spaceman Posted October 30, 2015 Author Share Posted October 30, 2015 Hello everybody, and thus now in detail to the FSS frame construction, which is undersized by Revell and quite simplified. And as we have already noted, all FSS levels are too low, due to the 7.5 cm too low height of the tower (1:168). And now to the individual structural elements of the frame structure, the dimensions of which I found with two exceptions in the 39B Dismantling plans after a long search. And this concerns specifically the edge lengths of the upwardly tapering square tubes (Box Columns) at the foot of the tower and at the transition to the W-beams above Level 235. But I was quite glad to have found at least two box dimensions in the central region. So I calculated the edge length of the box-spars at the bottom of the tower from this picture based on the height (30'') of the first frame support W30x99, Source: NASA and the corresponding edge length of the spar at the transition from this picture based on the local frame support W24x76. Source: NASA And therefore still to these two profiles after the transition, which however, are not gradated in the Revell kit. While the W14x193 is a typical H-beam with a square cross section (15,5''x15,7''), the following part W14x61 (13,9''x10,0'') corresponds more likely to an I-beam. And so this looks in detail, whereupon I again have indicated the scaled 1:168 values next to the relevant profiles, and to the right the dimensions of the Revell parts. I hope that the details are still to read and the colors are not be too confusing. What should one immediately notice is the fact that all Revell frame supports from top to bottom have the same height of 4.2 mm, and all diagonal struts the same diameter Ø 1,9 mm. During the struts in the lower part to Level 135 are slightly undersized, in the upper part they nearly correspond with the actual conditions. The deliberate cross section reduction of the frame supports however Revell has less well implemented upwards. It is similar with the side beams, which have the same cross-section from the bottom up to the transition and do not taper towards the top. And that is in fact already a clear difference, because these huge square tubes taper from approx. 760 mm edge length (2'4¾'') at the bottom (wall thickness 90 mm), after all, just over half to approx. 356 mm (1'8½'') at Level 235. But the really most serious deviation from reality represent the railings, because they are lot too strong with Ø 1 mm, what might find less attention. However, one must say that these diameters can not be realized by means of injection molding, but rather probably only with PE parts. So my mission of inventory making of the greatest deviations of the Revell kit in my view would now almost complete with mainly. How one should deal with it, will have to be shown therefore, and everybody has to decide for itself. Therefore just another approach to the diagonal struts in the lower section to Level 135 that I'll probably replace entirely. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
egt95 Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Wow Manfred... All of this research that you are doing, I expect a life size launch complex in your back yard. Make sure you send me an invitation when it opens. :woot.gif:/> Keep up the great work!!! Mike Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted October 31, 2015 Author Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Hey Mike, thanks for your great compliments. BTW, a life size launch complex in my back yard, what a nice idea ... My backyard is not quite as big, unfortunately, but an invitation you get anyway, welcome to the show! Edited October 31, 2015 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted November 1, 2015 Author Share Posted November 1, 2015 (edited) Hello guys, because the chunky railings has left me no rest, I have tested my PE railings of ABER in order to have a comparison with a true to scale part. This railing can be found at ABER under Ship relings (1:150) and the dimensions of which should fit almost perfectly, especially as they are only 0.2 mm "thin". So I've even cut out an useable strip, and have mounted provisionally on the west side of Level 195 at the local gap in the railing, which there is not existing because of the freedom of access to the rescue baskets of EES, even not these outer short pieces, what I had already mentioned. But through this gap one can see the difference from the 1 mm "thick" railings of the Revell Tower very well what has impressed me. And since we are talking just about, the overlying cross beam (the old kits) does not exists at this place. It could be that Revell had tried to indicate the cross beam on which the ropes (Slide Wire) are attached, via which in the case of an accident the emergency the baskets slide down, who knows? But this cross beam is sitting a bit in front of the FSS framework, as you can see here. Source: NASA And here once more a taste one floor deeper on Level 175, where in the old kits both the railing and the diagonal braces completely lacking, and the cross beam is not true. Therefore the comparison with the chunky railing of the level below here is even better to see, I think. And the longer I look so, the more I reach the view that it would be worthwhile, perhaps completely replace the Revell railings, what do you think? Because later will come then still the filigree grid floors, stairways and the elevator shaft of the LVM Detail Kits, which would then naturally harmonize well. Edited November 3, 2015 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted November 2, 2015 Author Share Posted November 2, 2015 (edited) Hello everybody, to round off the matter, today only briefly my conclusion about the planned changes of the FSS, of which actually no longer so much is left when you look at it realistically. On the Side beams nothing should be changed, except for the upper part after the transition from the Box Columns to the W profiles W14x193 and W14x61. While W14x193 in 1:168 would correspond to a 2.5 mm H-Beam, one could use a 2.0 mm I-Beam for W14x61. Since the gradual tapering of the square tubes a total of only is about 1 mm upwards, it can be approximately neglected. Also the Frame girders one should leave unchanged, since in their inner sides the PE grid floors of LVM are fitted. Only the top frame girder W33x118 could be replaced by an Evergreen I-beam (4.8 mm), since one anyway must intervene in the upper three levels. The Railings I will completely replace however and use for this the PE-railings of LVM, because they fit perfectly to this scale. Consequently, one only need to exchange the lower eight Ø 16'' Diagonal braces, but as I said, the first floor is anyway too low and must be raised by approx. 8 mm, in order to bring it to 1:168. And then, of course still the installation of the additional floor, for which I had to decide me enforcedly. Last not least, the FSS includes also the three Access Arms OAA, OVA, IAA, which I will also scratch build for the most part. All together a lot of tricky work. Edited November 3, 2015 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
