|
Author
|
Topic: Dragon Wings 1:72 Apollo-Soyuz Test Project
|
cspg
Member Posts: 6210
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 06-30-2011 01:18 AM
   
Planned for this summer is Apollo 18 and Soyuz 19: |
Rick Mulheirn
Member Posts: 4167
From: England
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 06-30-2011 03:20 AM
The Apollo-Soyuz model looks excellent. I only hope the image is of the unfinished prototype... |
BNorton
Member Posts: 150
From:
Registered: Oct 2005
|
posted 06-30-2011 08:34 AM
quote:
Originally posted by cspg:
Planned for this summer is Apollo 18 and Soyuz 19.
One can only hope that the first change they make is with the name(s), since there never was an Apollo 18. |
cspg
Member Posts: 6210
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 06-30-2011 08:52 AM
Their catalog lists the model as: DM-50370 Apollo-Soyuz Test Project. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42982
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 06-30-2011 08:53 AM
NASA sometimes informally refers to the launch of the Apollo command module for the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project as Apollo 18. For example, from the agency's Shuttle-Mir history: In July 1975, when American Apollo 18 and the Soviet Soyuz 19 docked, the first international spacecraft rendezvous was achieved. Or fro the NASA History Office, Monographs in Aerospace History: The Soyuz 19 and Apollo 18 craft launched within seven-and-a-half hours of each other July 15, and docked on July 17. NASA SP-4225 spells it out as part of a discussion of Mir Hardware Heritage: Soyuz 19 was officially referred to as Soyuz, just as the Apollo craft was simply called Apollo (while some sources refer to the craft as Apollo 18, this was not the official designation. So, it is not entirely incorrect to refer to it as "Apollo 18" if used in the context of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project. |
BNorton
Member Posts: 150
From:
Registered: Oct 2005
|
posted 06-30-2011 11:32 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
...it is not entirely incorrect to refer to it as "Apollo 18" if used in the context of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project.
If it were to be referred to as Apollo 18, then what were the three manned flights between Apollo 17 and Apollo-Soyuz? I would say that an obvious error in the documents cited exists. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42982
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 06-30-2011 11:41 AM
Those missions were canceled — therefore no longer needing designations — before the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project was even considered. Besides, "Apollo 18" in the use you are suggesting didn't refer to the command module, but to the mission, whereas "Apollo 18" for ASTP was the (unofficial) call sign of the capsule. |
BNorton
Member Posts: 150
From:
Registered: Oct 2005
|
posted 06-30-2011 07:54 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
Those missions were canceled — therefore no longer needing designations — before the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project was even considered.
Skylab 1, 2, and 3 (or Skylab 2, 3, and 4, depending upon the NASA numbering you care to select) - the three manned flights between Apollo 17 and Apollo-Soyuz - were flown...they were not canceled. Again, I would consider the Apollo 18 designation in the literature you reference an error by the author(s) - perhaps one that has propagated over time. There are some major well known errors in some of the NASA literature...so this would not be the first time. Obviously there is a chance that it is not an error and just some strange designation, which would require a search of the historical literature to verify. |
cspg
Member Posts: 6210
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 07-25-2011 08:26 AM
quote:
Originally posted by cspg:
Planned for this summer is Apollo 18 and Soyuz 19.
Here's the latest official release: |
Rick Mulheirn
Member Posts: 4167
From: England
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 07-25-2011 01:34 PM
The updated image shows a better paint job but there are still issues most notably the silver docking module... |
cspg
Member Posts: 6210
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 07-26-2011 01:51 AM
quote:
Originally posted by cspg:
Planned for this summer is Apollo 18 and Soyuz 19.
August preorder for $72.99 (Flying Mule) |
Jay Chladek
Member Posts: 2272
From: Bellevue, NE, USA
Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 09-05-2011 11:01 PM
quote:
Originally posted by BNorton:
Skylab 1, 2, and 3 (or Skylab 2, 3, and 4, depending upon the NASA numbering you care to select) - the three manned flights between Apollo 17 and Apollo-Soyuz - were flown...they were not canceled.
