Space Shuttle Launch Complex 39A with Challenger STS-6 (1:144)

Real Spacecraft
,
396

Manfrad, I am about 12 pages behind and catching up slowly as you are sharing a lot of stuff. But, where can I begin…more and more I see what you are trying to achieve is more and more I’m realize this might be out of my zone…any zone.

The size difference between space shuttle, MLP, FSS, RSS is mind bellowing. I am getting a headache seeing this is 1/168 and this 1/160 and this 1/200, and 1/144. Every additional input from you will change several things and if one does not stay on top this can end up very badly in the end and I believe my build of this will be that…bad. As with all these adjustments I will have a model structure that will not lineup correctly.

I do have confidence in your ability to comprehend all these changes and give us a satisfaction result. Thus, I am following it very closely to everything you are doing.

Either that or this particular project will lend me to starting a new hobby…

IMG_8658
IMG_86581245×799 195 KB

397

Hi everybody,

still a short addendum to the upper connection of the OMS Pod Covers to the PCR Bay, one can clearly see from this HiRes. photo of STS-1.


Source: NASA

And it is true, as I suspected it, because the Pod Covers sit completely in front of the RSS Main Doors, so also this detail would be clarified.

Another mistake in Revell’s vision of the RSS is the fact that the front of the PCR Bay is completely straight, which is not true, as illustrated in this section of the STS-1 photo:

The red line is intended to represent the execution of the Revell model and the green line the reality. The additional grid structure on both sides was completely ignored by both Revell and LVM, which unfortunately very quickly leads to a “warped perspective”, including the arrangement of the OMS Pod Covers.

There the side guide rails for the Payload Canister are missing, which sit behind the side grid frames.

But these are the little things that Revell handled relatively generously and easily 40 years ago.

And LVM unfortunately overlooked a number of these quirks or had to make do with them, and attached their detail kit parts onto the oldie kit, as well as improving a number of things if the effort wasn’t too great. The RSS elevator shaft is, among other things, unfortunately an example of such “mutual sins of omission”.

On the other hand, the whole launch tower is far too complex to do everything technically correctly, but it definitely could have been a little more. But then Revell would not only have been allowed to reheat the old injection molds for the new edition but also fundamentally revise the kit, and first of all had to resolve the scale dilemma, which in retrospect would have been far too expensive.

Another example are the doors (RSS Main Doors) in the PCR Bay,

which at Revell has this simplified rounded shape, not to mention the already discussed OMS Pod Covers (left).

While the bay in Revell’s kit is not further structured and there are no doors to be seen, LVM still has the door gap (B-55) and the lower small ones doors (A-54) indicated by PE parts.

However, the doors do not reach all the way to the top, which is why one can save the upper door gap (B-56).

In reality it looks a little different, as one can see in this image. The two main doors connected by hinges are flat,


Source: NASA

and are opened after the payload canister has been connected to transfer its payload into the PCR, what one can see in this image from the interior.


Source: NASA

Based on the dimensions of the PCR and the bay given in this drawing, one can see to what extent these parts are again undersized by Revell (red),


Source: capcomespace.net

what you have to consider when installing the modified doors and OMS Pod Covers!

Oh how good that we have compared.

2 Likes
398

Hello Mike,

I can understand your desperation all too well, and I basically feel no different. But you have to stay tuned at this seemingly endless error analysis so as not to lose your head and go crazy.

That’s why it’s a Herculean task to make all these corrections and modifications. Maybe you can’t realize all changes and one cannot have everything.

But first I have to grit my teeth and must conclude this damned analysis.

3 Likes
399

Hello friends,

actually, I was thinking that I have almost done the inventory of the main Revell flubs, but far from it.

Therefore once again back to this overview of the parts of the right support structure of RSS with the Hinge Column to the FSS, whose analysis indeed is still awaited.

It is about these parts 22, 39, 41, 47 and 54, shown in the building instructions.

So, let’s go.

Here is Revell part 39.

On the left side again, as usual, the profiles and the scaled dimensions (1:168), and on the right side the Revell dimensions that differ partially quite strong.

And here is part 41,

part 47,

here part 54,

and finally the two parts 22.

As far as for today. I need a little break.

3 Likes
400

Hello everybody,

here we go, because after all I want to complete the seemingly endless chapter of analyzing the undersized Revell parts soon, which on the one hand is pretty stressful and for some guys this might be boring, but on the other hand this must also be done to know where the (Revell) rubber meets the road, to avoid being caught out at some point.