HughChan Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Havent checked you in a while Manfred but looks like you are moving right along! I think your PE rails will look far better than the plastic ones. Heres just a thought for you, in case u can make use of it, but looking at the photo you have at the top, clearly there will be many thin pipelike structures to include, which may not work well in plastic. A cheap source for thin wire for you to consider might be electric guitar strings, in particular the thinner gauges which go down to .008 inch (these would be E strings). Im well acquainted with them since I am a much better guitarist than model builder! Always great to see your work! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted November 11, 2015 Author Share Posted November 11, 2015 Thanks Brian for your nice compliments and your proposals. But I do not need to correct all deviations, only the most serious, that's enough. And for the smaller diameters metal wires are actually better suited than plastic, that's right. Therefore, the thin PE railings made of brass are the ideal solution. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted November 23, 2015 Author Share Posted November 23, 2015 (edited) Hello everybody, so friends, after a fling penultimate Thursday for a (guaranteed not one-time) rendezvous with my "dream" woman Mriya (AN-225) on the Leipzig/Halle Airport, whose preparation and follow has taken some time to complete, it will now go further on my Launch Pad. What has always been lacking is the analysis of the right support structure of the RSS, including the Hinge Column to FSS, with whom I have engaged myself in some detail. And as I have already suggested, this looks similar to those on the left with regard to undersized profiles. This involves first of all the parts 22, 39, 41, 47 and 54 shown on the assembly guide. And now I have noticed that the lower side parts of the front elevation below the RSS Main Floor are open to the fore, and not closed as in the Revell-RSS. Source: Revell That looks here for the STS-6 at least so, as if these two platforms are open towards the front. Source: retrospaceimages.com (STS-6) Therefore this one must be taken under a closer look. Edited November 30, 2015 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted November 29, 2015 Author Share Posted November 29, 2015 (edited) Hello everybody, as you can see relatively well in this photo from 1983, the upper floor (APU Servicing Platform) extends deeper into the inside than the front wall as well as the subjacent APS Servicing Platform below the RSS Main Floor of the PCR. Source: John Duncan And both floors are also much wider than the PCR, which is not also true at Revell, and need to be broadened accordingly. In any case, both floors are open towards the front, so one must remove the side panels of the front wall. And consequently, the LVM parts have to be adjusted with the railings, which form the front end. Another problem are the two OMS Pod Covers below the PCR Bay that are highly abstracted with Revell and sit too far inside, namely where the two APU and APS Servicing Platforms are. Both Revell parts can, if at all, only as an outer shell to be used, because towards the front or on the inside the Pod Covers have indeed an approximately semicircular shell shape which is adapted to the contours of the OSM pods. Here one can see the installation of the OMS Pod Covers, how Revell has imagined, but which is not correct. As noted above, the front sides below the RSS Main Floor must be removed which then allow a view into the interior of the APU and APS Servicing Platforms. As can be seen on the very first image, the upper front edge of the pod cover is not flush with the PCR main doors but are significantly more forward on. Presumably, the rear edges will be flush. Edited November 30, 2015 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted November 29, 2015 Author Share Posted November 29, 2015 (edited) And this was the back of the Pod Cover, which were mounted on the Pad 39B, and I mean it might be the left cover. A photo of the inside structure would be interesting, of course, but unfortunately I have no HiRes images. Source: NASASpaceflight.com (J. MacLaren) What is interesting is the structure of the two missing platforms that need to be completely scratch built. In the meantime, I have found two NASA panorama that show both platforms in detail and thus constitute a great help. And so it looks on the lower APS Servicing Platform, which has a large cutout for the orbiter tail in the middle that extends close to the PCR back wall. Source: NASA As can be seen on the panorama, the back ceiling of the platform hangs a bit deeper, which can be seen in the next panorama of the APU Servicing Platform clearly. Source: NASA Source: NASA But look arround to your heart's content. And so now the structure of the two platforms looks relatively clear, which is but a tricky challenge for scratch building. Edited November 29, 2015 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted December 13, 2015 Author Share Posted December 13, 2015 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted December 13, 2015 Author Share Posted December 13, 2015 Hello friends, actually, I was thinking that I have almost done the inventory of the main Revell howlers, 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 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 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. Here is Part 41, Part 47, here Part 54, and finally the two Parts 22. As far as for today. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted December 19, 2015 Author Share Posted December 19, 2015 Hello everybody, here we go, because after all I want to complete the seemingly endless chapter of analyzing the undersized Revell parts before Christmas, 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. To be continued ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted December 19, 2015 Author Share Posted December 19, 2015 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 picture) 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 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: NASA 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 42'' rotation axis with 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 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 ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
