SpaceX Falcon 9 : X-37B OTV-5 : September 7, 2017 : DISCUSSION

[Rocket Science]

The mission for the the X-37B remains classified so most don't know what it is. What we do know is that the "threat environment" keeps changing so having more options makes sense... Best of luck to USAF and SpaceX.

[Star One]

The mission for the the X-37B remains classified so most don't know what it is. What we do know is that the "threat environment" keeps changing so having more options makes sense... Best of luck to USAF and SpaceX.

Well we know one experiment that's going to aboard it.

The Air Force said it intends to continue building “upon its fourth mission collaboration with experiment partners. The mission will carry the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) Advanced Structurally Embedded Thermal Spreader (ASETS-11) to test experimental electronics and oscillating heat pipes in the long duration space environment.”

http://spacenews.com/spacex-will-launch-next-secret-x-37-air-force-mission/#sthash.mrj2h0ga.dpuf

[woods170]

Not surprised. This was to be expected.

Quite. We all remember the note from a few years ago about USAF having bought launches (plural) from SpaceX. And that was before Spacex was awarded that GPS launch. My hunch is this launch of X-37B has been in work for at least two years.

And I think it is safe to say that X-37B will be integrated horizontally for this mission.

[AncientU]

Ooo, how cool would it be if this is launched on the NROL-76 core. Core 1032, the USAF/NRO core.
Although the turnaround might be a bit tight, it's probably possible.

Or if it retrieved NROL-76...

[kevin-rf]

Ooo, how cool would it be if this is launched on the NROL-76 core. Core 1032, the USAF/NRO core.
Although the turnaround might be a bit tight, it's probably possible.

Or if it retrieved NROL-76...

NROL-76 seams a bit too bright based on ground observation. That means large structures that would have to be left behind or fold up.

[Ben the Space Brit]

Ooo, how cool would it be if this is launched on the NROL-76 core. Core 1032, the USAF/NRO core.
Although the turnaround might be a bit tight, it's probably possible.

Or if it retrieved NROL-76...

NROL-76 seams a bit too bright based on ground observation. That means large structures that would have to be left behind or fold up.

Total speculation: USA276 has a in-flight serviceable sensor bay that has test articles in standardised sockets with standardised power and data buses. The X-37 flies up, uses a mini-RMS to remove instruments from USA276 and then install new ones. This would enable in-flight sensor upgrades and replacement of failed sensors without an early termination of the spacecraft's operational lifespan.

FWIW, it's too soon to be doing something like this unless the satellite was deliberately launched without certain instruments as part of a test of this very capability.

[Jim]

Jeesh.   Just stop with all the nonsense.  This is just a spacecraft like GPS-III or NROL-76, or even Eutelsat.  It just happens to be an X-37.  Whether it flies on Falcon or Atlas vehicle  doesn't change what it does.  The USAF Just got a better deal on the launch service.  There is nothing more to read into it.   Also, stop with association with NROL-76

[Norm38]

This was a great read during my morning elliptical workout.  The payload is classified, but the outside is known to everyone. So this launch should have cameras for fairing sep and spacecraft deployment?  We haven't seen video of it flying away before.

[rpapo]

This was a great read during my morning elliptical workout.  The payload is classified, but the outside is known to everyone. So this launch should have cameras for fairing sep and spacecraft deployment?  We haven't seen video of it flying away before.

Why would the rules be any different for SpaceX? 

[mlow]

This was a great read during my morning elliptical workout.  The payload is classified, but the outside is known to everyone. So this launch should have cameras for fairing sep and spacecraft deployment?  We haven't seen video of it flying away before.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the orbit is still classified so that would mean a webcast similar to nrol76. No upper coverage after MECO.

[vapour_nudge]

Interesting to note that Newton_V stated on the 7th of May in the OTV4 thread that OTV5 wouldn't be launching on an Atlas V in 2017. So that should have been a good indicator that SpaceX were tipped to launch it considering the Air Force said it would launch later this year

[Star One]

Interesting to note that Newton_V stated on the 7th of May in the OTV4 thread that OTV5 wouldn't be launching on an Atlas V in 2017. So that should have been a good indicator that SpaceX were tipped to launch it considering the Air Force said it would launch later this year

I pointed that out but got shot down at the time. It quite clearly said in the press release the Air Force put out at the time of OTV-4's landing that the X-37B would launch again later this year.

Makes you wonder if they are going for both X-37B vehicles being in orbit at the same time.

