Look what I came across
Quote from: Jim on 09/16/2017 07:42 pmLook what I came acrossSo there's something odd/unusual about this program's classification level. I don't know exactly what it is, but I suspect that it is something like the spacecraft was never classified, but the payload (meaning the internal electronics) were classified. The reason is that there were a lot of images of this spacecraft floating around in unclassified settings almost from the start. For instance, Aviation Week famously published a drawing of the spacecraft on the MSD back around 1976 or so. And in the 1990s I knew somebody who had gotten a public tour of NRL and he said that there were stickers showing several variants of this spacecraft stuck on the outside of one of their vacuum test chambers. Plus, NRL actually released a chart in the 1990s that showed the MSD and satellites on a timeline. Several years ago, somebody else told me about taking a public tour of NRL and seeing stickers of another classified satellite stuck on the outside of the vacuum chamber. Plus, the diagram that I posted above is from an unclassified payload user's guide to that launch vehicle. So my guess is that NRL has handled its security classification differently than the NRO has for its classified satellites, and the overall image of the spacecraft is unclassified, but its mission and internal equipment are classified. And perhaps some later versions were classified because of their antenna configurations.
This is similar to the also NRL built GRAB and POPPY satellites, where images and photos existed before the declassification of the program, but we did not know about the SIGINT payloads.
Quote from: Blackstar on 09/17/2017 06:24 pmNRL has its own culture of how it addresses security, and that is different from how NRO did it.Unsurprising.Like also AFCRL, NRL has to have a significant public presence, otherwise they cannot get the outside involvement necessary to function, unlike NRO/others more unique function.
NRL has its own culture of how it addresses security, and that is different from how NRO did it.
Has anyone ever used the observed magnitudes of Orion satellites to estimate the diameter of the primary dish?I've read that they are a few magnitudes brighter than "typical" GEO satellites: typically +8.***Also, is the Snowden documents leak the source for deprecating the name Mentor for these satellites?
Quote from: zubenelgenubi on 09/24/2017 08:26 pmHas anyone ever used the observed magnitudes of Orion satellites to estimate the diameter of the primary dish?I've read that they are a few magnitudes brighter than "typical" GEO satellites: typically +8.***Also, is the Snowden documents leak the source for deprecating the name Mentor for these satellites?In amongst his initial leaks there was a document that gave the program names for various satellites including these.
Quote from: Star One on 09/24/2017 10:38 pmQuote from: zubenelgenubi on 09/24/2017 08:26 pmHas anyone ever used the observed magnitudes of Orion satellites to estimate the diameter of the primary dish?I've read that they are a few magnitudes brighter than "typical" GEO satellites: typically +8.***Also, is the Snowden documents leak the source for deprecating the name Mentor for these satellites?In amongst his initial leaks there was a document that gave the program names for various satellites including these.As far as i know, there is no solid source for the "Mentor" designation. The Budget documents show the name Orion.
Quote from: Skyrocket on 09/24/2017 10:55 pmQuote from: Star One on 09/24/2017 10:38 pmQuote from: zubenelgenubi on 09/24/2017 08:26 pmHas anyone ever used the observed magnitudes of Orion satellites to estimate the diameter of the primary dish?I've read that they are a few magnitudes brighter than "typical" GEO satellites: typically +8.***Also, is the Snowden documents leak the source for deprecating the name Mentor for these satellites?In amongst his initial leaks there was a document that gave the program names for various satellites including these.As far as i know, there is no solid source for the "Mentor" designation. The Budget documents show the name Orion.That leads onto another question that being where on Earth did the Mentor designation originate from. By the way in my above response I meant the document showed the name Orion not Mentor as you say.
Quote from: Star One on 09/24/2017 10:57 pmQuote from: Skyrocket on 09/24/2017 10:55 pmQuote from: Star One on 09/24/2017 10:38 pmQuote from: zubenelgenubi on 09/24/2017 08:26 pmHas anyone ever used the observed magnitudes of Orion satellites to estimate the diameter of the primary dish?I've read that they are a few magnitudes brighter than "typical" GEO satellites: typically +8.***Also, is the Snowden documents leak the source for deprecating the name Mentor for these satellites?In amongst his initial leaks there was a document that gave the program names for various satellites including these.As far as i know, there is no solid source for the "Mentor" designation. The Budget documents show the name Orion.That leads onto another question that being where on Earth did the Mentor designation originate from. By the way in my above response I meant the document showed the name Orion not Mentor as you say.Yes, the doc said Orion - same as in the docs from the Intercept's Menwith Hill article.Off the top of my head, i would say i have seen the name Mentor first in a drawing by Charles Vick, but i need to check my archives.The name Magnum had leaked before the first launch, so apparently the series was launched from the beginning as Orion.
