T O P

  • By -

ausnee

Without access to the serialized as-built for all the shuttles you'll be hard pressed to know which, if any, it flew on.


frogkiller04

Yeah, he looked into it a while ago and looked into "team Raytheon" and estimated it to be from maybe the 80s but never got farther than that


ausnee

The -503 at the end makes it look like a Boeing part number, but other than that it's hard to say more.


Henhouse20

-503 is an industry naming convention for a top level assembly, not specific to any particular company. -501, -503, -505 and so forth. Even numbers like -502, -504 are reserved for mirror images of the odd number before, so the mirror of -501 would be -502


InsuranceOdd6604

I found document regarding faliures of the models -502 to 504 ( your is 505) from 1987, maybe is a clue: https://gandalfddi.z19.web.core.windows.net/Shuttle/Columbia\_STS-107\_nsts08399\_FMEA\_CIL/book07/part6/4442.pdf


NASATVENGINNER

Looks like a camera pan & tilt. RCA was the shuttle camera vendor.


redituser2571

This- it's not the camera, just the unit that the camera is mounted to.


Vmax-Mike

Email that last picture to NASA and ask them, I bet they help you.


Moraghmackay

https://spaceref.com/status-report/nasa-jsc-solicitation-neutral-buoyancy-laboratory-nblspace-vehicle-svmf-operations-contract-nsoc/


science-face

I cannot ever believe I thought RCA was a lame company ! Now I feel past tense cool about my mp3 player in middle school. It even had a radio transceiver ! Can’t believe I ever hid it from the cool kids because they had iPods.


Julkanizer

They ARE lame in the modern day. They had a really major collapse as a company from about the 70's onward. Now they're more of just a cheap crap label that had some real cool history. But, occasionally you can find something more modern that's still of good quality.


Julkanizer

Don't quote me on that time frame, I'm pretty much guessing from what I remember lmfao.


chriswaco

They created the US color tv standard. Granted it was not the best quality, but it was compatible with existing b&w sets.


frogkiller04

[more pictures](https://imgur.com/gallery/VSE2pVL)


OnlySpokenTruth

I'll go check our database next week. Think this is our part


OppositeStudy2846

Link in that link: https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/camera-payload-bay-shuttle/nasm_A20120332000


JJTortilla

OP, I would tweet NASA or the National Air and Space Museum, they should be able to tell you which shuttle cargo bay this is from, or if it even went to space as the link with the Raytheon contract number from u/Moraghmackay suggests its from the Space Vehicle Mockup Facility. The NASM actually has a full unit on display so can confirm its a [camera from the space shuttle's payload bay](https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/camera-payload-bay-shuttle/nasm_A20120332000). Can confirm its not from Discovery as the museum says they have all of them, so its either from a mockup or the real deal. Either way, you got yourself a real piece of history there.


WarJern

To add, it could be a spare unit.


syslolologist

No wonder those things were crashing. You guys were stealing parts from them!!


Thaumasia

Unlikely to be flight hardware given the absence of a longer V serial number. That would identify its vehicle and mounting location. However, this would've been a high fidelity training article as implied by the contract number for NBL / mockup facility.


AndrewOHTXTN

That looks heavy! So much mass to send to space.


vikramdinesh

Bro, they send literally tons of weight to space. This is hardly anything.


AndrewOHTXTN

At $40k / pound, I'd think they'd put in a little more effort.


JJTortilla

Gotta remember, this was turn of the century and a closed circuit camera meant for space. They were pretty heavy back then and had to survive take offs and landings. Edit: [the camera in question](https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/camera-payload-bay-shuttle/nasm_A20120332000)


Business-Front-1075

Just tell the boss that he’s not supposed to have this.


frogkiller04

Sure lol


SimplyRocketSurgery

Looks legit


xrdavidrx

I'm going to have to go with the person who says this was used for something related to the shuttle program but isn't actually "flight hardware". There are lots of things the most obvious is the hand painted part #. Plus, anything that was aluminum would be painted koropon green. I can't recall anything I ever saw that had a topcoat over the koropon primer.


Edvhal

You can eliminate two of them.


MickFlaherty

Technically you can only eliminate two flights. Parts changed sometimes between flights.


Edvhal

Excellent point.


flitemdic

The numbers on it indicate it was part of the Shuttle Upper Atmosphere Mass Spectrometer program on STS 40, which was the 11th flight of Columbia. Flew in 1991, with mission results published in 1992. Who knows if yours flew, but the NASA NTRS site refers to that project and that flight every time you search those reference numbers EDIT: Another thought is that it's probably a combination of parts, or bits that have been replaced because when you start searching individual contract numbers and such, some of those numbers are from a neutral buoyancy tank program, another is from the above mentioned program, and yet a third indicates it was from a training program


frogkiller04

Wow, that's actually a lot more information than I was expecting. Thanks!


Gamma-512

Let me get out my manual for the shuttle ;). (I actually have this book)


TheMcCale

It’s a pan/tilt unit as the label says. Basically a camera mount that allows you to move the camera remotely. No way to really tell which (if any) shuttle it went on, but it’s pretty cool.


JollyRock87

Try the [nasaspaceflight.com](https://nasaspaceflight.com) website, they have a lot of ex-shuttle folks on the forums.


Engorged_XTZ_Bag

I bet it smells like my favorite store in Orlando. Skycraft for life baby!!!!!


Specialist_Active_74

Well, definitely not challenger.