scale, so four pairs of tracks are used instead.
The Crawler-Transporter has a diesel-electric drivetrain, like a locomotive. As of its latest upgrade, the CT has sixteen 375 hp DC electric traction motors, powered by four 1,000 kW DC generators, driven by two 2,750 hp V16 ALCO 251C diesel engines. Two AC generators, driven by two 16-cylinder 2,220 hp Cummins engines, are used for all onboard power demands, including jacking, steering, and payload power. Its tanks hold 5,000 gallons of diesel fuel. Speed under load is 1 mph, top speed unloaded is 2 mph. Mileage? 165 gallons per mile, or put another way, 32 feet per gallon.
After the Apollo program finished, the Crawler-Transport worked in thirty years of Space Shuttle operations. The Crawlerway is a dual-lane road built for CTs. It’s 3.5 miles from the VAB to Pad 39A, 4.2 miles to Pad 39B. Each lane is 40 feet wide, separated by a 50 foot median. The top layer is Tennessee river gravel, 4 inches thick on the straight sections and 8 inches thick on curves. Tennessee river rock was chosen for its anti-spark properties. Beneath that is 4 feet of graded, crushed stone, resting on two layers of fill.
Pad 39A (seen in the back right) is now used by SpaceX, which assembles their Falcon rockets horizontally near the pad and tilts them up for launch. The Vehicle Assembly Building, Pad 39B (back left) and the Crawler-Transporters will remain in use for NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) program, which is expected to begin flights in 2020 (maybe).
This shot shows off the Crawler-Transporter’s ability to keep its bed level while climbing a 5% grade up to the pad. If that payload fell over, it would be a Very Bad Day. So the CT has a laser guided leveling system to keep the platform level within 0.16 degrees. A team of nearly 30 engineers, technicians and drivers operates the vehicle.
Each track has 57 shoes, and each shoe weighs a full ton. With eight one-ton shoes simultaneously slapping the earth, “you get a low frequency vibration which you feel when riding on the crawler. It’s a lot like being on a ship,” said CT Project Manager John Giles in a Popular Mechanics article on the CTs.
There are two Crawler-Transporters. (“First rule in government spending: why build one when you can have two at twice the price?” — S. R. Hadden in Contact.) They were designed and built by the Marion Power Shovel Company using components from Rockwell International. Marion’s experience in massive power equipment goes back to its participation in the Panama Canal, Hoover Dam and Holland Tunnel projects.
This diagram shows the 40-inch diameter guide tubes above each pair of tracks that transmit loads from the Mobile Launch Platform which attaches to the top of the CT. Each guide tube has hydraulic cylinders for keeping the bed level. The MLP contacts the crawler at four points, arranged in a 90-foot square (same as the base line on a professional baseball field). You can also see the four electric propulsion motors on each track pair, which also has four steering cylinders, since the CT is steered like a wheeled truck would be, not by differential track speeds like a tank. Hydraulic steering pressure is up to 5,000 PSI.
One of the original diesel engines for CT and payload auxiliary AC power is being hoisted out of CT-2 during its 2012 upgrade.
Here is one of the new Cummins 16 cylinder 2,220 hp diesel engines used for auxiliary AC power before installation in CT-2.
Like any other truck, the Crawler-Transporter has a cab with driver’s seat, steering wheel, accelerator pedal and instrumentation. There’s also a windowless control room at the center of the CT for monitoring its engine, electrical and hydraulic systems.
These Crawler-Transporters are so big and so important that in 2000 they were listed in the National Register of Historic Places. A truck so big it’s a place. Here’s a picture from when it was new. There are other mobile structures which are bigger, but they have external power sources, so they’re not trucks. After over fifty years, the NASA Crawler-Transporters are still the biggest self-contained load-bearing land vehicles, i.e. trucks, in the world. And they’re ready to go for another fifty years. Who knows where its payloads will be off to in 2069?
Regarding NASA having built a pair of these. I was taught “Two is one and one is none.” Yet we liked triple redundancy where I worked.
I believe NASA had and still has at least double redundancy for just about everything possible, including astronauts. With the pressures of the space race and the precision of launch schedules, determined by astronomic windows and such, delaying a launch due to a malfunctioning Crawler would have been unthinkable. I doubt there was ever even a question that they would build at least two.
There was also the Gemini VI and VII missions that launched very close to each other in December 1965 and did a physical rendezvous in orbit. I don’t know, but they may have used the crawlers separately and near simultaneously.
It makes sense that it would be an official historic PLACE. After all, there are many historic buildings that are much smaller. And it’s not really a lot faster than a building:)
Gemini missions were stacked on the pad and did not use the crawler transporter.
Good to know. Makes sense, they were quite a bit smaller and the program started before the crawlers were finished.
Another great CC article. Thanks Do you work in the space industry?
Given all the private activity around space exploration and the attendant innovation I am willing to bet that we are headed into a new golden age of space travel. Hope so anyway!
Thanks! No, I’m a computer engineer and a lifelong space cadet.
I knew instantly what that vehicle was as soon as I saw the thumbnail. A veritable landship, no?
