STS-126: Post Flight (Dryden, SCA Ferry to KSC) Coverage

[cb6785]

I did a quick review of the SCA compared to your average 747-100 (MTOW, Service Ceiling, etc.). I guess range should be around 1000-1200 miles with a shuttle. Minimum runway length should be around 10,000 feet. So if anyone want's to look up all the airstrips between Europe and the US with a 10k runway and a max distance of 1000miles in between...

[psloss]

I did a quick review of the SCA compared to your average 747-100 (MTOW, Service Ceiling, etc.). I guess range should be around 1000-1200 miles with a shuttle.

Are you factoring in the SCA ceiling with the orbiter on top for range?  Can't fly much higher than 15k feet.

[cb6785]

I did a quick review of the SCA compared to your average 747-100 (MTOW, Service Ceiling, etc.). I guess range should be around 1000-1200 miles with a shuttle.

Are you factoring in the SCA ceiling with the orbiter on top for range?  Can't fly much higher than 15k feet.

Yep 15k was what I read as ceiling.

But I have to say my numbers for range are just an educated guess, based on a Flight Level vs. Range chart for the 747-200F and roughly calculating the differences between -200, -100 and SCA.

[SpaceNutz SA]

Don't they use Air Force bases anyways? Or has DFW been utilized in the past? It just seems strange to think they would fly it in to regular airports...

In only a cursory search I found mention of one case, during the ferry after STS-30.  That was a long time ago, but more importantly it was before 9/11.

I seem to remember the most recent Ferry-Back made a stop at Amarillo (commercial airport)??

[jcm]

Out of interest, if an Orbiter were ever to land at a TAL site in Europe or Africa, what would be the plan for returning her to KSC? Would the SCA have the range to fly across the Atlantic Ocean, or would it have to go the long way round the planet, East all the way?

Might have to copy this across to Shuttle Q&A as I've always wondered about that too. You'll of seen the emergancy landing site document on L2 with all the contingency landing sites and you have to wonder if they could even land the SCA on some of the "sporty" runways (wide enough?) - so maybe they'd have to lift her on to a barge?

Remember Enterprise went to the 1983 Paris Air Show.
Route was  EAFB-Peterson-McConnell-WrightPat, then Goose Bay,
Keflavik, RAF Fairford, Bonn, Le Bourget.
On the way back, Le Bourget to Stansted, Keflavik, Goose Bay, Ottawa, Dulles, Sheppard, EAFB.

[Aobrien]

Was there coverage on NASA TV of the MLP being moved to the parking position?
If so are their any videos of it.

[DaveS]

Was there coverage on NASA TV of the MLP being moved to the parking position?
If so are their any videos of it.

No coverage which is usual.

[robertross]

Out of interest, if an Orbiter were ever to land at a TAL site in Europe or Africa, what would be the plan for returning her to KSC? Would the SCA have the range to fly across the Atlantic Ocean, or would it have to go the long way round the planet, East all the way?

Might have to copy this across to Shuttle Q&A as I've always wondered about that too. You'll of seen the emergancy landing site document on L2 with all the contingency landing sites and you have to wonder if they could even land the SCA on some of the "sporty" runways (wide enough?) - so maybe they'd have to lift her on to a barge?

Remember Enterprise went to the 1983 Paris Air Show.
Route was  EAFB-Peterson-McConnell-WrightPat, then Goose Bay,
Keflavik, RAF Fairford, Bonn, Le Bourget.
On the way back, Le Bourget to Stansted, Keflavik, Goose Bay, Ottawa, Dulles, Sheppard, EAFB.

Ottawa...that's when I got hooked!
Saw it outside our house doing a fly-around, then landing at YOW. Good thing my dad was into flying...he was as choked up as I was!
And BIG! I have a polaroid somewhere of it. I was only 12.

I wish it would do a tour when the last orbiter retires, that would be neat.