Skylab was its own designated program though where as ASTP was sort of a tack on at the end. And they did call it the "APOLLO" Soyuz Test Project, not Skylab Soyuz. It was also the last CSM to be called an Apollo on the radio callsigns (they never gave this craft a different radio callsign like the lunar flights with LMs). The Skylab Apollo CSMs were a bit different from the lunar block 2 ships. For starters, most of the fuel cell and cryo supply for them was removed and replaced with storage batteries, which were better for long term storage in orbit while docked with the Skylab. Secondly, the CMs had a side of them painted white for thermal control issues (since that side would spend much of its time facing the sun due to the orientation of the Skylab solar arrays). The CSM used for ASTP was CSM 111, the last of the CSMs built for H type lunar missions (meaning no SIM bay in the SM). Granted CSM 119 was the ASTP backup (also being the Skylab rescue CSM), but it was also closer to lunar spec then the Skylab CSMs since it was never intended for long term powered down storage at Skylab either. |
cspg
Member Posts: 6210
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 10-15-2011 09:38 AM
quote:
Originally posted by cspg:
Planned for this summer is Apollo 18 and Soyuz 19.
Is it just me or from this photo the CM and Soyuz stack seems "bent"? |
cycleroadie
Member Posts: 452
From: Apalachin, NY USA
Registered: May 2011
|
posted 10-27-2011 10:08 AM
The Apollo-Soyuz Test Project model hit the coast yesterday, expect it to be available in the next few days from your favorite vendor. |
lucspace
Member Posts: 403
From: Hilversum, The Netherlands
Registered: Oct 2003
|
posted 10-27-2011 03:48 PM
quote:
Originally posted by cycleroadie:
The Apollo-Soyuz Test Project model hit the coast yesterday...
Hope they corrected the ASTP model from the one shown; the docking module should be black, and in this config, the Apollo CSM is 'upside down'... |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42982
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 10-27-2011 04:03 PM
The orientation of the CSM, docking module and Soyuz are user determined (they each fit together in multiple configurations). The docking adaptor is silver colored. |
jjknap
Member Posts: 273
From: Bourbonnais, IL USA
Registered: Apr 2011
|
posted 10-30-2011 07:34 PM
quote:
Originally posted by lucspace:
the docking module should be black
Are you sure it is supposed to be black? I see that pictures of the engineering model show it black, but it is hard to tell from the actual photos from the mission. Does anyone have a picture of the installation of the DM into the S1B? |
Ironman One
Member Posts: 73
From: Ormond Beach, FL USA
Registered: Sep 2011
|
posted 10-30-2011 07:43 PM
It is supposed to be black. |
jjknap
Member Posts: 273
From: Bourbonnais, IL USA
Registered: Apr 2011
|
posted 11-01-2011 09:10 PM
Flying Mule now has Apollo-Soyuz in stock and has some good pictures. |
lucspace
Member Posts: 403
From: Hilversum, The Netherlands
Registered: Oct 2003
|
posted 11-02-2011 01:52 AM
Hmmm... Soyuz in wrong orientation in respect to DM, periscope sticking out at wrong angle, solar cells on both sides of panels where it should have on only one... |
Rick Mulheirn
Member Posts: 4167
From: England
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 11-02-2011 04:02 AM
I cannot help but notice the distinct "bend" in the docked spacecraft. It appears to be evident even in the illustration on the box; that would suggest an inherent issue with this model. |
cspg
Member Posts: 6210
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 11-02-2011 07:09 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Rick Mulheirn:
I cannot help but notice the distinct "bend" in the docked spacecraft.
That was obvious in a previous picture - see my Oct.15 post. |
GoesTo11
Member Posts: 1309
From: Denver, CO
Registered: Jun 2004
|
posted 11-05-2011 06:22 PM
I received the Apollo/Soyuz model yesterday, and did a test fit of the Apollo CSM, docking adapter, and Soyuz today.With respect to previous comments, there is indeed a slight "sag" to the assembled combination, though I wouldn't call it obvious. The weak point is the connection between the docking adapter and the Soyuz...the Soyuz model has genuine die-cast heft to it (as opposed to Dragon's feather-light, all-plastic 1:72 LMs), and that weight is enough to slightly bend the assembled combination, though again it's not enough to be obvious. It's an easy fix if one cares to cement the Soyuz to the docking adapter. |
Bill Hunt
Member Posts: 399
From: Irvine, CA
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 11-06-2011 01:14 PM
Frankly, I hope Dragon will just make the Soyuz (in its variations) available seperately. |
Jay Chladek
Member Posts: 2272
From: Bellevue, NE, USA
Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 11-07-2011 10:53 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Hunt:
Frankly, I hope Dragon will just make the Soyuz (in its variations) available seperately.
