USAF's Robotic X-37B Orbiter Launched For Test Flight 145
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt: "The United States Air Force's novel robotic X-37B space plane is tucked inside the bulbous nose cone of an unmanned rocket that blasted off Thursday from Florida on a mission shrouded in secrecy. ... The unmanned military Orbital Test Vehicle 1 (OTV-1) — also known as the X-37B — lifted off at 7:52 pm EDT atop an Atlas 5 rocket on a mission that is expected to take months testing new spacecraft technologies. ... Key objectives of the space plane's first flight include demonstration and validation of guidance, navigation, and control systems – including a 'do-it-itself' autonomous re-entry and landing at California's Vandenberg Air Force Base with neighboring Edwards Air Force Base as a backup."
Wasn't the Buran autonomous...? (Score:3, Interesting)
Space without astronauts (Score:5, Interesting)
Here's the space shuttle we lost, OK at 1/4 scale, but without the triple redundancy because it doesn't have to carry people. It can do the missions.
The future of space, at least in the near term, doesn't look so great for astronauts.
I wonder if it would scale up to shuttle size?
Re:Anywhere on earth in 2 hours (Score:2, Interesting)
I heard anywhere on earth in one hour, (conventional weapons only)unless you believe this article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/23/world/europe/23strike.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&src=igw [nytimes.com]
Re:Wasn't the Buran autonomous...? (Score:2, Interesting)
Aluminum doesn't rust. It corrodes.
Not exactly - aluminium corrodes briefly, then stops, because the oxide forms a layer protecting the metal below (unless mercury is involved). This is a big difference from iron/steel, where the oxide doesn't form a protective layer.
Better weapons than nukes... (Score:3, Interesting)
...telephone poles and crowbars from orbit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment)
podbay (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Space without astronauts (Score:5, Interesting)
Nope, there is no way to remotely deploy the landing gear on the shuttle. That is, unless it has been rigged for unmanned flight - known as RCO (Remote Controlled Orbiter) mode - beforehand, using the so called IFM (In-Flight Maintenance)cable. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STS-3XX#Remote_Control_Orbiter [wikipedia.org]
This wasn't developed until after the Columbia accident. So yes, the Soviets with their unmanned Buran flight were first.
The Reason for not letting the computer control the landing gear deployment is simple: It's a one-way procedure. Once deployed, you cannot retract the gear and close the orbiter's underside - that can only take place on the ground. So, if a computer glitch would deploy the gear before or during the "hot" phase during reentry, there'd be no way to return the craft in one piece, with fatal consequences for the crew if it happened at a point where (re)docking with the ISS and waiting for a rescue shuttle is no longer an option.
You know, folks, sometimes having a human in control isn't all that bad.
What's with the fairing? (Score:3, Interesting)
Does anyone know what the panels lining the rocket fairing are for?
http://www.foxnews.com/slideshow/scitech/2009/10/22/nasas-secret-space-plane-nears-maiden-voyage?slide=4
Re:Space without astronauts (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm of very mixed feelings on the Constellation cancellation. On one hand, I thought that Constellation was a big loser of a program. Expendable solid rockets? Apollo style capsules? We need cheap access to space, not more aerospace contractor welfare. On the other hand, not having a manned space program sucks pretty badly too. As you said, if Obama cancelled the NASA boondoggle knowing that the Air Force had something better coming along, I would feel much better.
Re:podbay (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Anywhere on earth in 2 hours (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't see the logic in this. Existing missles have a delta-V that could reach orbital velocity. That's why their boosters get re-used for civilian missions. If anyone wanted to loiter a missle in orbit, in contravention of the treaty about that, I would imagine that some of the existing MERV systems have that capability. But sitting one in orbit doesn't make it harder to shoot down when it re-enters, because regardless of how well it is stealthed it can be seen - if by no other means, when it occludes a star. Having it in orbit just makes destroying its launch pad irrelevant.
Submarines can go anywhere, and sit there for months, and launch a missle that arrives in 20 minutes rather than 2 hours. If you want to worry about US nuclear capability, worry about that.
Re:What is it for? (Score:1, Interesting)
Special Recon:. The X-37 has a on orbit delta-V of 3.3km/s so it can basically add 14,000km of cross range any time it wants to on orbit, in a orbital period, literally showing up unexpected, over anywhere on the _entire_ planet.
ASAT: possibly, but probably not a primary or even secondary mission. Would not be too hard to upgrade one of the many exoatmospheric ABM interceptors for taking on higher targets when dropped from the X-37s bay. Or carry stealthy slow missiles with black spray paint, to induce premature failure in enemy satellites.
Satellite Stealer: Not at all likely. Most military satellites are equipped with self destruct charges ranging from simple ruination to catastrophic explosion.
Antipodal bomber: Highly Likely. Drops guided conventional warhead reentry vehicle onto high value or fleeting targets. anywhere in the world 80 minutes or less. Multiple vehicles can lower time dramatically to below 10 minutes.
Not stuck with NASA: Fly more frequently for test and research purposes, almost on demand as long as you have a booster. No having to dance around civil payload manifests.
Survivable, Reliable, Evasive Orbital Observation/Mapping/Recon/Communications.
Immense delta-V and cross range reduces vulnerability to enemy ASAT weapons, allows for flying of high investment radar and optical telescopes that you can bring home and reuse, cheaper than the big KH spy satellites. Use saved money on perks for Officer clubs.
Re:Space without astronauts (Score:3, Interesting)
A Surge? (Score:2, Interesting)
Large solar flare destroying a bunch of satellites, replacement needed.
Some new weapon that can destroy a large number of satellites (ground based X-ray laser or an EMP/Nuclear weapon)
Reagan's Star Wars style satellites chain. I've heard we have some advances in Fiber laser efficiency. Any other recent big advances in beam weaponry?