Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About spaceman

  • Rank
    Full Blown Model Geek

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

11,234 profile views
  1. Thank you Mike for your words of praise and your continued interest, as well as to all my other true friends here, and therefore you will hereby be decorated with the STS-6 Order of Merit 1st Class. I know the particular predilection of you guys here in ARC for Shuttle Modeling, but I'm even more interested in the whole Launch Complex with all of its fascinating technique. BTW, I think so, that Michael Key's 3D Intertank (1/144) someday will be available at Shapeways for everyone to buy, but I will ask him. But keep in mind that this ET-IT is specially modeled for the Airfix ET, which differs in some details and dimensions from Revell's ET. So this intertank is tapered from bottom to top - thicker at the bottom and 1 mm thinner at the top, what is very strange, but it's fact. Bye for now.
  2. Hello everyone, and my hope was not disappointed. Yesterday Michael Key came up with a new update in which he took into account some of my correction hints. On the one hand, it has reduced his previous, somewhat too large number of stringer in the two Thrust Panel to 26, as well as the perpendicularly extending circumferential segment rings somewhat narrower made, which looks much better. Source: Shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place - Michael Key) And on the other hand, he has adapted the geometry of the front and rear transitions from the Intertank to the ET better to the original. Source: NASA as you can see here, all respect. Source: Shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place - Michael Key) In order to be able to continue modeling, he now needs the exact location of the SRB Forward Attachment Points, as well as the location of the LO2 Feedline (Ø 17'') and of the GO2 and GH2 Pressure Lines (Ø 2'') , shown in this drawing. Source: Lockheed Martin (System Definition Handbook SLWT - Vol. II) The only question is whether or how well the details of the Shuttle Stack from the Airfix Kit match this original drawing, or not. In order to be able to check these details on the shuttle stack, I had to disassemble my previously provisionally taped Test-stack and then to attach the kit supports at the SRB on the ET-Attachment Ring to determine the exact position of the coupling point on the Intertank. With the glued supports, the location of the SRB on the ET was now fixed exactly, and could be marked again. After that, I was amazed that my border of the front SRB docking pad, previously marked with tape on the test stack, was sitting actually a bit too deep, which could now be corrected. Then I still determined the location of the LO2 feedline on the Intertank and was pleasantly surprised that the angle of 23° matches with the value in the above drawing. However, what is less consistent with the original is the spartan version of the feedline itself and the lack of coverage (Fairing). Source: NASA This has been realized much better by Revell on their ET-Intertank, as you can see here at the ET of my recently unexpectedly deceased friend Thomas from Bavaria, whose Real Space Modeling estate was taken over by me. In view of this, after careful consideration and in coordination with his wife and son, I have come to the conclusion that it would be also in his sense to at least partly preserve his model-building heritage, when I would integrate some of his assemblies and parts, e.g. the already LED illuminated FSS platforms and the Hammerhead Crane as well as the PE staircases for the tower, etc. into my model and would thus be able to document and honor his awesome modeling work and skills for everyone visibly posthumously. - May he rest in peace ... And here finally the distance of the coupling point for Michael Key, which lies approximately in the middle. At this point, a continuous inner tube is foreseen into which I will later insert a brass rod (Ø 2 mm) to stabilize the SRBs. Source: Shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place - Michael Key)
  3. Thanks Pete for your good wishes, the Scratch variant with Evergreen strips, I'll initially keep in the hindquarters. But I think Michael Key is on a good way and will succeed.
