August 27, 2007
Nitpicking the Details

We haven't even finished designing the thing, but someone already has an Orion model on the market.

Allow me to point out the shortcomings (not to be a jerk, just because...well, because I can):


  • The avionics ring on the SM has never to my knowledge been, ahh...knurled
  • The windows are too small, too high, and two too few
  • No fuel and oxidizer servicing panels
  • Four pitch-down thrusters instead of three
  • Where are the roll thrusters pointing?
  • No pitch up thrusters
  • A mystery gap between the yaw thrusters
  • No sublimators (trust me, you couldn't miss them if they were there)
  • Prominent splitlines on the backshell
  • A splitline at 6:00 that shouldn't be there
  • No splitline halfway down the backshell, which should be there
  • An access panel at ~7:45 that shouldn't be there
  • Frisbee-shaped closeout on the back of the SM
  • MLI on the SM propulsion subassembly instead of radiators
  • An apparent difference in material or coatings between the forward bay cover and the backshell
  • Umbilical too low and too far clockwise

Those are the easy things to spot, anyway. Oh well. I'll still give them credit for getting quite a lot right, since it's hard enough for those of us on the program to keep up with the configuration changes.

Posted by T.L. James on August 27, 2007 08:15 PM | TrackBack

Comments

There's a paper model of the Orion out there too.

See: http://www.spaceday.org/conmgmt/pdf/OrionCEVmodel.pdf

It's way behind the times, too, but at least with a paper model it can be changed easier than a resin mold can!



Posted by: Tim Kyger at August 28, 2007 06:28 AM

Or aluminum-lithium, for that matter.



Posted by: T.L. James at August 28, 2007 09:57 PM

.

to-day, I've added this article on my ghostNASA.com blog:

"Why the "Face of Mars" wasn't made by Aliens"

.



Posted by: Gaetano Marano at September 3, 2007 12:08 AM

I made the master parts for this model, and made them to match, as best I could, the available artwork. A small summation of available art:
http://www.up-ship.com/Imagesnsuch/New%20CEV%20art.jpg

There you can see pretty much all that you're having a problem with. As to the RCS thrusters... *all* the 606 artwork released to date that I've seen has been very, very odd. As in no roll control thrusters whatsoever. For example, look here:
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/vision/technology/hires/jsc2007e20988.jpg

As to insulatiuon vs radiators, there has been conflicting info on just *whre* the radiators are. The art in the latter link shows radiators on the main body of the SM. The art in the earlier link shows insulation where the radiations should be... see also:
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/vision/technology/hires/jsc2007e20977.jpg

People who have claimed to know have said that the SM radiators are mounted on the outer diameter of the SM, which fits in with the "knurling," as you call it.

As to your splitline issues... I'm not sure I'm getting you. Pictures showing the problems would be more useful.

The main problem is is that the imagery released by NASA was done by at least two different groups, and there are numerous discontinuities. And the whole weird "we don't need no stinkin' roll control" thing. I was contracted to build a model accurate to what NASA showed, not what I *thought* should be there.



Posted by: Scott Lowther at September 4, 2007 12:34 PM

.

I think that a possible solution for the (now definitive, but still underpowered) Ares-I problems could be a "resized J-2X" as explained in my new article on my website

.



Posted by: gaetanomarano at September 6, 2007 08:56 PM

I'm sure it's hard to get all the little details right when we keep changing them on you. Wait until you see the delta wings we've added on 607.

(Just kidding. There's no 607.)

The radiators for the two-cylinder SM have always been on the cylinder at the aft end. The short, larger diameter cylinder at the fwd end of the SM doesn't provide enough surface area, and is exposed to aeroheating on ascent.

Splitlines are the lines between the backshell TPS panels.

I suspect the difference between NASA's art and the current configuration is partly due to the ongoing changes and partly due to the time lag in producing art from the models and other data provided. I've noticed on a few occasions that they release images of a "new" design which is one or two iterations behind. Since the artists aren't working directly with us and don't see the ongoing changes until a drop is made to them, I suppose this is unavoidable.



Posted by: T.L. James at September 8, 2007 11:03 AM