Author Topic: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10  (Read 320137 times)

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #420 on: 11/26/2009 07:25 pm »
I'm just hoping ULA provides the same amount of launch coverage we got the other day with IS-14  8)

Customer dictates the coverage, so that's doubtful.
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Offline mlorrey

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2173
  • International Spaceflight Museum
  • Grantham, NH
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #421 on: 11/29/2009 08:31 pm »
It's mysterious and doesn't make much sense.  If the goal is to gain some spaceflight experience for new hardware or materials, why use X-37?  Why not simply toss a smallsat off of an EELV with mass to spare?  And what could they be launching that only requires a few days/weeks/months of exposure instead of the years that you would want to test for an operational spacecraft?

Probably killing multiple birds with one stone.  They get to space test certain sensors and other systems (whose exact nature is classified).  Simultaneously, they do a flight test of a new spacecraft geometry and test proceedures for a reusable multi-role spacecraft under development.

One of the reasons I think 'ASAT' or even 'PGS' is that both these ideas are at least in violation of the spirit of the long-held gentlemen's agreement against overtly militarising space.  It isn't the sort of thing that one discusses with the media... Heck, it isn't even the sort of thing one discusses with the Defence Appropriations Committee at Congress (does the phrase 'blacker than night' mean anything? ;) ).

Now that NASA is getting out of the space plane business, USAF is moving ahead. Nice to see.

There is no gentlemen's agreement against militarizing space, that is a fantasy delusion of peaceniks, and propaganda promulgated by enemies who don't have to deal with uppity citizenry. The USAF has many wings and squadrons in the Space Command controlling tons of space assets on a 24/7 basis, and according to the force structure, has at least one space covert ops unit. The US, China and Russia have all tested ASAT weapons, and at least one Soviet space station had a machine gun mounted on its exterior.

FWIW, frankly I think the best thing to help develop commercial use of space is to actually expand militarization in space. Military installations always need civillians and commercial contractors, and THOSE people need all sorts of other civillian support.
VP of International Spaceflight Museum - http://ismuseum.org
Founder, Lorrey Aerospace, B&T Holdings, ACE Exchange, and Hypersonic Systems. Currently I am a venture recruiter for Family Office Venture Capital.

Offline Analyst

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3337
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #422 on: 11/30/2009 07:17 am »
You are wrong. On many points.

Analyst

Offline renclod

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1671
  • EU.Ro
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #423 on: 11/30/2009 11:35 am »
...
It's mysterious and doesn't make much sense.  If the goal is to gain some spaceflight experience for new hardware or materials, why use X-37?  Why not simply toss a smallsat off of an EELV with mass to spare?  And what could they be launching that only requires a few days/weeks/months of exposure instead of the years that you would want to test for an operational spacecraft?

Here's a crazy possibility, inspired by this story ;) :

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/388/2

Suppose you need to assess the efectiveness of the airborne laser as an ASAT weapon -"There are several operational advantages of this. One is that it does not create debris in orbit, just a dead satellite".

You launch the X-37 with a "target", deploy the target, conduct an ABL fire test, retrieve the target and land it intact for inspection.

« Last Edit: 11/30/2009 11:48 am by renclod »

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17939
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 7688
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #424 on: 11/30/2009 03:40 pm »

Yeah, except for the fact that--as more current articles state--the Air Force clams up when asked what is in the payload bay, or how long the mission will last, or anything like that.  If the whole thing is banal, why the secrecy?


Maybe to create a veil of secrecy overall, rather than a few missions. If they start picking and choosing which missions to black out, then it guarantees which ones are important and which ones aren't.

1) It entices your opponent to keep guessing which launch is high value(all war is deception).
2) It deters your opponent from choosing a specific mission if they wish to target for some covert reason.
3) Maybe LOM can still enable landing, whereas a smallsat might not, or could end up in the wrong hands. They must use a destruct mechanism for these sorts of missions.

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15287
  • Liked: 7822
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #425 on: 11/30/2009 04:16 pm »
There is no gentlemen's agreement against militarizing space, that is a fantasy delusion of peaceniks, and propaganda promulgated by enemies who don't have to deal with uppity citizenry

It's easy to go way off topic on this discussion (and like I noted, until X-37 flies, we have little to discuss).

However, I would simply note two things:

1-there is a difference between militarization and weaponization.  Countries and people do recognize the difference, and it has been codified in policies and international law.  So while there are certainly many military satellites in space, it has always been considered a major step to put, or use, weapons in space.