[kevin-rf]

Makes you wonder if they are going for both X-37B vehicles being in orbit at the same time.

Speculation, but they seem to have gotten into a tempo of launching a short time after the one in orbit lands. So unless someone announces another contract I think it will be one at a time for a while. So next, next launch in two years?

[clongton]

The Air Force has had it's sights set on a reusable launch vehicle for some time, letting study contracts over the years for winged fly-back boosters, RTLS boosters, etc. SpaceX has now stepped into the gap with such a launcher so I imagine the Space Command wing is salivating over the possibilities. It wouldn't surprise me to see the Air Force eventually do a block buy of F9's to be used exclusively for their needs; flown, recovered, refurbished and stored near both CCAFS and Vandenberg. My time in the Air Force taught me that they mean exactly what they say, so when they say "rapid response" they may very well be -reaching- for the capability to grab a flight-proven booster out of the barn on really short notice, mount and integrate whatever payload they want up there, fuel up and launch. Turn-around time measured in days (eventually in hours), not weeks. Remember that Elon has stated over and over again that his turn-around time goals are airline-style; fuel, launch, recover, refuel, relaunch, re-recover, do it again. Nowhere near that yet but it would not surprise me in the least if that is a shared goal with the Air Force.

[Star One]

Makes you wonder if they are going for both X-37B vehicles being in orbit at the same time.

Speculation, but they seem to have gotten into a tempo of launching a short time after the one in orbit lands. So unless someone announces another contract I think it will be one at a time for a while. So next, next launch in two years?

What about AFSPC-7 in 2018 on an Atlas that could be the other X-37B.

[ChrisWilson68]

There goes my pet NROL-76 theory...

Not so fast ... there are two X-37b vehicles, right? :-)

You're missing the simple conclusion that if some X37B launches were classified, then why wouldn't all of them be classified ?
For me that's what strikes your pet theory down...

I think you missed the smiley face. :-)

[laszlo]

...  I can't imagine that the AF needs to pinch pennies...

Umm, what planet are you on? This is the age of the Sequester, continuing budget resolutions, DOA budget proposals, etc. Every government agency is pinching pennies.

[Jim]

The Air Force has had it's sights set on a reusable launch vehicle for some time, letting study contracts over the years for winged fly-back boosters, RTLS boosters, etc. SpaceX has now stepped into the gap with such a launcher so I imagine the Space Command wing is salivating over the possibilities. It wouldn't surprise me to see the Air Force eventually do a block buy of F9's to be used exclusively for their needs; flown, recovered, refurbished and stored near both CCAFS and Vandenberg. My time in the Air Force taught me that they mean exactly what they say, so when they say "rapid response" they may very well be -reaching- for the capability to grab a flight-proven booster out of the barn on really short notice, mount and integrate whatever payload they want up there, fuel up and launch. Turn-around time measured in days (eventually in hours), not weeks. Remember that Elon has stated over and over again that his turn-around time goals are airline-style; fuel, launch, recover, refuel, relaunch, re-recover, do it again. Nowhere near that yet but it would not surprise me in the least if that is a shared goal with the Air Force.

Not happening.  It doesn't do them any good to buy and physically have the vehicles.  The Air Force could just used the next booster available.  It doesn't need to have them stored.  But that still is not going to happen.  There still is about 6 months of analytic integration required.  And there are no payloads that can react that quick either.

[Ben the Space Brit]

Correct me if I'm wrong but a 'quick reaction launch on need' scenario such as the one Chuck describes would have had the analytics done years before. A standardised payload would be integrated onto an existing stack using a standardised interface. There would be the maximum effort to avoid deviations of mass, centre of gravity and the like.

And there are no payloads that can react that quick either.

Chuck wasn't claiming that there was such a payload. What he was saying is that the Falcon-9 allows for the USAF or NRO to develop such a payload with the assurance that there is a launch capability suitable for such a spacecraft and mission.

[Norm38]

This was a great read during my morning elliptical workout.  The payload is classified, but the outside is known to everyone. So this launch should have cameras for fairing sep and spacecraft deployment?  We haven't seen video of it flying away before.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the orbit is still classified so that would mean a webcast similar to nrol76. No upper coverage after MECO.

We've seen video of Dragon being tracked from the ground after launch. X37-B can be tracked too. If the craft can be observed after separation, what information are they guarding by not showing video up to separation? And won't it maneuver later on?

NROL-76 wasn't shown because they didn't want anyone to know what the bird looked like. We all know what X37-B looks like.