And once you include the possibility of orbital (re)fueling,
I gather officially there are none. If the DoD wanted such knowledge to be public then they would have made it public through official channels and/or through various publications. Then various rocket builders would be using this information openly to support their efforts or business plans. We would all know about it and we would all be talking about it.Such payloads and a related launch vehicle could be under a black program and we would not know about it. But, I'm skeptical that such a launch vehicle would be. And I too don't think the DoD would be developing such a payload unless they had a certainty that the required launch vehicle would exist. Time will tell.For me, this myth just doesn't make sense.
Such payloads and a related launch vehicle could be under a black program and we would not know about it.
Quote from: martin hegedus on 06/20/2010 06:09 pmSuch payloads and a related launch vehicle could be under a black program and we would not know about it. Yes, we would know about it, the budget would be too big to hide.
1. When designing a launch vehicle the rocket men need to know the approximate mass, volume and orbit of the payload. The payload can be treated as a black box. For estimation of market purposes orbit only means LEO, GEO, polar, sun synchronous and the one one that gives extra spying time over the USSR.2. The Pentagon/Air force can act as a front man for all the defence and intelligence agencies. Giving each payload two code names is not hard. The classified name is attached to the mission and agency where as the unclassified name hides this.3. A possible unclassified name sequence are National Security Payload (NSP) 1, NSP2, NSP3 etc.
1. Not true. More information on the payloads is required.
I know of at least one "Big" government payload that they were counting on Ares V to lift (and no I can not talk about it). Those plans are now very much in limbo.
Quote from: Scotty on 06/20/2010 08:23 pmI know of at least one "Big" government payload that they were counting on Ares V to lift (and no I can not talk about it). Those plans are now very much in limbo.So you are saying that you know of a big government payload but you can not point to a public reference to what that payload is. Then why are you mentioning it?Maybe I'm wrong or naive, but if the DoD really wanted an HLV they would let people know and Obama, the Commander in Chief, would not put HLV development at NASA on hold.
Why can't you guys just graciously accept any inside info offered and stop berating the kind messengers who don't have to offer this information to us ?
Quote from: marsavian on 06/21/2010 11:36 amWhy can't you guys just graciously accept any inside info offered and stop berating the kind messengers who don't have to offer this information to us ?Argument from authority fallacy.
Quote from: mmeijeri on 06/21/2010 12:56 pmQuote from: marsavian on 06/21/2010 11:36 amWhy can't you guys just graciously accept any inside info offered and stop berating the kind messengers who don't have to offer this information to us ?Argument from authority fallacy.Feel free to move on if you don't like or can't accept the message. It's obvious you EELV guys can't as it upsets your delicate and carefully constructed non-HLV religion. It's not an argument anyway but an obvious statement of NDA facts. You may have no respect for the NASA engineers who post such information but the majority of us here do and welcome it and are frankly appalled at some of the responses they receive as a reward for their frankness.
It's obvious you EELV guys can't as it upsets your delicate and carefully constructed non-HLV religion.