And I hope they do Soyuz as a model kit as well (as opposed to JUST doing it as a diecast). Doing a Salyut station with a Soyuz docked with it is VERY tempting.  |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42982
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 11-07-2011 11:13 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman One:
It is supposed to be black.
Having been unable to find a clear photo of the actual hardware (pre- or in-flight), I discussed the issue of the docking module's color with Nick Proach. He too felt it should be black but as we had access to some of the astronauts who worked with the hardware, we posed the question to them.Vance Brand said the module was foil covered, similar to what had been used on the lunar module. He said it was reflective. David Scott thought it was a dark gray, but said his memory of it wasn't clear. Could the attributed black color have been the reflection of the blackness of space or it being photographed in shadow? |
X-Plane Fan
Member Posts: 150
From: CA, USA
Registered: Jul 2007
|
posted 11-07-2011 05:11 PM
The docking module sure looks to be dark gray in these photos: |
history in miniature
Member Posts: 600
From: Slatington, PA
Registered: Mar 2009
|
posted 11-07-2011 05:35 PM
Interesting indeed, I thought the DM was black.When I first built a replica of the GATV, I remember viewing pictures of the real hardware in space and there were portions of the target vehicle that appeared to be black when they were in fact silver. It simply was a reflection of the darkness of space.
There are an awful lot of us out here who thought the color was black. Great theory Robert.  |
mode1charlie
Member Posts: 1169
From: Honolulu, HI
Registered: Sep 2010
|
posted 11-07-2011 06:45 PM
But if that were true (docking module had a reflective surface), wouldn't the color of the CM - which I presume was covered in kapton film as with Apollos 7 through 17 (and parts of the Skylab CMs) - in the first photo also appear black? It doesn't in that photo (AST-32-2686).Also, totally unrelated to this immediate question, what is that weird blob on the SPS nozzle (in the AST-32-2695 pic)? |
mode1charlie
Member Posts: 1169
From: Honolulu, HI
Registered: Sep 2010
|
posted 11-08-2011 04:41 AM
Here is a photo of the Apollo 17 LM ascent stage. It's notable how what we know to be a flat black color (someone may know a more precise term on the FS scale) on the micrometeroid protection panels appears, in the glare of the full sun, to be a much lighter shade of gray. That appearance is not as light colored as the two images of the ASTP docking module, so I'm not suggesting it's the same flat black color, just that darker "flat" colors can appear much lighter in full sunlight. The DM in the two ASTP images doesn't look like a reflective surface to me, but I defer to knowledge much greater than my own. Anyone know how to put in a query with Gen. Stafford? |
history in miniature
Member Posts: 600
From: Slatington, PA
Registered: Mar 2009
|
posted 11-08-2011 06:55 AM
We know for sure the colors of the CM and the SPS engine bell which appear in this picture to show their true coloring. One could then determine the color of the DM. I'm leaning towards a gray color. |
dog320
Member Posts: 49
From: West Sussex, United Kingdom
Registered: Jul 2010
|
posted 11-08-2011 09:08 AM
quote:
Originally posted by mode1charlie:
Also, totally unrelated to this immediate question, what is that weird blob on the SPS nozzle (in the AST-32-2695 pic)?
I believe the anomaly was observed by the Soyuz crew but not reported at the time. I'm not aware of a definitive cause having been determined but have heard a theory about differential expansion, not sure its really plausible though.Back to the DM. Without wishing to imply any disrespect, 36 years is a long time to rely on any human memory and I'd like to see documentary proof. I would expect that several different insulation blankets were tried during the DM's development, which may confuse the issue. To me it looks similar to the black material on the LM descent stage. As we know this varies in appearance from black to mid-grey depending on lighting/ exposure etc (but is actually black). Whilst I don't buy the "reflected black sky" theory, several of the Apollo 9 CSM pictures do seem to provide some evidence for it. |
mikej
Member Posts: 481
From: Germantown, WI USA
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 11-08-2011 06:05 PM
quote:
Originally posted by mode1charlie:
what is that weird blob on the SPS nozzle (in the AST-32-2695 pic)?
