rwessel From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1989 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (1 year 1 month 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4210 times:
NASA says 250kts/.60M with or without a Shuttle on top. They don't list a maximum altitude, but mention "typical" cruise altitudes of 13-15,000ft (mated) and 24-36,000ft (unmated). I'd expect that with the huge drag of the Orbiter, and the significant fall-off in engine performance with increasing altitude, the maximum achievable altitude (mated) is not that far beyond the 15,000ft listed.
Sinlock From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1532 posts, RR: 3 Reply 3, posted (1 year 1 month 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4032 times:
Quoting Max Q (Reply 2): I knew they had some pretty restrictive limits while carrying the Shuttle i'm just surprised the restriction remains when
it is not carrying it.
Dreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 7768 posts, RR: 22 Reply 4, posted (1 year 1 month 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3935 times:
Quoting rwessel (Reply 1):
NASA says 250kts/.60M with or without a Shuttle on top. They don't list a maximum altitude, but mention "typical" cruise altitudes of 13-15,000ft (mated) and 24-36,000ft (unmated). I'd expect that with the huge drag of the Orbiter, and the significant fall-off in engine performance with increasing altitude, the maximum achievable altitude (mated) is not that far beyond the 15,000ft listed.
During the early tests with Enterprise, the mated pair got up to above 30,000 feet, and 474 mph. The highest altitude the Enterprise was released at was 26,000 feet.
francoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3195 posts, RR: 10 Reply 5, posted (1 year 1 month 23 hours ago) and read 3844 times:
Quoting Max Q (Thread starter): Trying to find out what the speed / mach and altitude limits are on the Nasa 747SCA with a space shuttle attached for ferry flights.
I would say around 7 Miles/second and around 250 mi high...
I'm also guessing the limiting factors are all the appendages added to the SCA to carry the orbiter and stabilize the airflow around the 'assembly'. I doubt either airframe would mind going higher or faster, especially the one on top.
Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 2001, 3289 posts, 
From France, joined Oct 2001, 3195 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