[dgates]

I am at EDW this week... the parking lot over at DFRC is *packed* compared to the usual.  Noted that there are currently two SCA's on the NASA ramp.  Anybody know if they use the 2nd 747 as the pathfinder airplane or if they use a C-130 or maybe the STA aircraft for that role, or maybe something else entirely?

If there is anybody on here that is local at EDW, hey, I have a flight line badge and would love to go have a look!  Lunch?  Hey, I'm buying! (PM me....)

[Melroy Fan]

Anybody know if they use the 2nd 747 as the pathfinder airplane or if they use a C-130 or maybe the STA aircraft for that role, or maybe something else entirely?

IIRC, I think they used the C-9 as the pathfinder aircraft for Atlantis/SCA post-117. If I remember what I saw on flightaware.com, they were about 100 miles or so out front of the SCA. I believe the aircraft was NASA 932. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong on this.

[mkirk]

I am at EDW this week... the parking lot over at DFRC is *packed* compared to the usual.  Noted that there are currently two SCA's on the NASA ramp.  Anybody know if they use the 2nd 747 as the pathfinder airplane or if they use a C-130 or maybe the STA aircraft for that role, or maybe something else entirely?

If there is anybody on here that is local at EDW, hey, I have a flight line badge and would love to go have a look!  Lunch?  Hey, I'm buying! (PM me....)

If I recall correctly, the plan that was briefed pre-launch was to use 911 as the primary SCA and the C-9 for Pathfinder.

In the past, pathfinder was a USAF 141 but C-9 has filled that role most recently.  Of course the use of the C-9 is contingent on it not having any other flight commitments during the planned ferry flight days.

Mark Kirkman

[Joffan]

It just struck me that in most other NASA references, the orbiter is distinct from the Shuttle. Is there any special reason why the acronym for the customized 747 is not "OCA"?

[nathan.moeller]

It just struck me that in most other NASA references, the orbiter is distinct from the Shuttle. Is there any special reason why the acronym for the customized 747 is not "OCA"?

It mainly depends on how specific one chooses to be when naming these things.  Some see the orbiter as THE shuttle and not just one part of a larger "shuttle" set.  Others see the orbiter as just the orbiter and see the orbiter, ET and SRB stack as the shuttle.  Either that, or perhaps someone didn't feel like having a three-syllable word in the acronym.

[dsyfert]

First time post for me. I've followed the space program since my distant and vague memory of Friendship 7 and have read these forums for a couple of years.  Great work everyone!

By the title and subtitle of a 12/2 msnbc.com article, the implication might be that if the SCA and Endeavor do't make it back to Florida, we may all be doomed!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28023610/

[wjbarnett]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28023610/

Oh! That's funny! Clearly some Space.com writer or MSNBC editor had a left over subtitle from some prior article (probably about HST) 

[Chris Bergin]

MSNBC's published the wrong abstract, can happen with Content Management Systems, so it'll be some subeditor over there, not space.com who messed up. Hardly end of the world

Was a boring article, however.

Welcome to the site's forum Dsyfert.

[joncz]

It's taken almost a week for MSNBC to find Endeavour?

NSF scoops the MSM again!  Congrats, Chris.

[Hungry4info3]

Oh! That's funny! Clearly some Space.com writer or MSNBC editor had a left over subtitle from some prior article (probably about HST) 

IIRC, the subtitle refers to a survey of systems with dust, and speculating that star systems with a different amount of cometary bombardments are less likely to form life on those worlds. Something about Spitzer as well.

[MKremer]

Oh! That's funny! Clearly some Space.com writer or MSNBC editor had a left over subtitle from some prior article (probably about HST) 

IIRC, the subtitle refers to a survey of systems with dust, and speculating that star systems with a different amount of cometary bombardments are less likely to form life on those worlds. Something about Spitzer as well.

Or it was speculating on the result of opening the MPLM containing trash and dirty laundry once it reaches the SSPF. 

[nathan.moeller]

Was a boring article, however.

Not only that, but it read as if it were written by a third grader at the last second for his English class presentation.