  4. Hello everybody, in the meantime, I went to another building site again and took care of the Intertank of the External Tank (ET), which I like to have as 3D print (1:144), if I can find a modeler and manufacturer for it. Source: NASA Here is the 3D model by my friend Bill (niParts) from the ARC Forum, but unfortunately only in 1:72 scale, Source: shapeways.com (niParts) as well as here with the installation of the finished 3D-Intertank at his ET (1:72), where the part comes out great, in my opinion. Source: arcforums.com (niart17) And he also offers the matching mounts (Ice Frost Ramps) for the GH2 and GO2 pressure lines, also 1:72. Source: shapeways.com (niParts) A charming alternative to this is the Scratch building with thin Evergreen strips, Source: raumfahrer.net (inselaner) as it was successfully and impressively had been realized by my friend (inselaner) in the Raumcon forum at the ET of his Airfix Shuttle Stack. Source: raumfahrer.net (inselaner) So far, I have also flirted with the idea of this scratch-building variant, in case I can not find a suitable 3D-print. In the Airfix kit, the Intertank stringers are only hinted at by these boring decals and are therefore only 2D, which I can not make friends with. So I'm still trying to get a 3D Intertank (1:144), with that Michael Key (The Aerospace Place) had been starting in a hopeful way, Source: Shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place - Michael Key) on whose update I'm still waiting. That's why I've been more in-depth with the Stringers, if I have to scratch them myself, which I did not intend to do. Source: NASA So far, unfortunately, I had no dimensions of the stringers, but rather I have always tried to estimate it myself. At first, these images helped me, where cracks in the insulating foam on the Intertank before the STS-133 had been investigated, Source: NASA which were caused by a broken stringer, which can be seen here. And thus the height of the stringers should be about 2.5''. Source: NASA From another image of this study after the repair of this stringer area, then I have determinedthe 1:144 widths of the Stringer (0.3 mm) and the Valleys (0.65 mm), which would be a good basis for scratch building. Source: NASA So far so good, but then I've actually found even more detailed information about stringer geometry in another NASA document (ntrs.nasa.gov), Source: NASA with which I made this sketch (1:1), which was then supplemented by the 1'' thick foam insulation (red), And these dimensions with foam insulation could now, if one would like, be taken as a basis for scratch building, which is summarized here again. Source: NASA But I still hope that Michael Key keeps on the line. At first he wanted to know the diameter and the exact position of the LO2-Feed Line as well as the Forward SRB Attachment Point) in the Intertank, what I still have to determine. Source: NASA
  5. Hello everybody, just short to the status quo, as one could expect, from the Crystal Valley I've got a negative answer to my request, because they only deliver upwards of 30 kg. And quite so many lamps there are not installed on the Launch Pad.
  6. Hi Pete and thanks for your great laudation, which makes me very happy because it is honestly meant. BTW, it sounds almost as if you were the speaker in the mission of the forum community, which seems to be paralyzed from a kind of photobucket shock, which is really very, very pity ... Whenever I want to access the old threads with lots of amazing photos of you guys, only these stupid photobucket error images are staring at me, what a disaster, because a thread without pictures is a dead thread in my eyes. In that sense, I can understand when many of you are tired of posting ... But head up my friends - life goes on.
  7. Hello everybody, as I see you have no opinion or suggestions on this issue. Anyway, let's go, because with regard to the glass body for the lamps without a large lampshade, I have at least gotten a tip from a friend from the Paper Modelers Forum, who has found out a manufacturer of smallest glass beads in the Czech Crystal Valley, which I could perhaps contact to possibly get a handful of samples for testing. These mini beads Delica-RH / 321 11 001 (1,3 x 1,3 mm) could be a possibility with their size, and Macco-RH / 321 11 001 (1 x 1 mm) would also be interesting. Source: preciosa-ornela.com Crucial would be the inner diameter, which I have estimated from the image to 0.65 mm, which would be to check, which is why I have just asked there once. Similar mini beads (Ø 1.3 x 1.1 mm), which would fit and would also be suitable for threading the LED, I have in my stock, but unfortunately they are silvered and not transparent or red-transparent. So the matter does not seem to be hopeless. So long!
  8. Hello everybody, once more back to the Tube bending. The wires I have threaded before, especially since that would be one of the two options in the later installation. But since I for myself was unsure how far I had threaded the wires, I have checked it out. And as one can see here, the wires actually went beyond the arch, so they might have been a bit of a bending aid. But there is also this second option here, which had brought a friend at the Raumcon forum into play at that time. In this case, only one wire (anode) needs to be threaded into the tube, the other wire (cathode) could be separated and then soldered at both ends with the brass tube and thus use it as a return conductor (GND). When using brass pipes, of course, there is the risk of sharp edges, which is why you have to debur the separation points at the tube ends carefully or round off, so that the protective varnish of the LED wires stays intact and there is no short circuit is caused. That I have tried with my thinnest drills, first with a drill Ø 0.3 mm, which did not fit into the opening, but hopefully has served for deburring, and then with a drill Ø 0.25 mm for cleaning. Then I have cut my first bent tube to length, also deburred the ends, and then tried to thread in both 0.1mm wires one at a time to test whether or not the bow can be run through. That was the expected tricky affair, and threading alone was not for the faint of eyes. In the process, I first have slided the one wire from the long side into the opening and carefully felt my way to the bending so as not to unnecessarily bend the wire out of shape, which worked out well. And after a short standstill it went around the arch and out at the other end. The second wire then made some more problems and only progressed a few millimeters, then I had to grasp again. But as one can see, it finally came to the fore again at the other end. Whether the threading would be easier from the short side, I do not know what one could try. In any case, the soldering on the tube could be avoided this way. That's it for now, maybe there are still useful tips from this round.