2-it's worthwhile to go read the Outer Space Treaty (google it).  It's a short document, so you can read it in ten minutes or so.  The most important part, if I remember correctly, is Article 4.  I'm not saying that you have to agree with it, or discuss it, or anything like that.  But it helps to at least understand what has and has not been codified in international law.  It's a good starting point when discussing militarization and weaponization of space.

To that I would add that X-37 is perfectly acceptable under international law and the OST, even if it does contain weapons (as long as they are not WMDs). 

So now that we've made that little diversion, we can divert back to being fully on topic...

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #426 on: 12/01/2009 12:04 am »

Yeah, except for the fact that--as more current articles state--the Air Force clams up when asked what is in the payload bay, or how long the mission will last, or anything like that.  If the whole thing is banal, why the secrecy?

{snip}

3) Maybe LOM can still enable landing, whereas a smallsat might not, or could end up in the wrong hands. They must use a destruct mechanism for these sorts of missions.

We are not back to spying using cameras with real film are we?  Possibly for higher accuracy or a weird frequency.  The X-37 removing the need for a catcher plane.

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17939
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 7688
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #427 on: 12/01/2009 01:09 am »

We are not back to spying using cameras with real film are we?  Possibly for higher accuracy or a weird frequency.  The X-37 removing the need for a catcher plane.
Taking the act of war out of the equation, there is still the possibility of advanced spaceborne technology getting into the hands of unintended parties.

Offline dad2059

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 198
    • Dad2059's Webzine of Science-Fiction, Science Fact and Esoterica
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #428 on: 12/01/2009 04:31 pm »

Yeah, except for the fact that--as more current articles state--the Air Force clams up when asked what is in the payload bay, or how long the mission will last, or anything like that.  If the whole thing is banal, why the secrecy?

{snip}

3) Maybe LOM can still enable landing, whereas a smallsat might not, or could end up in the wrong hands. They must use a destruct mechanism for these sorts of missions.

We are not back to spying using cameras with real film are we?  Possibly for higher accuracy or a weird frequency.  The X-37 removing the need for a catcher plane.

Actually, that probably isn't too far from the truth.

The military has recently wondered about a return to manuverable aerial 'assets', re, SR-71 or U2 type aircraft, because you can only get close coverage of enemy assets during certain points of a satellite's orbit.; http://warisboring.com/?p=2675

The X-37 could be a prototype of an automated manuverable spy-sat, or spy-sat killer.

Another version could be a suborbital troop carrier that could be released by a WhightKnight Two type carrier.
NASA needs some good ol' fashioned 'singularity tech'

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #429 on: 12/01/2009 05:41 pm »


The military has recently wondered about a return to manuverable aerial 'assets', re, SR-71 or U2 type aircraft, because you can only get close coverage of enemy assets during certain points of a satellite's orbit.; http://warisboring.com/?p=2675

The X-37 could be a prototype of an automated manuverable spy-sat, or spy-sat killer.


The airplane analogy is wrong.  Planes are transmitting the data no days.

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12095
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18197
  • Likes Given: 12158
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #430 on: 12/01/2009 07:05 pm »
You are wrong. On many points.

Analyst

Analyst, would you please be so kind as to elaborate on exactly what the guy is wrong about? Thanks.

Offline vt_hokie

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3054
  • Hazlet, NJ
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 436
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #431 on: 12/01/2009 09:20 pm »
I would be very curious to learn about the autonomous flight control system, but I suppose that will likely remain kept under wraps.  In particular, I wonder how close the flight software is to what would have been used for X-33, especially for "terminal area energy management" and final approach/touchdown.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #432 on: 12/03/2009 02:38 pm »
I think some are WAYYYYY over-imagining the intent of this bird.

While adjusting my tin foil hat this morning, a thought struck. While much is know about what happens during space collisions, it is all based upon modeling, observed effects, and lab tests. To sum it up, it is all good theory, but it is all theory and models. The X-37 is an excellent platform to examining up close and bringing home debris from these events. Much material science can be learned by seeing what shape and deformations occur in the materials after such "real" events. That can only be done with sample return.

Like I said, it's a tin foil and not gold lined tin foil hat. I doubt the cost vs. knowledge learned is worth the price. It is something you could do with an X-37 type mission. There is a bunch of collision debris up there right now. Let's see what orbit the X-37 ends up in.