And so let’s have a look at the rotation axis of the RSS Hinge Column (Ø 42’'), around which this Monster construction must be pivoted for loading and unloading the orbiter up to the MLP for what these two huge Hinge Column Bearings are installed on the axis.

The connecting structure has a triangular cross-section and a similar framework as the FSS, and is directly connected with its tier floors.


Source: retrospaceimages.com (STS-6)

In these images, the two frame parts (11, 12) are fixed only provisionally at the tower.

Comparing the structure of these frame parts with the NASA Demolition plan (Pad 39B), one notices that the arrangement of some struts don’t conform with the true run (light blue), what can be seen from the following picture. This apparently has to do with these two bearings, which namely sit exactly at these points of the rotation axis and need an appropriate place, which is why this struts sit a little higher.

These facts must be considered in more detail in connection with the planned heightening of the FSS and the lateral RSS support frame anyway, as this will result in further shifts what will be explained still.

Here you can see the two bearings of the rotation axis again in detail, initially the upper bearing,

and here the lower bearing, which at Revell but unfortunately too deeply seated, and thus also the RSS, because their Main Floor is exactly at this level.

For orientation here the Level 135 is marked, and how one can easily see, this bearing is thus approximately at a height level with the lower edge of ceiling. If one extends the fleeing, one sees that the middle horizontal struts of both Revell frame parts (in the previous image) meet directly to this bearing and would block it, but this would be nonsense. And that’s why these struts can only run to the rotation axis above the bearing, namely as shown (light blue).

In the following panorama image you can see this a little bit clearer, although the Centaur platform and the walls of the Weather Protection System conceal some things, but both systems at the STS-6 were not existing.


Source: nasatech.net

And these are the corresponding Revell parts of the bearings (169-171 and 173), but both the diameter and the height are too small. In addition, the upper bearing has no cover plate (173) like the Revell bearing.

For these dimensions it should be noted that I could find only the diameter of the Hinge Column (42’') in the NASA plans which I have used as a reference value for the scaling of the bearing dimensions on the basis of detailed photos.

And this is the comparison of the profile dimensions of the two frame parts 11 and 12 with the scaled values (1:168).

As you can see, all other profiles except for the 14’’ tubes are partially undersized clear, whereupon the diameter of the rotation axis (42’') with Ø 5 mm lies clear below the nominal value of Ø 6,4 mm (1:168).

That was it but now for today. Next time I have to return once more to the outer RSS support structure, because some parts are still missing. And as I have found, the analysis of the backside of the PCR is missing so far, what remains to be done.

But soon this crazy Sisyphean task is done, and then I know what is to change, or not …

3 Likes
401

Hello everybody,

today it goes once more back to the outer RSS support structure, because there are still missing some parts in the analysis.

Here again an overview of the building instructions with the corresponding parts.

The construction of Revell’s two main parts 45 and 46 is identical except for the two marked profiles on part 45, and that is the extended side beam (W27) and the additional lower strut (Ø 12’'). But unfortunately, the dimensions of the profiles are not correct what I had already then indicated in my first presentation.
The analysis in this image here has now been completed.

As stated earlier, the two lower frame profiles and also the lateral end profile (part 43), how apparent from the overview are no I-beams, but in reality tubes with Ø 24’', as well as the two upper profiles.

By contrast, the side beam of part 46 is a 20’’ tube and not a rectangular profile as Revell. The inner struts have partially significant deviations from the real thing.

Part 40 has consistently round profiles Ø 16’’ and not a rectangular profile.

The parts 88 and 156 are the central and lateral connecting struts of the support structure, which are all round profiles Ø 18’'. While the diagonal struts are somewhat too thin, the horizontal struts at first sight are okay so far. But strangely they are not exactly round, but have different diameters in the longitudinal and transverse direction (3,0/2,8 mm), which initially irritated me when measuring.

And to this support structure belongs still this side support frame (part 53), whose dimensions are clearly undersized, which can be seen from the following image.

But this supporting frame must be scratch built in any case, because it must be also raised due to the raise of the Tower.

And as I’ve stated in the meantime, even the analysis of the backside of the PCR (part 29) is still missing, what is hereby rescheduled.

As already was discussed in detail in the analysis of other PCR walls, there are also on the backplane significant deviations of Revell’s profile from reality, both in terms of form as well as the dimensions of the profiles, which is why the Revell-PCR should be replaced completely by scratch-building.

Although there are certainly some Revell inconsistences more, I want it but it (for now) let the matter rest and slowly turn to more pleasant things again. The To-do list has become anyway longer than was expected initially.