  9. Hello friends, here is another update to the marked three lamps without shade on the Side 1, as well as for the hazard warning lights with this shape here. Source: NASA In my search for even better matching ferrules for this lamp shape, I've actually found something, and indeed at Voelkner, who offers the smallest available size 0.1 - 0.3 mm². And although that are equal to 100 pcs, which I guaranteed will not need, so I grabbed it, and today the package arrived, so of course I had to try it. These sleeves have a shade diameter of 1.5 mm, which corresponds exactly to the width of the MLP girders, and would therefore be even better suited than the previously tested 0.5 mm² sleeves with Ø 1.9 mm (shade). An LED 0402 can also be threaded into the sleeve, as you can see on this picture. To the left are the 0.5 mm² and the 1 mm² sleeves. And if the back part of the shade is slightly widened, then the shade looks like this (right) and its shape would therefore fit even better. But since there probably are no matching transparent or red glass beads for this size, which should have a diameter of approx. 1.3 mm, one would have to apply the glass body above the LED with transparent epoxy resin. But wether that would work, I do not know ... Let's try and see.
  10. Hello everybody, Oh well - pipe bending is always such a tricky thing and can also become a complete flop. But what's the name of it? Well begun is half done. And my first bending test with the 0.5 mm brass tube looks quite useful already, right? Which in turn confirms my credo: Nothing is impossible!!! BTW, maybe the pulling in of the two 0,1 mm wires is even favorable for the bending of the brass tube, since its diameter is 0.3 mm, which both wires almost fill.
  11. Hello everybody, on closer inspection, however, the lamp Made by Revell is too rustic for me, which I can not make friends with, especially as the tube seems also too thick to me. And since the lamps are getting a bit more filigree anyway, I have taken measurement at the RSS-lamp once more. And behold, my sense of proportion has not deceived me again, because the tube should have a diameter of 0.4 mm, Source: forum.nasaspaceflight.com (James MacLaren) while the Revell tube with 1 mm is twice as thick, which can be seen in the following photo. This is for comparison a brass tube with Ø 0.5 mm, which would match the lamp size well, compared with the overlying lampshade, which is a little smaller with Ø 2.8 mm than my first samples with about Ø 3 mm (left). And as one can see, the 0.1 mm thin LED wires let also thread into the tube, so everything is okay. All we can hope is that one can bend the tube cleanly around the rounding without a kink, but we'll manage that too, I guess.
  12. Hello everyone, today I have first expanded a handful of the larger ferrules (1 mm²) with a center punch from 2.3 mm to 2.8 mm diameter, for which the cordless screwdriver only needs to run a few revolutions, otherwise one is fast at Ø 3 mm or more. Then I experimented a bit further and tried to expand also the slightly smaller ferrules (0.5 mm²) to Ø 2.8 mm. At this sleeve, the smaller diameter of the tube with 1.4 mm is still slightly smaller than that of the larger ferrule with 1.8 mm, which would fit much better to the socket diameter of my lampshades. The only question was whether the sleeve would endure the expansion, or whether the lampshade would crack. On my first attempt, I was probably a bit too impetuous, which can be clearly seen on the cracked lampshade on the right in the picture. To the left are the expanded 1 mm² ferrules, which did not mind this expanding. Therefore, I proceeded much more cautiously on the second attempt and checked the lampshade diameter from time to time with the caliper gauge. Everything went pretty well up to Ø 2.5 mm, as you can see here, but at Ø 2.8 mm the first mini-cracks appeared on the edge of the lampshade, which is why I will rather use the larger ferrules. And here's already a look ahead to the mainly installed lamp shape on the RSS, here on Pad 39B during the preparation of the Challenger on her last, unfortunately fateful mission STS-51L (1986). Source: forum.nasaspaceflight.com (James MacLaren) And here are my first attempts compared to a simple lamp from the Revell Kit (right). Probably for these lamps thin brass tubes will later be used into which the LED wires then will be threaded respectively soldered.
  13. Hi friends, I can still remember very well how I have rubbed my eagle eyes at that time three years ago, when I did a lot of extensive analysis during my Lighting Chapter, as one can see here for the RSS ... Source: NASA Here is another amazing impression of the Pad at night, showing Challenger's countdown for mission STS-41B (1984). Source: NASA But until then there is still a long and challanging way to go ...
