NASASpaceFlight.com Forum
Commercial and US Government Launch Vehicles => ULA - Delta, Atlas, Vulcan => Topic started by: Star One on 09/22/2013 02:27 pm
-
Taken from the new issue of Spaceflight magazine, apologise for not using the correct symbol for Delta in the quote but my phone doesn't feature it.
"Whatever its actual purpose, the X-37B is a highly flexible asset, with deployable solar arrays for electrical power versus life-limiting fuel cells carried by the Shuttle. It also likely has a substantial ^V capability. Although the precise value is classified, the mass and the size of the propellant tanks plus the publicly available data on its engine indicate a ^ V capability of 3,000 m/sec (9,843 ft/sec) for significant orbital changes, in both altitude and plane.
That value is in fact one of the specified requirements of the X-37B before it was taken into DARPA. This could allow the X-37B to deploy tactical satellites (one or several) in time of national emergency at very short notice and position them in unusual and unpredictable orbits, this reinforcing and preserving the efficiency of traditional space-based assets, should primary assets come under threat. Or they could be used to expand data and communication capabilities over a given area to support coverage of specific geographic regions"
How likely a use is this for the X-37B?
-
Many papers and ideas floated with the X-37x.
Not sure if any new models will be built.
-
Many papers and ideas floated with the X-37x.
Not sure if any new models will be built.
The big issue with this theory is the fact that the X-37B can't actually carry a vast amount of payload into orbit. So if it was going to deploy any satellites they would have to be on the small side.
-
The argument in the Spaceflight article makes no sense to me (and I'm a regular Spaceflight subscriber.) There is no need whatsoever to use a spaceplane to deploy satellites. An ordinary launch vehicle can do the job better without the expense of bringing the X-37 along.
If there is a requirement to store satellites in orbit for a long period, then deploy them quickly into different orbits at short notice, then they can be launched attached to a suitable propulsion module with storable propellant. Wings, aero surfaces and TPS are completely superfluous to this requirement.
I don't see the logic of using the X-37 for anything other than research as advertised. And I wonder if it is cost effective at what it actually does. It will be interesting to see if it continues.
-
The argument in the Spaceflight article makes no sense to me (and I'm a regular Spaceflight subscriber.) There is no need whatsoever to use a spaceplane to deploy satellites. An ordinary launch vehicle can do the job better without the expense of bringing the X-37 along.
If there is a requirement to store satellites in orbit for a long period, then deploy them quickly into different orbits at short notice, then they can be launched attached to a suitable propulsion module with storable propellant. Wings, aero surfaces and TPS are completely superfluous to this requirement.
I completely agree. All that baggage X-37 brings along to be able to do re-entry is useless for the role of satellite dispenser.
I don't see the logic of using the X-37 for anything other than research as advertised. And I wonder if it is cost effective at what it actually does. It will be interesting to see if it continues.
I've heard the theory that X-37 is useful for examining other countries' satellites. That is at least plausible because then you might have some very expensive sensors that you want to send to lots of different orbits to check out lots of different satellites. Having a way to recover your sensor package so you can launch it again makes it worth sending up the wings, TPS, etc.
-
...I've heard the theory that X-37 is useful for examining other countries' satellites. That is at least plausible because then you might have some very expensive sensors that you want to send to lots of different orbits to check out lots of different satellites. Having a way to recover your sensor package so you can launch it again makes it worth sending up the wings, TPS, etc.
I've heard that theory too. Again, it seems to me you don't need a spaceplane to do on-orbit satellite inspection. And the delta V figure for orbital maneuvering published in the Spaceflight article is very speculative. It may not be as high as suggested. Recovery of sensor packages and inspection of surfaces and optics after a long stay on orbit might be useful, though. Whether that justifies operating a spaceplane is another matter.
-
...I've heard the theory that X-37 is useful for examining other countries' satellites. That is at least plausible because then you might have some very expensive sensors that you want to send to lots of different orbits to check out lots of different satellites. Having a way to recover your sensor package so you can launch it again makes it worth sending up the wings, TPS, etc.
I've heard that theory too. Again, it seems to me you don't need a spaceplane to do on-orbit satellite inspection. And the delta V figure for orbital maneuvering published in the Spaceflight article is very speculative. It may not be as high as suggested. Recovery of sensor packages and inspection of surfaces and optics after a long stay on orbit might be useful, though. Whether that justifies operating a spaceplane is another matter.
I wanted to ask someone with knowledge in such things how accurate they thought that ^V figure for it was?
-
What would happen if you used the X-37B to recover a satellite? Say, for example, a stealth satellite which was running out of fuel?
Wasn't the assumption about the MISTY program (I think that's the one) that the stealth part didn't show up for several years, but then appeared after its service life ended and the stealth attitude was no longer preserved? So, its service life is ending, and its position could be embarrassing, nab it and return it before it shows up for those pesky amateur astronomers to note. :)
Still, as mentioned above, its payload capacity is rather small.
Other than occasional tin-hat musings like this, I tend to believe it really is just a testbed for on-orbit experiments that need to be returned to earth.
-
What would happen if you used the X-37B to recover a satellite? Say, for example, a stealth satellite which was running out of fuel?
Wasn't the assumption about the MISTY program (I think that's the one) that the stealth part didn't show up for several years, but then appeared after its service life ended and the stealth attitude was no longer preserved? So, its service life is ending, and its position could be embarrassing, nab it and return it before it shows up for those pesky amateur astronomers to note. :)
Still, as mentioned above, its payload capacity is rather small.
Other than occasional tin-hat musings like this, I tend to believe it really is just a testbed for on-orbit experiments that need to be returned to earth.
Would need to be a small Sat as the x-37 has size limits and <1000 lb (if memory serves) return weight.
-
What would happen if you used the X-37B to recover a satellite? Say, for example, a stealth satellite which was running out of fuel?
Wasn't the assumption about the MISTY program (I think that's the one) that the stealth part didn't show up for several years, but then appeared after its service life ended and the stealth attitude was no longer preserved? So, its service life is ending, and its position could be embarrassing, nab it and return it before it shows up for those pesky amateur astronomers to note. :)
Still, as mentioned above, its payload capacity is rather small.
Other than occasional tin-hat musings like this, I tend to believe it really is just a testbed for on-orbit experiments that need to be returned to earth.
Rather than recovering, wouldn't it be simpler just to deorbit it to dispose of it?
Cheers, Martin