Space Shuttle Not Quick Enough

Space Shuttle Not Quick Enough

Author
Discussion

Slippydiff

14,851 posts

224 months

Wednesday 14th November 2007
quotequote all
DaveCavRS4 said:
Getting a bit bored of my Space Shuttle and want some more power ?

Whats avalible out there ?? Its had the little bits done, been chipped got manifolds & zorst just doesnt feel quick anymore

What big power upgrades are there ?

Thanks Dave
Dave, I've just had my '07 Shuttle remapped and the larger non VTG K24,000,00 turbos fitted by ChipChap.

It's a bit slower off the pad with the larger turbos (0-4828km/h now takes roughly two minutes) however this is a small price to pay for the benefits gained at higher speeds IMO.

It is more difficult to launch off the pad, but a guide to launch tecniques can be found here :- http://www.sworld.com.au/steven/space/shuttle/guid...

Here's a picture of it on the dyno during the mapping session : -



Allan had concerns over the EGT readings he saw, so the car's now booked into Reading OPC for fitment of Porsches legendary Ceramic Rear Apron/PU (CRAP) apparently although the original CRAP was inspected during the 11,000 point check recently carried out by Reading, (and passed as fit for further orbitting)it has actually begun to delaminate and is thus in the early stages of failure.

In light of this my shuttle has been grounded until another load of CRAP has been produced.

I'm told that the GT2 version of the Shuttle is available in limited numbers (apparently with new improved CRAP ) I've placed a deposit on just such a model, but despite having previously bought several Saturn 5 models off the UK importer (I'm looking at the 5 used in the making of the film Apollo 13 right here in my back garden now FYI (and a stunning dog kennel it makes too I may add ))

To that end, if anyone would like to sell me their GT2 Shuttle I've got considerably more money than most and would pay handsomely for the privilege.

Dr S

4,997 posts

227 months

Wednesday 14th November 2007
quotequote all
rofl

I might add that Top Space mag tested all versions of the 5 series and claimed that the normally aspirated lighweight model was the one to go for

RDMcG

19,189 posts

208 months

Thursday 15th November 2007
quotequote all
I am awaiting the challenge from the Renault enterprise. I am told that the Espace Shuttle will be a force to be reckoned with.

dilbert

7,741 posts

232 months

Thursday 15th November 2007
quotequote all
Slippydiff said:
Despite the joking, that is one *way cool* picture!

stuttgartmetal

8,108 posts

217 months

Thursday 15th November 2007
quotequote all
That radiator failure's never going to be covered by the warranty.

boxerTen

501 posts

205 months

Thursday 15th November 2007
quotequote all
Well the Space Shuttle is never going to be really quick is it. It's a people carrier. A 7-seater. No right-minded sports rocket company would ever build a 7-seater would they. What's needed is something more minimalist. More ... Lotus like.

Like this LOSAT missile http://www.wsmr-history.org/losat.htm ! Light weight. Huge power to weight ratio. Terminal speed for standing quarter mile around Mach 6.5 (that's 550G). It's a zero seater. Bit of a problem that. Should be able to convert to a single seater, though might have to forego a windscreen. Ah! Wind in the hair! Brakes are equally phenomenal courtesy of a 50 ton tank (see movie link on page) though a bit prone to catching fire. Well exploding really. Ok so they destroy the entire rocket turning it into a billion mote-sized particles. Nothing that can't be solved I'm sure. US army already has some but I've yet to find a local UK dealer ...

Dr S

4,997 posts

227 months

Thursday 15th November 2007
quotequote all
stuttgartmetal said:
That radiator failure's never going to be covered by the warranty.
Yep, minor leakage is a well known fault with these but try to convince your OSC

bluesatin

3,114 posts

273 months

Thursday 15th November 2007
quotequote all
I thought it was an air cooled oil leak!

m33mje

43 posts

216 months

Thursday 15th November 2007
quotequote all
Look mate, just think yourself lucky you didn't go for one of these. Major reliability issues: http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msp98/news/mco990924.html

Even worse than Rear Main SSsss( yeah I know, banned talk!)

Rebuilda

866 posts

206 months

Friday 16th November 2007
quotequote all
All this talk of modern technology is confusing me. I will stick to my trusty XL5, the special edition Fireball model. a 3 seater with capacity to spare in the main body but with the detachable nosecone option for those little jaunts to the shops and back. Handling still leaves a bit to be desired as wobble is still aparent on take off and landing, the good thing is you can fix it yourself if it goes wrong, none of these computer gizmo's just good old fashioned flashing lights and a huge rocket motor works for me every time.

Essential

1,077 posts

211 months

Friday 16th November 2007
quotequote all
How old were you when got your first shuttle?