2 Likes
402

Hi folks,

after my detailed endless and stressful analysis of the hitherto unknown scale problems of the old Revell kit I will now come back to the actual work. And I can tell you that change is not as simple as it seems, and first of all I had to scroll far back to find the right connection.

At that time I had stopped at the nice Rainbirds,

and there I will go on now.

After I had recapitulated the former state of affairs, I came to the decision not to use my last mounting template for the screws on the flange rings with the smaller spacers (0,25 mm), because the screw spacing compared to the screw diameter from 0,5 mm ultimately appears to be too low.

Therefore, I’ll stay with the spacers from Styrene strips 0,38 x 1,5 mm, but between them strips 0,5 x 1,5 mm were glued with MEK as a placeholder for the screw-rods and I have still extended the mounting template, because the two middle Rainbirds are slightly thicker and consequently have more screws on the flanges.

Next, I’ve drawn a sketch, to finally determine the dimensions. And so the two Rainbirds should look, which are right next to the SRB holes on the MLP deck, whereby in scale of 1:1 is not much to see.

And here the rods are inserted in the new template (right), and the old template (left) can be used for more uniform alignment.

As far as for the beginning, so slow I find back into the track …

2 Likes
403

The scale of this task was incredible… each part and update just gets more amazing…

404

Thanks John for your staying interest.

Yep, this task was really massive and extremely stressful, on the one hand constantly photographing the Revell or LVM construction instructions and on the other hand determining shapes of steel profiles, as well as distances and dimensions from NASA drawings and scaling them to 1:160 …

But luckily I persevered.

405

Hello everybody,

in addition to the flanges with the screws the Rainbirds have at the top slanted hoods or better caps, which according to NASA have a diameter of 6’ (1,83 m), which would correspond to about Ø 11,5 mm (1:160).

For the thickness of these covers I have determined from photos about 0,2 mm, at which I have used the diameter of the pipe with Ø 5,6 mm as a reference. That corresponds to (extrapolated to 1:160) a 40 mm thick steel plate, what I could well imagine.

Since I want to move between 1:144 and 1:160 with the dimensions of the Rainbirds because of the TSMs (1:144), so first I have selected Ø 12 mm for the hoods. And because I could not find any matching discs, I’ve tried using a template and an engraving needle to produce such discs from 0,25 mm Sheet.

For this the needle must circle already several turns. Although this is a bit of a hassle, but eventually the discs let separating in this way out.

And after sanding the burrs at the edges one could certainly use these discs, although this is still not an optimal solution.

Unfortunately my Punch & Die set only goes up to Ø 10 mm, but maybe I can improvise still something …

But who knows, maybe there are even better solutions, which is why I would be grateful for any tip.

1 Like
406

I made a die to punch out uniform discs .
See here -

Post number 48 .
I started to copy text and photos as part of this reply but I thought it would disrupt your wonderful blog .
You are doing an amazing job .
Richard

1 Like
407

Thanks Richard for your understanding,

It is better like that, but I didn’t necessarily want to buy a lathe.

I’ve already thought of another solution, which I’ll show you next.

1 Like
408

Brother Manfred, first off I am sorry to hear about your friend Thomas. My he rest peace.

Glad to see you are creating a needed space between the RCS room and HER and Elevator shaft room. It doesn’t look right the way revel represents this area. Adding the crane cables there will add needed detail.

I cannot believe LVM PE set have missed in their measurements. For such price they demanded one would expect accuracy. Good thing you have Thomas set to add the needed extra detail and I’m sure he will be please looking down seeing you are making use of such set.

It will be cool to see you add those Emergency Escape Baskets and their cable details to the structure. Shame Revell and LVM missed this important detail. But, I am glad to see the ABER 1/150 ship rails have come to the rescue…again! Yes, all those rails changed with PE is a must. :wink:

Now, as I finally caught up with all the reading…first my my head hurts. :laughing:but reading your analysis of the FSS, RSS, support structures, PCR bay, main doors, and so on…(wow) you have uncovered a lot detail that is inaccurate and/or otherwise completely missing.

I like the fact you are creating correct drawings of the tower/structure in 1/160 and using it as a guide to fix and scratch building accurate parts. Those drawing can come in very handy someday…:thinking:…:rofl:

A lot of work to keep in track while tackling the Revels mixed scale puzzle.

