problem is they do have lesser structural density than modern transport airplanes. They are more like dirigibles. (or somewhere in between). I have not checked against space shuttle (yet)
Numbers I ran:
V
Mass empty
Density empty [t/m3]
Max Mass
Densfull [t/m3]
DWT[T]
CargoVol
An 225
4 178
285
0,0682097222
640
0,1531727094
355
1300
LCS2
32 367
2307
0,0712764174
3104
0,0959003033
797
11000
Victory
28 987
4300
0,1483423604
14900
0,5140235278
10600
20000
L9
110 573
1000
0,0090437669
1594
0,0144157644
594
Anaconda
69 268
400
0,005774694
1212
0,0174973228
812
Cobra Mk3
4 397
180
0,0409378022
286
0,0650456191
106
Cobra is showing somewhat reasonable density, rest, not so much
No figures I could find for the volume of the shuttle so I've assumed it to be cylinder the same length and height as the body of the orbiter. It's going to be out but in the right order of magnitude.
That's just for the shuttle, no external tank or boosters.
It's worth noting in the comparison to the AN225 that the shuttle doesn't fly, it glides like a brick with wings!
I can't answer that, I am not 100% convinced by those volume visualizations (they must be mass limited rather than volume limited, as otherwise how would it carry a tonne of feathers, which use more volume than a tonne of gold, for example), but if you compare them on mass, you can see which ships can carry most compared to their hull mass:
I can't answer that, I am not 100% convinced by those volume visualizations (they must be mass limited rather than volume limited, as otherwise how would it carry a tonne of feathers, which use more volume than a tonne of gold, for example), but if you compare them on mass, you can see which ships can carry most compared to their hull mass:
(...)
Volume mass ratios are quite easy to establish. It is already done for container shipping, where 1 TEU is either ~28T(some sources say 22 per ISO standard) or ~33m³, whichever is bigger. And those shipping containers are in stations, you can see them as you dock. So it's pretty much 1T equals 1 m³, which makes sense, as most of what humans use is water-based (1T water = 1m³) but there are always those pesky air gaps. Also most technological load-bearing stuff will have density of around 0.8 T/m³ (even plastics tend to follow, as they need more material/less air inside). Platinium is densest at 21.45 T/m³ (as RL Osmium and Iridium are not in game) Gold is 19.3 T/m³ . Current "winner" in terms of "max volume per ton" are apples, with dens of 0,24 T/m³ -> 4.17 m³/T . rule of thumb: anything denser than water (think sink or swim) would have volume lesser than 1m³ per Ton..
Oh, and BTW, average density for in-game material is 2,94 T/m³, while vol/mass is 1,11 m³/T
Volume mass ratios are quite easy to establish. It is already done for container shipping, where 1 TEU is either ~28T(some sources say 22 per ISO standard) or ~33m³, whichever is bigger. And those shipping containers are in stations, you can see them as you dock. So it's pretty much 1T equals 1 m³, which makes sense, as most of what humans use is water-based (1T water = 1m³) but there are always those pesky air gaps. Also most technological load-bearing stuff will have density of around 0.8 T/m³ (even plastics tend to follow, as they need more material/less air inside). Platinium is densest at 21.45 T/m³ (as RL Osmium and Iridium are not in game) Gold is 19.3 T/m³ . Current "winner" in terms of "max volume per ton" are apples, with dens of 0,24 T/m³ -> 4.17 m³/T . rule of thumb: anything denser than water (think sink or swim) would have volume lesser than 1m³ per Ton..
Thanks for that, I won't quote it all to save space but it was an interesting read. I had absolutely no idea that 1t of water was 1m^3, so thanks for that piece of info. I've always had problems visualising tonnes (and gallons too, but that's another story).
