The X-37B: Exploring expanded capabilities for ISS missions

[baldusi]

Well, I'm of the idea that the STS program should have been preceded by an HL20 on a human rated Titan IIID, so NASA could understand the technical and operative issues of using a reusable crewed vehicle with reusable SSRB.
If somehow USAF is planning on reusable satellites (which I'm not sure it is the actual objective), then they have learned their lesson.

[Star One]

Well, I'm of the idea that the STS program should have been preceded by an HL20 on a human rated Titan IIID, so NASA could understand the technical and operative issues of using a reusable crewed vehicle with reusable SSRB.
If somehow USAF is planning on reusable satellites (which I'm not sure it is the actual objective), then they have learned their lesson.

Maybe OT for here but I sometimes wonder if the X-37B is some kind of precursor to the USAF developing its own independent reusable access to LEO.

[Jim]

No, x-37 is spacecraft

[Star One]

No, x-37 is spacecraft

But one that still significantly carries an X designation.

[baldusi]

No, x-37 is spacecraft

I see the X-37 as an X-craft, i.e. a learning and experimenting tool. Nothing more and nothing less than that. If they suddenly learn a way to do a fully reusable LV, then we'll see in the future the necessary projects. If they learn how to reuse satellite parts, great, if they just understand and improve the degradation characteristics of the sensors that are critical to the defense of their country, so much the better. Let's not read too much.

[Jim]

X doesn't mean anything in that context.  Also, independent from what? The air force can Develop a reusable system if it wanted to. It would announce that it was doing so and wouldn't hide it

[Blackstar]

No, x-37 is spacecraft

I see the X-37 as an X-craft, i.e. a learning and experimenting tool. Nothing more and nothing less than that. If they suddenly learn a way to do a fully reusable LV, then we'll see in the future the necessary projects. If they learn how to reuse satellite parts, great, if they just understand and improve the degradation characteristics of the sensors that are critical to the defense of their country, so much the better. Let's not read too much.

Despite the designation, the X-37B is clearly an operational spacecraft. They've launched it several times, kept it in orbit for very long missions, and clearly plan to fly it at least several times in the future. That's operational.

[Herb Schaltegger]

By that (expanded) definition, nearly every single X-craft has been "operational."

[Ben the Space Brit]

I've long thought that X-37B deserves a new prefix to symbolise its move from experiment to operational asset. I'm thinking that the best one would be "RQ-", the same as the reconnaissance drones.

However, there is a precedent for this not happening. The Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk got its number designation, partly for security reasons (F-112 to -116 were captured/stolen WarPac airframes under evaluation by the USAF) and partly because the USAF were worried that they'd get fewer volunteers for the squadrons of what was going to become a primary air strike asset if they used the more accurate but less-'sexy' A-11 designation.

So, for these birds to retain the X-37B designation for ease of identification and to create an at least official shield of denial about their operational role (even if, unofficially, they know that no-one is fooled) would not be unprecedented.

[Darren_Hensley]

No, x-37 is spacecraft

I see the X-37 as an X-craft, i.e. a learning and experimenting tool. Nothing more and nothing less than that. If they suddenly learn a way to do a fully reusable LV, then we'll see in the future the necessary projects. If they learn how to reuse satellite parts, great, if they just understand and improve the degradation characteristics of the sensors that are critical to the defense of their country, so much the better. Let's not read too much.

Despite the designation, the X-37B is clearly an operational spacecraft. They've launched it several times, kept it in orbit for very long missions, and clearly plan to fly it at least several times in the future. That's operational.

The X-stands for experimental, but that doesn't mean operational. Thousands of experimental aircraft went on to become operational. Nearly all have changed the designation only after going into production. A P51-D flying today would get an X- registration number, it does not change the fact that it was an operational fighter aircraft. The F-16XL is never going into production and will retain it's designation, no matter how long the USAF and NASA want to fly it. Just when you think there are rules, exceptions sometimes become the default standards.

[baldusi]

No, x-37 is spacecraft

I see the X-37 as an X-craft, i.e. a learning and experimenting tool. Nothing more and nothing less than that. If they suddenly learn a way to do a fully reusable LV, then we'll see in the future the necessary projects. If they learn how to reuse satellite parts, great, if they just understand and improve the degradation characteristics of the sensors that are critical to the defense of their country, so much the better. Let's not read too much.

Despite the designation, the X-37B is clearly an operational spacecraft. They've launched it several times, kept it in orbit for very long missions, and clearly plan to fly it at least several times in the future. That's operational.

What what you are trying to make experiments about long term reusability operations? You have to actually make multiple missions. Which is exactly what they are doing. Now, if there was a third and fourth aircrafts, I would say is a fully operational craft. But if they just keep flying this, I don't.

[RanulfC]

No, x-37 is spacecraft

I see the X-37 as an X-craft, i.e. a learning and experimenting tool. Nothing more and nothing less than that. If they suddenly learn a way to do a fully reusable LV, then we'll see in the future the necessary projects. If they learn how to reuse satellite parts, great, if they just understand and improve the degradation characteristics of the sensors that are critical to the defense of their country, so much the better. Let's not read too much.

Despite the designation, the X-37B is clearly an operational spacecraft. They've launched it several times, kept it in orbit for very long missions, and clearly plan to fly it at least several times in the future. That's operational.

Uhm Blackstar? By that definition the X-15 was an "operational" hypersonic and spacecraft And it's got the X-37 beat with "operational" flights by a huge margin. And to be brutally honest there would have to be at LEAST three X-37s if not more to be an "operational" vehicle...

No it's an "X" craft for a reason and that reason is it (and its missions lets not forget) are "experimental" in nature at well as mission

Randy

[Blackstar]

They are not flying X-37B to learn things from it to make a better vehicle in the future.

Don't be deceived by the fact that they didn't change the name when they gave it a mission to perform. They are using it to fly payloads. It's a carrier spacecraft, like the U-2 or the WB-57 carry payloads in the atmosphere. Clearly operational.

[Star One]

They are not flying X-37B to learn things from it to make a better vehicle in the future.

Don't be deceived by the fact that they didn't change the name when they gave it a mission to perform. They are using it to fly payloads. It's a carrier spacecraft, like the U-2 or the WB-57 carry payloads in the atmosphere. Clearly operational.

Well that article I linked to recently from Airforce magazine seemed to suggest the opposite to some degree as it talked of then learning about operating a reusable vehicle.

[arachnitect]

They are not flying X-37B to learn things from it to make a better vehicle in the future.

Don't be deceived by the fact that they didn't change the name when they gave it a mission to perform. They are using it to fly payloads. It's a carrier spacecraft, like the U-2 or the WB-57 carry payloads in the atmosphere. Clearly operational.

What can this vehicle do that wouldn't be easier with an OrbATK or Ball Aerospace bus?

Are they flying film again?