The SPS nozzle is wrapped in a vinyl-type plastic film for protection during ground handling. This film is not removed before flight, to avoid the risk of last-minute damage. On lunar missions, this coating is burned off by the heat of the LOI burn. However, at the time in the ASTP mission that these photos were taken, the SPS engine had burned a cumulative time of only a few seconds (with no individual burn more than 3.2 seconds). This caused the film soften and outgas (but not burn off), resulting in the blisters. Reference Apollo Soyuz Mission Evaluation Report, p. 4-10 and 4-11 (p. 29 & 30 in the PDF). |
dog320
Member Posts: 49
From: West Sussex, United Kingdom
Registered: Jul 2010
|
posted 11-08-2011 09:23 PM
Thanks mikej, nice to have the definitive word.And back to the DM, the same report states in A.1.2 (PDF page 163): "Most of the external surfaces were insulated with 30 layers of aluminized Kapton covered with iconel foil and nickel foil to protect the Kapton form service module reaction control system plume impingement." So not really much clearer as it doesn't say anything about the iconel and nickel foil coatings, if any. However, on the LM descent stage we know that at least some of the iconel was painted black. |
history in miniature
Member Posts: 600
From: Slatington, PA
Registered: Mar 2009
|
posted 11-09-2011 06:53 AM
After a lengthy discussion over at the space modelers group forum, the consensus is the DM is in fact a gray anti-glare coating and not black or polished silver. |
lucspace
Member Posts: 403
From: Hilversum, The Netherlands
Registered: Oct 2003
|
posted 11-12-2011 07:44 AM
The incredible thing is that I cannot find any photo of the DM during KSC handling online anywhere!I think the colour must have been dark-grey to black. On orbit estimation of the colour is dificult; in some on-orbit views of Shuttle orbiters, the black tiles appear light grey. Also, in most of Paul Fjeld's art of ASTP, the DM is depicted as almost black. |
J.L
Member Posts: 674
From: Bloomington, Illinois, USA
Registered: May 2005
|
posted 11-12-2011 10:39 AM
quote:
Originally posted by lucspace:
The incredible thing is that I cannot find any photo of the DM during KSC handling online anywhere!
And that is why I make thousands of images available on disc thru Retro Space Images. No endless searching on the web to find the same shots over and over.For what it's worth, I have concluded the DM is gray. The SPS engine nozzle is black and gray. The DM color matches the gray part. I have dozens of DM checkout images on my ASTP disc, unfortunately none of them appear to show the mission flown outer skin applied. |
randyc
Member Posts: 779
From: Chandler, AZ USA
Registered: May 2003
|
posted 11-12-2011 07:53 PM
What a frustrating model! Although there aren't many pieces to assemble not only is there a slight bend between the Apollo Command Module and the Docking Module/Soyuz, which is somewhat annoying, the biggest problem I have is that the base keeps tipping over because of the weight of the Soyuz cantilevering over the base. I tried different orientations of the Soyuz in relation to the Apollo but nothing helped. I even tried putting a small weight under the back.of the base, but because that area is small I don't have a weight that will fit and is heavy enough to prevent the base from tipping.Did any of the other collectors who have this model experience the same problem? |
jjknap
Member Posts: 273
From: Bourbonnais, IL USA
Registered: Apr 2011
|
posted 11-12-2011 08:42 PM
I haven't tried assembly yet, but when I opened the box, a small piece sticking out of the Soyuz was broken.  Dragon is taking care of me though, but what a fragile piece. |
KAPTEC
Member Posts: 578
From: Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2005
|
posted 11-13-2011 06:39 AM
I straightened up a little the metal part of the base. Thus it does not fall down already but the alignment of the Soyuz keeps on being badly... I will need to glue it. |
advertisement