NASA911

[M2]

Nice....

Yeah, I had to chuckle at that one too...but if this thread gets sidetracked (like many others seem to have done lately), I am gonna bitchslap the shit out of some people, and enjoy the hell out of it!

[Jughead]

In your opinion, what causes the modified 747 SCA to fly "like crap"?

I'm not really qualified to have an opinion--I'm only relaying what I heard in casual conversation several years ago. I speculate that it has to do with being optimized to carry the orbiter (and *not* having the orbiter results in a sub-obtimal condition). So, beyond the huge horizontal stab adding drag as you point out (I think you meant horizontal, not vertical, yes?), it also changes the center of lift, which could change the handling dramatically. I suppose it would be a similar effect as having a really out-of-whack CG.

One of the pilots is quoted as saying the SCA flies similarly to a stock 747... which flies in the face of what Jughead heard.

That's not how I read it; I think he was saying that it flies similarly to a stock 747 **with the orbiter on**. That, in turn, jibes perfectly with what I'd heard. Another snippet I recall from the same conversation echoed that quote--that it flies "normally" with the orbiter on, just with higher thrust requirements & smaller performance envelope for everything.

[Guest boredwith9to5]

Kinda' like your mom.

I walked right into that one!

[JarheadBoom]

I'm not really qualified to have an opinion--I'm only relaying what I heard in casual conversation several years ago. I speculate that it has to do with being optimized to carry the orbiter (and *not* having the orbiter results in a sub-obtimal condition). So, beyond the huge horizontal stab adding drag as you point out (I think you meant horizontal, not vertical, yes?), it also changes the center of lift, which could change the handling dramatically. I suppose it would be a similar effect as having a really out-of-whack CG.

Heh... I'm barely qualified to talk about it, much less have an opinion.

I didn't notice until you mentioned it that the horizontal stab has a much wider span than normal. I was referring to the additional vertical panels on the tips of the horizontal stab.

I would imagine the crew could negate most of the larger-stab-induced CL changes with stab trim, but I know that's not an optimal solution.

That's not how I read it; I think he was saying that it flies similarly to a stock 747 **with the orbiter on**. That, in turn, jibes perfectly with what I'd heard. Another snippet I recall from the same conversation echoed that quote--that it flies "normally" with the orbiter on, just with higher thrust requirements & smaller performance envelope for everything.

After re-reading my link in the light of a new (and non-exhausted) day, I see you're correct. I mis-read it.

[Guest DILLA]

NASA test pilots

True, or the NASA (both Dryden and Johnson) pilots with a LOT of heavy time. Most of NASA's pilots went through TPS, but a couple are ex-military guys that had TONS of military and civilian heavy time. I had the opportunity to jumpseat on the SCA (w/o the Shuttle on its back during a prof. flight) back when I worked at NASA...pristine jet and awesome crews.

[Dupe]

True, or the NASA (both Dryden and Johnson) pilots with a LOT of heavy time. Most of NASA's pilots went through TPS, but a couple are ex-military guys that had TONS of military and civilian heavy time. I had the opportunity to jumpseat on the SCA (w/o the Shuttle on its back during a prof. flight) back when I worked at NASA...pristine jet and awesome crews.

Somewhat aside, if you've not had the opportunity to get a seat on the NASA Gulfstream-2 shuttle sim when they do practice approches, do it! Imagine a business jet in a 30 degree dive-bomb pattern with a base altitude of 20,000 feet then taking it to a low-approach. That pretty much summarizes the G-2 profile. They often fly missions into KSC, Edwards, and White Sands and always give up seats to aircrew, tower folks, airmen of the quarter, etc.

[Guest DILLA]

Somewhat aside, if you've not had the opportunity to get a seat on the NASA Gulfstream-2 shuttle sim when they do practice approches, do it! Imagine a business jet in a 30 degree dive-bomb pattern with a base altitude of 20,000 feet then taking it to a low-approach. That pretty much summarizes the G-2 profile. They often fly missions into KSC, Edwards, and White Sands and always give up seats to aircrew, tower folks, airmen of the quarter, etc.

I know, buddy...that was my next conquest...the Atlantis crew was training heavily out at EDW for the first flight after the Columbia tragedy and my boss was trying to get some of us on the Gulfstream, but it never came through. Apart from a T-38 or FA-18 ride, that would have been my favorite.

Edited June 8, 2009 by DILLA