K2Pete Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 I'm astounded by the amount, and quality, of your research Manfred! The details you're uncovering, comparing them all to the Revell kit is incredible!! I am curious as to just how much of the Revell kit you will end up using .......... but I think you're going to build the entire structure from scratch ... but it's just a feeling!! Your posts are very clear, comparing the existing kit, to what needs to be changed. Plus your photo references are terrific! I sure hope you're still having fun, Manfred!! We're still watching this ... just keep posting! Pete Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted December 20, 2015 Author Share Posted December 20, 2015 (edited) Hello Pete, my faithful friend, and thank you for your nice words and honest opinion about this lot of crazy analyzes, with which I surely have bored many of you guys only. But this is the content of errors of Revell's kit which have been noticed by my tired eyes, which is surely not complete, maybe, one should better say, this is the tip of the iceberg. :blink: Now I can, and any other lovers of the kit also, decide which errors you want to correct and also how exactly, because that is a question of effort and not least of everyone's patience and perseverance. Luckily not all the deviations are so serious, wherefore one don't need to correct or rebuild all things, but some things certainly. And believe me, I know better days will come back again with more fun and satisfaction, but I simply must overcome this dry spell, but I'm sure I will manage it. And therefore stay tuned my friends. Edited December 20, 2015 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted December 21, 2015 Author Share Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) 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 the two main parts 45 and 46 from Revell 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 picture 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-beam, 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 completely by an Scratch-building should be replaced. Although there are certainly some Revell inconsistence 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. And now I wish you all Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Edited December 22, 2015 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mknorr Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 Manfred, I wish you and yours a very merry Christmas and may you have a prosperous 2016. I also wish ARC a prosperous 2016 because they'll need another server., As always, I look forward to seeing many more of your fascinating posts. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted December 22, 2015 Author Share Posted December 22, 2015 Hi Manfred, thanks and the same wishes to you, Merry Christmas and all the best for the New Year. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
crowe-t Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 (edited) Manfred, Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! I'm looking forward to seeing these structures start to take shape. Mike. Edited December 22, 2015 by crowe-t Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted December 22, 2015 Author Share Posted December 22, 2015 (edited) Hello Mike my faithful friend, nice that you have pursued these endless analyses and thanks for your patience. Even you and Patricia and your loves Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year too. Edited December 27, 2017 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted January 27, 2016 Author Share Posted January 27, 2016 Hello friends, I hope you all had a good start into the new year and are doing well. After my detailed and endless analysis of the hitherto unknown scale problems of the 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 Rainbirds, and there now I will go on. 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 0,38x1,5 mm, but between them strips 0,5x1,5 mm were glued with MEK as a placeholder for the screw-rods and I have extended the mounting template still, 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, but 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 come back to track ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ApolloMan Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Its been quite the last month. Great to see ya back. Looking forward to seeing this get back up and running Looking great by the way Manfred. This will look fantastic once completed. Once completed... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted January 28, 2016 Author Share Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) Hello Mick, and thanks for your nice welcome. Every beginning is difficult, but I'm also glad to have my desk free again and so I'm ready for restart. Damn long time ... Edited December 27, 2017 by spaceman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spaceman Posted January 28, 2016 Author Share Posted January 28, 2016 Dear friends, exactly 30 years ago today, on 28 January 1986 at 16:38 UTC, the tragic disaster of STS-51L occurred, when the Challenger exploded after 73 seconds of flight time and all seven crew members lost their life. Source: wikipedia.org Back row (L-R): Ellison Onizuka, Christa McAuliffe, Gregory Jarvis, Judith Resnik, Front row (L-R): Michael J. Smith, Francis Scobee, Ronald McNair In everlasting memory ... Rest in peace! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.