So far, take away is it will be easier to have plains of the structure in the needed scale and scratch build the whole things. Time consuming, Yes but a lot less room for headaches. Cause, guys like myself…I will miscalculate and create more problems then solutions by cutting and gluing the existing parts to make them correct.

Or, do like what you have down with the MLP. Use the 1/144 paper Launch Tower kit from David R. Maier and use it as a guide and transfer parts of structure with styrene so it can be 3D and use appropriate parts of the LVM PE to enhance details.

But, as others I am blown away by your dedication and presentation. Learning a lot and saving a tons of reference. :wink: Thanks buddy :+1:t2:

2 Likes
409

Thanks Mike for your detailed answer,

which shows me that you have understood everything correctly and can now better assess the effort that needs to be made in order to be able to make all the necessary changes and modifications.

From today’s perspective, I have to say that it would have been better if I had scratched everything myself.

1 Like
410

Hello everybody,

although the Rainbirds are very similar, they still differ in shape, as we know. While the tube diameter of the four outer birds is uniform over the entire length, the two middle birds are cylindrical in the lower and upper areas and conical in the middle area. In addition, the diameters of these middle birds are significantly larger than the four others.


Source: flickr.com (Andrew Scheer)


Source: nasaspace.net

If you look closely, you will also notice that the upper openings of the slim birds (left) are narrower, while the two middle ones have the same diameter. However, David Maier did not take this into account with his rainbirds, because in his Paper kit the openings of all birds extend over the entire diameter what is not correct.

And finally to the profiles on the cover disc. I’m not entirely sure, but I think that these are probably H-profiles rather than I-profiles, but that’s not that important.


Source: nasaspace.net

Here both Evergreen profiles had been temporarily placed on the lid, on the left the H-profile (1,5 mm x 1,5 mm), and on the right the I-profile (1,2 mm x 1,5 mm).

For my part, I would rather see the H-profile as more suitable and would therefore prefer it.

The web widths should actually be smaller, but that’s just the available plastic profiles that you have to make do with.

But because I had to go to the hardware store anyway, I’ve bought a hole punch (Ø 12 mm),

with its help the covers can be produced more easily.

And fitting to the theme Rainbirds here for relaxation this impressive photo of a SSWS-Test.


Source: NASA

2 Likes
411

Hello friends,

and because we are right now at spectacular shots, do you notice something special in this image?


Source: forum.nasaspaceflight.com (39B)

Take a close look!

2 Likes
412

I could there a lifetime looking at that and never see the bit you are referring to …

And it is very true what Mike said, and people don’t mention it really, but the way you take the kit parts, then go through that in depth process of rescaling and building it correct is very very clever… not something I could get my head round :+1:

1 Like
413

Nice tool. From the photo it looks like the polished steel tip can be changed for different diameter tip. Is this true or am I just seeing things that are not such?

414

Thanks John,

then you will be amazed now, and so will everyone else.

What I mean I have circled red.


Source: forum.nasaspaceflight.com (39B)


Source: forum.nasaspaceflight.com (39B)

Hardly to believe, but true, this is my friend James MacLaren on the top of the Pad 39B Lightning mast (347 feet).

He had been working five years (1980-85) on Pad 39B when it was being converted from an Apollo pad into a Shuttle pad and has taken a lot of great photos, also experienced a lot and reported in a stunning documentary thread Launch Complex 39-B Construction Photos - Space Shuttle in NSF Forum.

And his most incredible story happened in the Payload Change Out Room (PCR) of the RSS, the most holy place on the entire Launch Pad.

Shortly for attunement some pictures of the PCR which is behind the Payload Canister (PC),


Source: retrospaceimages.com (STS-6)

Through this Payload Bay finally the movement of the respective payload into the orbiter is carried out by a huge handling device inside the PCR, the so-called Payload Ground Handling Mechanism (PGHM).

The PCR is a giant clean-room hermetically sealed from the outside, whose doors are equipped with inflatable seals, which are enclosing directly the fuselage of the orbiter and its payload bay doors, why everything must fit perfectly and as close as possible.

So it looks inside the PCR before the PC is opened (left), and here after opening the payload bay doors the already “unpacked” payload in the PGHM (right).


Source: NASA (STS-112)


Source: NASA (STS-112)

Enough of the preface, here is now the spectacular story of James MacLaren and his friend Jack Petty,

A Techno-Redneck’s Encounter With NASA’s Satellite

with it I want leave you alone now, enjoy and a lot of fun and goosebumps!!!

1 Like
415

Hi Mike,

this is not what you think, but rather these larger diameter punches are individual tools.

1 Like