I'm in a bit of discussion about whether or not the orbiter was at an slight angle when it was mated to the ET. Based on measurements of the separation planes (FWD and aft) it seems like the orbiter would have to be at an angle to be properly mated to both the FWD and aft points (EO-1 through EO-3).
Drawings in the SLWT System Definition Handbook Vol. 2 show that the FWD attachment point is 16.285 inches above the AFT attachment points. The FWD and AFT attachment points are 843.60 inches apart, so ARCTAN(16.285/843.60) = 1.106 degrees.F=ma
Quote from: Fequalsma on 09/07/2018 10:05 pmDrawings in the SLWT System Definition Handbook Vol. 2 show that the FWD attachment point is 16.285 inches above the AFT attachment points. The FWD and AFT attachment points are 843.60 inches apart, so ARCTAN(16.285/843.60) = 1.106 degrees.F=maFor a dry tank or a fueled tank? The ET shrank something like a foot in the vertical direction when cryo-loaded. So that would rotate the forward bipod a bit.
The meat of the question is now what if any AoA did the orbiter have when mated to the ET?
https://www.aiaa.org/uploadedFiles/About-AIAA/History_and_Heritage/Final_Space_Shuttle_Launches/Why_the_Wings_Stay_On.pdfF=maQuote from: DaveS on 09/08/2018 01:10 pmThe meat of the question is now what if any AoA did the orbiter have when mated to the ET?
Quote from: Fequalsma on 09/08/2018 02:07 pmhttps://www.aiaa.org/uploadedFiles/About-AIAA/History_and_Heritage/Final_Space_Shuttle_Launches/Why_the_Wings_Stay_On.pdfF=maQuote from: DaveS on 09/08/2018 01:10 pmThe meat of the question is now what if any AoA did the orbiter have when mated to the ET?I meant when while stationary on the MLP, not in-flight. Was the axes of the orbiter and ET/SRB stack different or were they inline with each other?
Did the orbiter have a pitch bias (positive or negative) when mated to the ET like it when it was mated to the OTS/SCA? When it was mated to either of those two, it was always pitched up by 3°s(6°s for the ALTs). That is what I am trying find out, if it had a positive or negative pitch angle (AKA Angle of Attack) when mated to the ET like it did for everything else it could be mated to.
https://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/modernplanes/modern-sa-st/56557/view/space_shuttle_boeing_747/Scaling from this drawing of the Orbiter/SCA, its FWD attachment is 4.5 feet above the AFT attachments, so the attachment point plane is inclined +3.4 degrees relative to the SCA reference plane (windows/body stripe), or 2.3 degrees higher than the Orbiter/ET stack (1.1 degrees). The Orbiter reference plane (Payload Bay Door sill) is inclined +1.8 degrees relative to the SCA waterline plane, or 1.8 degrees higher than on the Orbiter/ET stack (zero). Since this drawing is not CAD or a known scale, these angles are probably not accurate, but if you average them, the Orbiter sits 2 degrees (3 versus 1) more nose-high on the SCA than on the ET. What AOA between the Orbiter and ET are you looking for? The angle of the wings relative to the ET? If so, then at the root? At the chine?
Quote from: Fequalsma on 09/08/2018 05:15 pmhttps://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/modernplanes/modern-sa-st/56557/view/space_shuttle_boeing_747/Scaling from this drawing of the Orbiter/SCA, its FWD attachment is 4.5 feet above the AFT attachments, so the attachment point plane is inclined +3.4 degrees relative to the SCA reference plane (windows/body stripe), or 2.3 degrees higher than the Orbiter/ET stack (1.1 degrees). The Orbiter reference plane (Payload Bay Door sill) is inclined +1.8 degrees relative to the SCA waterline plane, or 1.8 degrees higher than on the Orbiter/ET stack (zero). Since this drawing is not CAD or a known scale, these angles are probably not accurate, but if you average them, the Orbiter sits 2 degrees (3 versus 1) more nose-high on the SCA than on the ET. What AOA between the Orbiter and ET are you looking for? The angle of the wings relative to the ET? If so, then at the root? At the chine?The orbiter X-axis which goes through the nose. I have attached a schematic of Discovery at a level attitude. Is that how the how the orbiter would sit on the ET or would it be at an angle relative to the X axis?
