Ye Olde Rocket Forum

Ye Olde Rocket Forum (http://www.oldrocketforum.com/index.php)
-   Scale & Sport Scale Rocketry (http://www.oldrocketforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=35)
-   -   Nasa Sls (http://www.oldrocketforum.com/showthread.php?t=18968)

JediBoss 11-05-2020 08:50 PM

Nasa Sls
 
The page is now up at Estes : https://estesrockets.com/product/002206-nasa-sls/

Ez2cDave 11-15-2020 01:02 PM

How is Estes considering that a "scale model", when no dimensioned drawings have been released by NASA or any prototypes built yet ?

Dave F.

Earl 11-15-2020 01:11 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ez2cDave
How is Estes considering that a "scale model", when no dimensioned drawings have been released by NASA or any prototypes built yet ?

Dave F.


I think, probably, that is called marketing....

Earl

Ez2cDave 11-15-2020 02:20 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Earl
I think, probably, that is called marketing....

Earl


That's one word for it . . . I think they should have used "semi-scale".

Dave F.

frognbuff 11-15-2020 05:50 PM

While it would be correct to say the vehicle has never been stacked, every significant SLS element has been built. Thus, the dimensions are known - to somebody. As for the source Estes used in creating this model, that's an excellent question!

tbzep 11-16-2020 10:43 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ez2cDave
How is Estes considering that a "scale model", when no dimensioned drawings have been released by NASA or any prototypes built yet ?

Dave F.

Sport scale would be a more accurate model rocketry term. We know the major component diameters, engine sizes, SRB's (segment sizes are known, so we can calculate length) etc from the Shuttle. We can use NASA drawings, photos, etc. to calculate the rest and have it good enough for a sport scale or slightly better than sport scale model. We have good images of the 1st stage, the Orion SLS Abort Test, SRB testing, etc. In fact, there are enough good high res images to make a much more detailed scale model than what Estes is releasing. Some of those details may change before the first flight, though.

georgegassaway 11-16-2020 01:25 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ez2cDave
How is Estes considering that a "scale model", when no dimensioned drawings have been released by NASA or any prototypes built yet ?

Dave F.

What do you call this?



Above from: https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/...y-for-artemis-i

And what do you think this is, being put into place on a static test stand at Stennis?


Above from: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-a...testing-in-2020

It's the real thing. SLS first stage core.

As for dimensions, there are "enough" to be found, with drawings that can be measured to fill in what's missing to build a good scale model. Note I'm not saying data for NAR "precision" scale, because there have been plenty of Scale model kits for which there was not NAR contest-detailed-level dimensions available at that time (people so spoiled by Peter Alway's work, and lack of internet google searching in the 1960's, 70's, and 80's).

Heck, the Centuri 1/45 Little Joe-II turned out to have some glaring inaccuracies but nobody would think of that as "semi-scale". And even the Estes upgrade of that kit, still has some of those inaccuracies (No Boost Protective Cover details that the A-004 and A-005 missions had, and that kit is representative of only those two missions without massive fin modification). Not a complaint, and the upgraded kit is fantastic, but pointing out even the best can leave out some significant scale parts. Would never call that kit semi-scale for not having the BPC detail.

To me, "semi-scale" has been when the kit-maker intentionally took a lot of liberties with accuracy for the sake of making a kit simpler and/or cheaper (Or using a pre-existing nose cone with not quite the right shape). Best example being the old Estes Semi-Scale Saturn-V, the worst model rocket Saturn-V ever (OK, Micro-Maxx a close 2nd), but also the most affordable. Also, the Estes profile Vostok with V-folded cardboard in place of the four outer boosters.

The EASIEST to get dimensions for on SLS are the 5-segment SRB's. Because those are pretty much the same as the Shuttle SRB's externally but with a 5th segment added (each segment 320" long). Shuttle SRB dimensions are out there, look 'em up. Might be surprised where one of the most useful dimensioned drawings is. Or not surprised.

And the SLS core uses the same diameter as the shuttle ET, and the same attachment fittings as the shuttle SRB's to the ET.