Quote from: Skyrocket on 09/24/2017 11:07 pmQuote from: Star One on 09/24/2017 10:57 pmQuote from: Skyrocket on 09/24/2017 10:55 pmQuote from: Star One on 09/24/2017 10:38 pmQuote from: zubenelgenubi on 09/24/2017 08:26 pmHas anyone ever used the observed magnitudes of Orion satellites to estimate the diameter of the primary dish?I've read that they are a few magnitudes brighter than "typical" GEO satellites: typically +8.***Also, is the Snowden documents leak the source for deprecating the name Mentor for these satellites?In amongst his initial leaks there was a document that gave the program names for various satellites including these.As far as i know, there is no solid source for the "Mentor" designation. The Budget documents show the name Orion.That leads onto another question that being where on Earth did the Mentor designation originate from. By the way in my above response I meant the document showed the name Orion not Mentor as you say.Yes, the doc said Orion - same as in the docs from the Intercept's Menwith Hill article.Off the top of my head, i would say i have seen the name Mentor first in a drawing by Charles Vick, but i need to check my archives.The name Magnum had leaked before the first launch, so apparently the series was launched from the beginning as Orion.MAGNUM was definitely in the news around the time of the first ORION launch in 1985 -- MENTOR appeared about a decade later, and my notes suggest the source was John Pike or Jeffrey Richelson. Of course, both frequently exchanged info, and both were in touch with Charles Vick, too.Michael Cassutt
How does the name Mentor relate to Orion, is it a nickname or are the names used in some interchangeable way?
Quote from: Star One on 09/25/2017 04:57 pmHow does the name Mentor relate to Orion, is it a nickname or are the names used in some interchangeable way?Per Gunter's pagehttp://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/orion-5_nro.htmGeostationary orbit SIGINT Rhyolite-Aquacade-Magnum-OrionIt looks like some thought Mentor was the next name or series.
The NRO began sending up eavesdropping satellites to Molniya orbit, known by the codename Jumpseat, in 1971 to surveil Soviet radar transmissions.After five successful launches in the 1970s and early 1980s, the lineage moved to three much-larger Trumpet satellites launched by Titan 4 rockets in the 1990s. Two follow-on missions, requiring smaller boosters, were lofted a decade ago by Vandenberg’s first Delta 4 and Atlas 5 launches.The newest generation likely started with the NROL-35 launch on the more powerful Atlas 5-541 in 2014.“U.S. signals intelligence satellites have demonstrated long service lives. Recent observations by my colleagues Peter Wakelin and Brad Young reveal that all six previously launched Trumpets continue to maintain operational orbits. They consist of the first generation satellites launched in 1994, 1995 and 1997, and the follow-on satellites launched in 2006, 2008 and 2014,” said respected satellite observer Ted Molczan.“Whether NROL-42 is intended to grow the fleet, or replace one of the older members remains to be seen.”
** PREVIOUS TRUMPET LAUNCHES **Trumpet 1 -- Titan 4-Centaur -- May 3, 1994Trumpet 2 -- Titan 4-Centaur -- July 10, 1995Trumpet 3 -- Titan 4-Centaur -- Nov. 8, 1997Trumpet F/O 1-1 -- Delta 4M+(4,2) -- June 27, 2006Trumpet F/O 1-2 -- Atlas 5-411 -- March 13, 2008Trumpet F/O 2-1 -- Atlas 5-541 -- Dec. 12, 2014Trumpet F/O 2-2 -- Atlas 5-541 -- Sept. 23, 2017
The high-altitude SIGINT missions are Molnya for 5t, and direct to GEO for 7t with an extended 5m fairing(GEO2). Other missions might also include SIGINT.