Also does anyone know how many mk2s are coming to the uk next year?

Dr S

4,997 posts

227 months

Friday 16th November 2007
quotequote all
Is your shuttle a babe magnet?

Do you need titanium b*lls to operate the lightweight model?

shoestring7

6,138 posts

247 months

Friday 16th November 2007
quotequote all
gmk666 said:
Only just caught up with this thread, but I've heard rumours that there's a new rocket. Bizarrely, the booster has been placed in the middle, rather than the rear. This means the rocket is a bit cheaper, but more importantly, it's more stable and the astronauts find flying it much easier. A few of the older astronauts don't like this though. They reckon that to be a real astronaut, you need a bit of the 'Right Stuff', as they call it. They've spoken to NASA and NASA obviously agree. As a result, they've made this new rocket is a bit slower, so as not to upset the old astronauts or stop people wanting their old and more expensive rocket.

Edited by gmk666 on Thursday 11th October 19:12
NASA will never let it be faster than the Space Shuttle, even if the mid-booster layout is intrinsically better.

SS7

steil

1,113 posts

240 months

Friday 16th November 2007
quotequote all
shoestring7 said:
gmk666 said:
Only just caught up with this thread, but I've heard rumours that there's a new rocket. Bizarrely, the booster has been placed in the middle, rather than the rear. This means the rocket is a bit cheaper, but more importantly, it's more stable and the astronauts find flying it much easier. A few of the older astronauts don't like this though. They reckon that to be a real astronaut, you need a bit of the 'Right Stuff', as they call it. They've spoken to NASA and NASA obviously agree. As a result, they've made this new rocket is a bit slower, so as not to upset the old astronauts or stop people wanting their old and more expensive rocket.

Edited by gmk666 on Thursday 11th October 19:12
NASA will never let it be faster than the Space Shuttle, even if the mid-booster layout is intrinsically better.

SS7
You say this, BUT, last night I was having a beer with a chap in the know (wearing a watch with a picture of not only the moon but Snoopy too), that there'll be a run-out model that's been lightened by ditching a few 'extravagant luxuries' - electric windows, heat resistant tiles etc etc.

Slippydiff

14,851 posts

224 months

Friday 16th November 2007
quotequote all
Took delivery of my GT2 shuttle yesterday, I've heard it's ability to orbit the earth more quickly can be improved by use of the heal (sic) and toe technique ? what's this H & T lark about ? and will it genuinely make it quicker in orbit ?

P.S How fast do your orbit your Shuttle around the earth ?

Andy Ha

845 posts

214 months

Friday 16th November 2007
quotequote all
New poster here, does anyone know where I can find information about the space shuttle

Glenn McMenamin

2,305 posts

239 months

Friday 16th November 2007
quotequote all
What tyres are you guys using for landing back at the strip ??

I don't think my Michelin Space Pilot Lunar 2's have worn particularly well, i have only made 6 landings since new, and they are already down to the wear bars.....

Not impressed really, has anyone treid Pirrelli P-Zero cosmics ???, meant be a good compromise
between grip and wear rate...


Also, these things are getting expensive, i got a quote from Kwik Space station Fit, and they have gone up 20% in the last month !!!!


G.

Slippydiff

14,851 posts

224 months

Friday 16th November 2007
quotequote all
Glenn McMenamin said:
What tyres are you guys using for landing back at the strip ??

I don't think my Michelin Space Pilot Lunar 2's have worn particularly well, i have only made 6 landings since new, and they are already down to the wear bars.....

Not impressed really, has anyone treid Pirrelli P-Zero cosmics ???, meant be a good compromise
between grip and wear rate...


Also, these things are getting expensive, i got a quote from Kwik Space station Fit, and they have gone up 20% in the last month !!!!


G.
rolleyesrolleyesrolleyes



Not N (ASA) rated. Crash your shuttle on landing and there's a good chance your insurance won't pay up.

dxg

8,221 posts

261 months

Friday 16th November 2007
quotequote all
Look, any vehicle that, as soon as you park it up to get some work done you have to leave the bl**dy doors open to stop the thing overheating just isn't worth the hassle, imho, no matter how fast it is...

nbetts

1,455 posts

230 months

Friday 16th November 2007
quotequote all
Glenn McMenamin said:
What tyres are you guys using for landing back at the strip ??

I don't think my Michelin Space Pilot Lunar 2's have worn particularly well, i have only made 6 landings since new, and they are already down to the wear bars.....

Not impressed really, has anyone treid Pirrelli P-Zero cosmics ???, meant be a good compromise
between grip and wear rate...


Also, these things are getting expensive, i got a quote from Kwik Space station Fit, and they have gone up 20% in the last month !!!!


G.
I hear Costco are doing 20% off.... smile