even nasa uses boat-tails

[MetroMPG]

Originally Posted by wyatt

If you really want, I can see about finding a graph that will show the fuel use over time...

You know what would be really neat? Figure out MPG equivalent (energy equivalence) for a typical mission flight. It's an expensive pulse, but man, what a glide!

[wyatt]

Ha ha ha! I completely take back everything I said! I have to add that one to my archives!

[wyatt]

With Wikipedia as my source (oh save me! it's just too fast!). I don't know how to do the conversion to gallons from the RSRBs, so I will do it in pounds instead.

446,030,333 total miles / (123 flights * ((2 * 1,100,000 pounds PBAN) + 1,387,457 pounds LOX + 234,265 pounds LH2))

Where:
PBAN is Polybutadiene Acrylonitrile, or a type of solid rocket fule
LOX is Liquid Oxygen
LH2 is Liquid Hydrogen

These calculations give the Orbiter .9488 miles per pound propellant.
The ISS which the Orbiter services would be significantly better since it is still up there accumulating miles!

The LOX is dense (over 70 lb per cubic foot) and the LH2 is not (around 4 lb per cubic foot), I am not sure where the PBAN falls, but it's bound to be more dense than the LOX.

[trebuchet03]

Remember kids - the space shuttle traveling at commercial aircraft speeds is not representative of your car traveling at sub speed limit velocities

[wyatt]

Originally Posted by trebuchet03

Remember kids - the space shuttle traveling at commercial aircraft speeds is not representative of your car traveling at sub speed limit velocities

Yes, a velocity (in space) of 5 miles per second is not exactly comparable to road speeds. Just getting to the point where the atmosphere doesn't interfere too much (and then staying there) is quite an accomplishment!

[trebuchet03]

Originally Posted by wyatt

Yes, a velocity (in space) of 5 miles per second is not exactly comparable to road speeds. Just getting to the point where the atmosphere doesn't interfere too much (and then staying there) is quite an accomplishment!

I was talking more about the piggy back scenario in the OP But yeah, even lift off velocities are freaking amazing

[diesel_john]

without the boattail the rudder behind it might not work

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by diesel_john

without the boattail the rudder behind it might not work

Which is why the auxillary rudders at the ends of the horizontal tail.

That drop-test picture reminds me of something I'd wondered about at the time, but never found an answer: how the !@$# did they ever manage to release the Shuttle in midair without taking off the 747's vertical tail?