  14. Hello friends, after my gallstone calmed down again and can stay on parole for the time being, where he is, I can finally turn the LED switch back again to clarify a few last details with the MLP lamps and try out. First of all, I want to introduce my Super Current Bank, which a friend of mine had designed and built in an ingenious way for illumination of my Launch Pad Diorama. Here again briefly to the profile of this "Marvel Box", whose performance capability we deliberately generously constructed, which provides the following Constant current circuits: - 46 current circuits (adjustable from 0.6 ... 5.6 mA) for the normal lighting of the FSS/RSS, as well as of the MLP and the Crawler, - 6 current circuits (adjustable from 0.6 ... 5.6 mA) for warning lights (switchable to flashing), - 6 current cuits (fixed at 12 mA) for flood light poles on the pad, - 2 current circuits (fixed at 220 mA) for the overall lighting of the diorama In each of the two circuits (220 mA), 2 LEDs can be connected in series. In each of the other circuits, however, up to 8 LEDs can be connected in series. That gives the impressive number of total 464 LEDs (368 + 48 + 48), which I will not exhaust corresponding to my previous planning. Before I react to the red LED (0401) for the Warning lights connected to the Current bank in the picture above, I have scrutinized once again the relevant lamp shapes for my pad model, initially adopted by the Apollo LUTs at the beginning of the Shuttle program and later replaced by more modern lamps. At that time there were lamps both with reflector (Type A) and without reflector (Type E), and this type also with red globe (Type F), as it was used for the warning lights. Source: NASA In the Tower (FSS) and on the RSS the lamps with reflector were mostly installed, Source: NASA Source: NASA for which I have used expanded ferrules (1 mm²) with inserted beads for fixing the LED wires. With the exception of lamps 2 and 3 (yellow) and lamp 2 (light blue), all lamps on the Side 1 are type A and have a reflector, Source: retrospaceimages.com (STS-6) what one can see a little more clearly in this picture section. Source: retrospaceimages.com (STS-6) As a reference measurement for the dimensioning of both lamp shapes served me the width of the webs on my MLP walls of 1.5 mm. Source: NASA And so back to the first image with the red LED for the warning lights, which works perfectly with the Current bank, only it does not blink quite as fast as this one. Since these lamps without a reflector are slightly smaller, I have used slightly smaller ferrules (0.5 mm²), which need not be widened as much as the sleeves for the lamps with reflector (left in the picture). The difficulty with these lamps without reflector is to find a suitable glass bead for the glass body, for which I have tried different bead sizes. Here is e.g. a cylindrical shape, and here a roundish bead, which should fit better in size. The sticking point here is that the LED also has to fit into the bead, which is why only the smallest types 0401/0402 with dimensions 1.0 mm x 0.5 mm x 0.5 mm (LxWxH) are suitable for this. Then I still found this smaller bead, which fits even better with this lamp shape without reflector. And with that I want to content myself for today.
  15. Hello everybody, after the wearisome Gutter chapter has been finished except for the paintwork, I want to take a relaxing look ahead and bring the highlight of the lighting of the MLP back into the game, which will soon be back on my agenda. During my first inventory (2014) I had found these 21 lamps on the Side 1, Source: retrospaceimages.com (STS-6) which I had to correct in hindsight, since the Lamp 5 during the STS-6 (1983) did still not exist, like one can see in this picture of the STS-28 (1989), but rather much later, whereby the number of lamps is reducing to 20. Source: NASA Since the wiring design of the Super-Current bank was construed on max. eight LEDs per circuit, my original lighting plan included these three circuits with a total of 20 lamps. During the preparation of the later installation of the circuits on the model, it is important from a practical point of view to think about how the thin leads and the return conductors of the individual circuits should be laid preferably. Withal it is necessary to consider how to pass with leads and lamps through the narrow spaces under the canopies between the pipelines and struts and past the tiny fittings and also to glue them, whiat should not be so easy. In my first lighting trials, the matter was easier, because I had then only provisionally laid the individual LED wires under the canopies, which now inevitably needs to be done differently in the final solution. That is why I have changed the division of the circuits, which now looks like this. Thus there will be a circuit (red) with eight LEDs connected in series, and two circuits with six lamps each. Source: retrospaceimages.com (STS-6) Therefore I imagine the installation so that the three leads are led through the front right Pedestal, preferably detachable via mini-connectors, in order to be able later to let drive the Crawler with the MLP a short piece on the Pad diorama. In contrast to my original plan, it will be more favorable to lead the first circuit (red) along the wall to the right Access Platform and then under the LH2 Access Platform. As with the other two circuits, the return wires then run via a Ground (GND) bus below the left Access Platform and the front left pedestal. The installation of the second circuit (yellow) will presumably be the most difficult act because the place under the Blast Shield over the valves of the LH2 Valve Skid is very tight, as one can easily see here. But we'll work it out somehow ... The installation of the third circuit (light blue) hopefully will be a bit easier, because there is more space above the LOX Valve Skid and under the left Blast shield. As far as with this little trip to the illumination of the clouded minds.