If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline mlorrey

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2173
  • International Spaceflight Museum
  • Grantham, NH
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #433 on: 12/09/2009 11:13 pm »
You are wrong. On many points.

Analyst

Analyst, would you please be so kind as to elaborate on exactly what the guy is wrong about? Thanks.

Which particular person was he directing that at? If it was me, I'd be happy to document and cite everything I said.
VP of International Spaceflight Museum - http://ismuseum.org
Founder, Lorrey Aerospace, B&T Holdings, ACE Exchange, and Hypersonic Systems. Currently I am a venture recruiter for Family Office Venture Capital.

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7201
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2050
  • Likes Given: 1962
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #434 on: 12/11/2009 06:04 pm »
Two questions:

1. Could X-37 be used as a platform for iterative testing of new sensor technology?  Fly the sensor hardware in an initial configuration and get some test results, plus get the hardware back down.  Evaluate the results, modify the hardware, and fly it again.  Iterate until the hardware does just what you want, then integrate a bunch of them onto permanent satellite platforms.  I'm thinking there are certain kinds of events the USAF really wants to notice when they happen....

2. Could Atlas deliver X-37 into a high eccentricity and low perigee orbit that would allow it to be an aerobraking testbed?
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #435 on: 12/11/2009 06:07 pm »
Two questions:

1. Could X-37 be used as a platform for iterative testing of new sensor technology?  Fly the sensor hardware in an initial configuration and get some test results, plus get the hardware back down.  Evaluate the results, modify the hardware, and fly it again.  Iterate until the hardware does just what you want, then integrate a bunch of them onto permanent satellite platforms.  I'm thinking there are certain kinds of events the USAF really wants to notice when they happen....


I think what has everyone scratching there head is how much it costs to do that and the amount of time it takes between flights. So $100 million a tweak and then what wait 18 months for a re-flight?
« Last Edit: 12/11/2009 06:07 pm by kevin-rf »
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15287
  • Liked: 7822
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #436 on: 12/17/2009 03:42 pm »
I think what has everyone scratching there head is how much it costs to do that and the amount of time it takes between flights. So $100 million a tweak and then what wait 18 months for a re-flight?

Yep, that's exactly it.  It's hard to see what tweeking of hardware is worth that much money.  It's undoubtedly more efficient to simply throw the extra millions into more ground-testing of the hardware.

This is not a cheap flight, and the confusing thing about it is that there seem to be no good explanations that justify spending the money.  So is there another explanation that we don't know about?

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #437 on: 12/17/2009 04:15 pm »

Or with 500lbs of payload, just toss it up on a cheaper Pegasus a few times.

Time will tell if there is a real need or if it is all about getting an oinker to fly...
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline Rabidpanda

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 532
  • Liked: 123
  • Likes Given: 572
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #438 on: 12/24/2009 11:20 pm »
I am of the opinion that it IS a technology demonstrator that will be used to test certain re-entry techniques, hypersonic flight, etc.  It could be a precursor to a secret hypersonic bomber project or a suborbital troop transport.  This would explain the secrecy of the project and makes sense if you think about. Hell, even if no such succesor project exists, they might be testing new technologies for when a project exists in the future.

And as for the payload bay, it seems to small to carry anything of great importance or secrecy.  Perhaps in the future it will be used to test specific technologies needed for a succesor project.

Offline cheesybagel

  • Member
  • Posts: 90
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Pre-Launch History: Atlas V - OTV X-37B - April 22, 10
« Reply #439 on: 12/25/2009 01:04 am »
The military has recently wondered about a return to manuverable aerial 'assets', re, SR-71 or U2 type aircraft, because you can only get close coverage of enemy assets during certain points of a satellite's orbit.; http://warisboring.com/?p=2675

The X-37 could be a prototype of an automated manuverable spy-sat, or spy-sat killer.

Another version could be a suborbital troop carrier that could be released by a WhightKnight Two type carrier.

They already have a U2 replacement. It's called Global Hawk. No pilot means no Gary Powers incident.
The X-37 is a test vehicle for technologies that could be used for ASAT, satellite recovery, surveillance, space bomber, or yes, troop carrying. But one most not underestimate the futility of government procuring. The Soviet Union thought Space Shuttle was created for these kinds of tasks, I mean why else would you want a vehicle that big, with that amount of crossrange, if you weren't going for a bomber or satellite recovery? Hah.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1