Revell 04736 Space Shuttle Discovery & Booster Rockets 1:144 Scale Unbuilt/Unpainted Plastic Model Kit, Multi-color, 59.5 x 36.4 x 6.5 centimetres

£21.495
FREE Shipping

Revell 04736 Space Shuttle Discovery & Booster Rockets 1:144 Scale Unbuilt/Unpainted Plastic Model Kit, Multi-color, 59.5 x 36.4 x 6.5 centimetres

Revell 04736 Space Shuttle Discovery & Booster Rockets 1:144 Scale Unbuilt/Unpainted Plastic Model Kit, Multi-color, 59.5 x 36.4 x 6.5 centimetres

RRP: £42.99
Price: £21.495
£21.495 FREE Shipping

In stock

We accept the following payment methods

Description

Items that did not meet certain design, reliability and safety requirements specified by NASA’s top management and whose failure could threaten the toss of crew, vehicle, or mis­sion, made up a critical i tems list (CIL).

Spaceship Free 3D Models download - Free3D Spaceship Free 3D Models download - Free3D

Report of the Space Task Group, 1969". NASA. Archived from the original on December 24, 2018 . Retrieved August 6, 2009.

Contact Us

Part of the problem is getting the engineers to understand that they are using subjective methods for determining risk, because they don’t like to admit that,” said Ray A. Williamson, senior associate at the U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment in Washington, D.C. “Yet they talk in terms of sounding objective and fool themselves into thinking they are being objective.” The Johnson authors’ value of 1 in 100 000 implied, as Feynman spelled out, that “one could put a Shuttle up each day for 300 years expecting to lose only one.” Yet even after the Challenger accident, NASA’s chief engineer Milton Silveira, in a hearing on the Galileo thermonuclear generator held March 4, 1986, before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science and Technology, said: “We think that using a number like 10 to the minus 3, as suggested, is probably a little pessimistic.” In his view, the actual risk “would be 10 to the minus 5, and that is our design objective.” When asked how the number was deduced, Silveira replied, “We came to those probabilities based on engineering judgment in review of the design rather than taking a statistical data base, because we didn’t feel we had that.” One reason NASA has so strongly resisted probabilistic risk analysis may be the fact that “PRA runs against all traditions of engineering, where you handle reliability by safety factors,” said Elisabeth Paté-Cornell, associate professor in the department of industrial engineering and engineering management at Stanford University in California, who is now studying organizational factors and risk assessment in NASA. In addition, with NASA’s strong pride in design, PRA may be “perceived as an insult to their capabilities, that the system they ’ve designed is not 100 percent perfect and absolutely safe,” she added. Thus, the character of an organization influences the reliability and failure of the systems it builds because its structure, policy, and culture determine the priorities, incentives, and communication paths for the engineers and managers doing the work, she said. The Space Shuttle program used the HAL/S programming language. [10] The first microprocessor used was the 8088 and later the 80386. The Space Shuttle orbiter avionics computer was the IBM AP-101. It’s not that simple,” Buchbinder said. “A probabilistic way of thinking is not something that most people are attuned to. We don’t know what will happen precisely each time. We can only say what is likely to happen a certain percentage of the time.” Unless engineers and managers become familiar with probability theory, they don ’t know what to make of “large uncertainties that represent the state of current knowledge,” he said. “And that is no comfort to the poor decision-maker who wants a simple answer to the question, ‘Is this system safe enough? ’”

LEGO NASA Space Shuttle Discovery 10283 Build and Display

The probabilities originated in a series of quantitative risk assessments NASA was required to conduct by the Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Panel (INSRP), in anticipation of the launch of the Galileo spacecraft on its voyage to Jupiter, originally scheduled for the early 1980s. Galileo was powered by a plutonium-­fueled radioisotope thermoelectric generator, and Presidential Directive/NSC-25 ruled that either the U.S. President or the director of the office of science and technology policy must examine the safety of any launch of nuclear material before approving it. The INSRP (which consisted of representatives of NASA as the launching agency, the Department of Energy, which manages nuclear devices, and the Department of Defense, whose Air Force manages range safety at launch) was charged with ascertaining the quantitative risks of a catastrophic launch dispersing the radioactive poison into the atmosphere. There were a number of studies because the upper stage for boosting Galileo into interplanetary space was reconfigured several times. Grey estimated that spares of the crucial modules might add another 10 percent to the space station’s cost. “But NASA is not willing to go to bat for that extra because they ’re unwilling to take the political risk,” he said— a replay, he fears, of NASA’s response to the political negativism over the shuttle in the 1970s. The real problem is: whatever the numbers are, acceptance of that risk and planning for it is what needs to be done,” Grey said. He fears that “NASA doesn’t do that yet.” After that, print out a few of the diagrams to reference. I also prefer having a physical model on hand to refer to so I broke out an old paper model from the local science museum. Additionally, it is nice to have a color picture on hand. All of this was taking place in the midst of other NASA teams proposing a wide variety of post-Apollo missions, a number of which would cost as much as Apollo or more [ citation needed]. As each of these projects fought for funding, the NASA budget was at the same time being severely constrained. Three were eventually presented to Vice President Agnew in 1969. The shuttle project rose to the top, largely due to tireless campaigning by its supporters [ citation needed]. By 1970 the shuttle had been selected as the one major project for the short-term post-Apollo time frame.Making the wheels can be quite hard. Although it may be hard, the rewards of someone telling you how cool they are when you have them retract are worth more than the work it takes to make it. I started off watching a few videos of the space shuttle landing to get and idea of how the landing gears work. Although my design is inaccurate (the sheer resistance on the flaps at high speed would rip them off their hinges), I chose to do it that way since it was easier to have the wheels perpendicular to the part that holds up the wheels (suspension?) vs it being parallel.

Space Modeling HobbySpace - Space Modeling

Another competing approach was maintaining the Saturn V production line and using its large payload capacity to launch a space station in a few payloads rather than many smaller shuttle payloads. A related concept was servicing the space station using the Air Force Titan III-M to launch a larger Gemini capsule, called " Big Gemini", or a smaller "glider" version of the shuttle with no main engines and a 15ft ×30ft (4.6m ×9.1m) payload bay.

Products of Space Shuttle Models

As another incentive for the military to use the shuttle, Congress reportedly told DoD that it would not pay for any satellites not designed to fit into the shuttle cargo bay. [6] Although NRO did not redesign existing satellites for the shuttle, the vehicle retained the ability to retrieve large cargos such as the KH-9 HEXAGON from orbit for refurbishment, and the agency studied resupplying the satellite in space. [7] When funding for the program came into question, there were concerns that the project might be canceled. This led to an effort to interest the US Air Force in using the shuttle for their missions as well. The Air Force was mildly interested but demanded a much larger vehicle, far larger than the original concepts, which NASA accepted since it was also beneficial to their own plans. To lower the development costs of the resulting designs, boosters were added, a throw-away fuel tank was adopted, and many other changes were made that greatly lowered the reusability and greatly added to the vehicle and operational costs. With the Air Force's assistance, the system emerged in its operational form.



  • Fruugo ID: 258392218-563234582
  • EAN: 764486781913
  • Sold by: Fruugo

Delivery & Returns

Fruugo

Address: UK
All products: Visit Fruugo Shop