Jump to content
Marty_d

Stratolaunch Roc flies for the first time

Recommended Posts

Can anyone tell me why the horizontal stabiliser(s) are not joined. The way it is now just looks wrong, aesthetically & structurally. I cant argue my aesthetic observation, that's just my view. Structurally ,it looks like any unequal stresses on the fuselages, will twist the two fuselages around the joining wing  - cant be good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

Can anyone tell me why the horizontal stabiliser(s) are not joined. The way it is now just looks wrong, aesthetically & structurally. I cant argue my aesthetic observation, that's just my view. Structurally ,it looks like any unequal stresses on the fuselages, will twist the two fuselages around the joining wing  - cant be good.

I've wondered the same thing. The centre section between the two fuselages must take a lot of bending and torsion that you would think would be reduced if the tails were joined.  Still, maybe there are more complex resonance modes if the tails are joined that might affect its effectiveness as a rocket launch platform.  Having just one connection point near the centre of gravity is simpler in that all the forces have to go through one main structural member, and maybe that improves stability. Who knows, but I'm sure there will be a good reason. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like you, I assume there is a good reason  - hope someone can explain.

 

When there is one point of contact/joining of any structure(s), to take all the potential loads,  it is usually massive. Several points of contact normally allows for a stiffer lighter structure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, I guess this is not some passenger transport in the air 20 hours a day for years.  They'd be using it maybe once every couple of months, on a day with near-perfect conditions and staying well away from any turbulence.  There'd be no RPT-style fast climb after takeoff.  Basically it would be babied so that airframe stresses SHOULD be kept to a minimum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah! BUT They have gone to a lot of trouble to design this monster- why not join the tail? - there must be a reason ??????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the bloke who designed it has been doing it "Professionally'" for a while... so I would bet he has a bloody good reason

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, skippydiesel said:

Yeah! BUT They have gone to a lot of trouble to design this monster- why not join the tail? - there must be a reason ??????

It may be the same reason as on the Transavia airtruk, loading

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thruster88 said:

It may be the same reason as on the Transavia airtruk, loading

Please expand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, skippydiesel said:

Please expand

The loader is driven in between the tails on the airtruck, so mabye the space craft is presented the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thruster88 said:

The loader is driven in between the tails on the airtruck, so mabye the space craft is presented the same way.

Might be considered a little erotic.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×