THANK YOU for letting me know about the movie!! I watched Apollo 11 land on my parent’s black and white TV, this will be so much better!! I’m going to see it tonight.
Apollo 11 landed on your parent’s TV? That must have been quite a sight to see…
There’s a genuine LOL!
Oh, I’m crying now.. That’s not good….
You’re Welcome! Part of my motivation to research and write this up was to spread the word about this amazing film. Let us know how you liked it.
Oh, my parents were NOT expecting Armstrong to step into their living room for sure! The rocket exhaust stunk and blew our furniture everywhere! 🙂
I saw much footage and many photographs I had never seen or even heard existed. They added some tension to the film at a few points by using a countdown timer. The highlight for me was watching the Moon landing with the fuel remaining indicator (in red with less than one minute remaining!) and the descent back into the atmosphere with some very cool pyrotechnics and that infamous pitch back up and then back down again – you could see the Earth’s limb during that. They made the capsule aerodynamic so that it could pitch up and down by changing attitude to fine tune the landing site and to have extra braking time. My only quibble was the Asteroids video game style illustrations showing some maneuvers they didn’t have film of- they could have so easily done better on that.
If you grew up during that time or have an interest in NASA, the movie is well worth your money.
Wow, the ultimate flatbed! And with level-ride, no less.
There are not many pieces of equipment that do their job as well in 2019 as they did in 1965, so it is nice to see this if for no other reason.
It is fun to imagine a baseball game being played on this. Anything that goes beyond the deck is a home run?
And the baseball team is always on the road.
I’ve always wondered about things like this from the middle of the space race when optimism about the future was high – if the engineers that built it ever imagined it would still be in use (for it’s original purpose too!) over 50 years later?
In any case, they deserve full credit for building it to last!
Playskool steering wheel
Also known as “Hans and Franz” for a time. Nicely done, huge machines always fascinate me.
I’m very curious about the inside of that. Is there a dingy break room with a flickering Coke machine in there? Bathrooms?
But can you get a lift kit for it?
With all those diesel engines they could roll coal with it, right?
Yeah, yeah, but how’s the infotainment system? 🙂
Seriously, though, a fascinating article about a vehicle I didn’t even know existed.
This may be a dumb question, but does this mover stay under the launch pad during the launch? Presumably not, but it’s not made clear here.
I was wondering the same thing, but noticed that where Mike cites the vehicle’s dimensions, he says the height is 20 to 26 feet tall. Since there is a 6 foot difference here, perhaps after it delivers its payload to the launchpad, it becomes a “Low Rider” and just drives away before the rocket is launched.
This is speculation though… I’ve not looked this up… yet. ;o)
Yes, Rick, I believe you’re right. The picture above shows how the Mobile Launcher Platform is bigger in both directions than the Crawler. In this picture of takeoff, a pedestal supporting an outer corner of the MLP is clearly visible. This Wikipedia article says “At the pad, the MLP was supported by six steel pedestals, plus four additional extensible columns.”. So like you said, I think the Crawler-Transporter must have come onto the pad with its payload bed extended high, and lowered the MLP onto the pedestals.
The Saturn V and the Space Shuttle were assembled on top of a mobile launcher platform, which rides on top of the crawler-transporter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_Launcher_Platform
You didn’t answer my question at all. Did you read it?
So I looked it up: apparently/presumably the flatbed truck moves out of the way during launch, but it’s not very explicit.
From this picture, it’s quite clear that the mover deposits the pad on a six-legged structure, and then gets out of the way. It obviously wasn’t designed to have the massive thrust (and heat) of the rockets on it.
Yes! Our replies have matching timestamps, Paul.
Whats it actually weigh pounds is a strange method of measuring tare weight and not used in the real world. Interesting device though a rail system would have been easier its not like it goes anywhere else.
Not enough contact area to support the load. Not enough traction to start or stop.
The width of the track would also be an issue. They would need a custom rail gauge which means custom locomotives.
All the public documents from NASA I could find, such as this one, put the CT’s weight and capacity in pounds. Probably they put it differently in their engineering documents.
The PM article I cited mentions NASA considered rail and canal-barge schemes before they settled on the tracked land transporter.
Going from memory, I recall it was like a 2 day trip or so to get from the VAB to the launchpad, inch by inch. Excellent read and beautiful photos! Truly this workhorse will someday belong in a museum, but none will be able to accommodate its size. Thanks for this insightful read.
Give it an address and build a museum on it.
I’ve been fortunate enough to have been able to “crawl” all over one of these monsters, twice.
While in Air Force ROTC, Uncle Sam gave our detachment an incentive (fun) 3 day trip to the Cape in Novembers ’71 and ’72.
Both years we got the “cooks tour” of the facilities; Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB), launch control center, and (among many other things) the crawler. One can’t really appreciate the size of the crawler (or anything else) until they have experienced it up close and personal.
We were told the first trip of the crawler ruined the track bearings. The problem was deemed to incorrect materials used to make the roadway. The roadways were laid with new material and the problem disappeared.
Wow, that sounds like fun! Fortunate man!
I think these crawlers still hold several world records. I would expect a kitchen, toilet and break room on board just like a large dragline excavator (Marion made a lot of those).