Ez2cDave 11-16-2020 06:46 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by georgegassaway
What do you call this?

And what do you think this is, being put into place on a static test stand at Stennis?

It's the real thing. SLS first stage core.

As for dimensions, there are "enough" to be found, with drawings that can be measured to fill in what's missing to build a good scale model. Note I'm not saying data for NAR "precision" scale, because there have been plenty of Scale model kits for which there was not NAR contest-detailed-level dimensions available at that time (people so spoiled by Peter Alway's work, and lack of internet google searching in the 1960's, 70's, and 80's).

Heck, the Centuri 1/45 Little Joe-II turned out to have some glaring inaccuracies but nobody would think of that as "semi-scale". And even the Estes upgrade of that kit, still has some of those inaccuracies (No Boost Protective Cover details that the A-004 and A-005 missions had, and that kit is representative of only those two missions without massive fin modification). Not a complaint, and the upgraded kit is fantastic, but pointing out even the best can leave out some significant scale parts. Would never call that kit semi-scale for not having the BPC detail.

To me, "semi-scale" has been when the kit-maker intentionally took a lot of liberties with accuracy for the sake of making a kit simpler and/or cheaper (Or using a pre-existing nose cone with not quite the right shape). Best example being the old Estes Semi-Scale Saturn-V, the worst model rocket Saturn-V ever (OK, Micro-Maxx a close 2nd), but also the most affordable. Also, the Estes profile Vostok with V-folded cardboard in place of the four outer boosters.

The EASIEST to get dimensions for on SLS are the 5-segment SRB's. Because those are pretty much the same as the Shuttle SRB's externally but with a 5th segment added (each segment 320" long). Shuttle SRB dimensions are out there, look 'em up. Might be surprised where one of the most useful dimensioned drawings is. Or not surprised.

And the SLS core uses the same diameter as the shuttle ET, and the same attachment fittings as the shuttle SRB's to the ET.


George,

Those are some nice photo's of components. I like the second pic best !

My point is the use of the term "scale" implies a precise representation of an existing prototype.

Until a "real" prototype has been assembled and FLOWN, it is INELIGIBLE to be entered in EITHER Scale or Sport Scale, for the same reasons that APOLLO SATURN V - 500F is not eligible.

Now, as an UNFLOWN "Concept" vehicle it would be eligible to be entered in Concept Sport Scale.

If Estes wants to "bill" it as a "scale" model, I think they should include substantiating data, especially with an MSRP of $69.99 !

Dave F.

georgegassaway 11-17-2020 12:00 PM

Dave, you are obsessing over NAR technical scale rules for NAR CONTESTS.

Which has NOTHING to do with what Estes or any other model rocket company calls their scale models in their catalog or on their website.

Estes had their SCALE Space Shuttle kit, 5 years before STS-1 flew and was NAR-legal for scale contests.

"Model Rocketry's first Scale Space Shuttle"

And heck, they also had the Wac-Corporal "scale" model, without booster, illegal in NAR scale competition.



People finding new things to whine about now, that nobody complained about decades ago.

That Estes calls a new scale model... a SCALE model!

And DEMANDING scale data to be included? Holy crap, hardly any kits have ever done THAT (the Apollo Historical brochure by Centuri being a rare exception. And even then it did not have NAR-legal minimum dimensional data). But you DEMAND it? Geezzz.

Buy it or don't buy it. If things worked out like your historical track record of complaints vs actions (inactions), if they DID change to call it semi-scale, and did add data, you would NOT buy it anyway.

Ez2cDave 11-17-2020 01:40 PM

2 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by georgegassaway

And DEMANDING scale data to be included? Holy crap, hardly any kits have ever done THAT (the Apollo Historical brochure by Centuri being a rare exception. And even then it did not have NAR-legal minimum dimensional data). But you DEMAND it? Geezzz.


George,

Yes, the Centuri 1/45 Little Joe had data . . . It's a shame that it was incomplete, as you mentioned.

So did the CMR D-Region Tomahawk, which did have dimensional data.

Dave F.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:30 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.