My assessment is yes. The Orbiter X-axis in your image runs through the centerline of the Orbiter Payload Bay, and is parallel to the centerline of the ET, separated by 336.5 inches (see Reply #3546).F=mahttps://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/v3o5.htmQuote from: DaveS on 09/08/2018 05:22 pmQuote from: Fequalsma on 09/08/2018 05:15 pmhttps://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/modernplanes/modern-sa-st/56557/view/space_shuttle_boeing_747/Scaling from this drawing of the Orbiter/SCA, its FWD attachment is 4.5 feet above the AFT attachments, so the attachment point plane is inclined +3.4 degrees relative to the SCA reference plane (windows/body stripe), or 2.3 degrees higher than the Orbiter/ET stack (1.1 degrees). The Orbiter reference plane (Payload Bay Door sill) is inclined +1.8 degrees relative to the SCA waterline plane, or 1.8 degrees higher than on the Orbiter/ET stack (zero). Since this drawing is not CAD or a known scale, these angles are probably not accurate, but if you average them, the Orbiter sits 2 degrees (3 versus 1) more nose-high on the SCA than on the ET. What AOA between the Orbiter and ET are you looking for? The angle of the wings relative to the ET? If so, then at the root? At the chine?The orbiter X-axis which goes through the nose. I have attached a schematic of Discovery at a level attitude. Is that how the how the orbiter would sit on the ET or would it be at an angle relative to the X axis?
Quote from: Fequalsma on 09/08/2018 05:50 pmMy assessment is yes. The Orbiter X-axis in your image runs through the centerline of the Orbiter Payload Bay, and is parallel to the centerline of the ET, separated by 336.5 inches (see Reply #3546).F=mahttps://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/v3o5.htmQuote from: DaveS on 09/08/2018 05:22 pmQuote from: Fequalsma on 09/08/2018 05:15 pmhttps://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/modernplanes/modern-sa-st/56557/view/space_shuttle_boeing_747/Scaling from this drawing of the Orbiter/SCA, its FWD attachment is 4.5 feet above the AFT attachments, so the attachment point plane is inclined +3.4 degrees relative to the SCA reference plane (windows/body stripe), or 2.3 degrees higher than the Orbiter/ET stack (1.1 degrees). The Orbiter reference plane (Payload Bay Door sill) is inclined +1.8 degrees relative to the SCA waterline plane, or 1.8 degrees higher than on the Orbiter/ET stack (zero). Since this drawing is not CAD or a known scale, these angles are probably not accurate, but if you average them, the Orbiter sits 2 degrees (3 versus 1) more nose-high on the SCA than on the ET. What AOA between the Orbiter and ET are you looking for? The angle of the wings relative to the ET? If so, then at the root? At the chine?The orbiter X-axis which goes through the nose. I have attached a schematic of Discovery at a level attitude. Is that how the how the orbiter would sit on the ET or would it be at an angle relative to the X axis?So the difference in heights of the attachment points (FWD vs aft) doesn't make the orbiter X-axis have an angle?
Archibald, check out the Orbiter weights starting on page D-81 of:W. Heineman Jr..: “Design Mass Properties II: Mass Estimating and Forecasting for Aerospace Vehicles Based on Historical Data,” Report No. JSC-26098, NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX, November 1994.http://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Space/JSC-26098_Design_Mass_Properties_II.pdfF=ma
Currently trying to wrap my mind around the orbiter weight breakdown.First, did I got the basic numbers right - Orbiter weight without the SSME and no payload: 151 000 pounds. - With the SSME added: 171 000 pounds. - Maximum landing weight: 240 000 pounds (does that includes a 60 000 pounds full payload bay ?) Well, is there, somewhere, a detailed breakdown of those 151 000 pounds of empty weight ? The two OMS pods weight 30 000 pounds by themselves, TPs was also pretty heavy - 20 000 pounds. What else ?