X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle (OTV)

[starviking]

The energy involved would be more than offset from the loss of whatever energy source would have been providing the energy in it's absence.

From a Thermodynamics point of view, this is not true. More energy has been introduced into the system, period.
Here "the system" is spaceship Earth.

But the burning of stored energy, fossil fuels, has been avoided. And the release of greenhouse gasses too - allowing more energy to escape the system into space.

using microwaves to transmit the power, and they are hardly absorbed in our atmosphere at all.

From a Thermodynamics point of view again, this is not relevant. More energy gets introduced into the system, and that's going to accelerate the warming. Whether this energy gets absorbed first in the atmosphere or in some receiver antenna, that will modify which component of the system gets it first. But for the system as a whole, it makes no difference.

And as in the first point, if this extra input energy results in less use of fossil fuels, less stored energy will be burnt on Earth, and less greenhouse gasses emitted.

 

[TomcatViP]

Let's not drift anymore away from topic objectives my friends. I am sure there is enough here to open a new thread where to discuss the merits of directed energy against fossil fuels.

 

[Byeman]

Almost sounds like the USAF don't see much of a future in store for the Space Force...

No, Space Force doesn't see much of a future for X-37

 

[sferrin]

Almost sounds like the USAF don't see much of a future in store for the Space Force...

No, Space Force doesn't see much of a future for X-37

The DoD has never suffered a lack of shortsightedness.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Indeed.

 

[Byeman]

Almost sounds like the USAF don't see much of a future in store for the Space Force...

No, Space Force doesn't see much of a future for X-37

The DoD has never suffered a lack of shortsightedness.

This has nothing to do with shortsightedness. It is actually the opposite. Not wasting money on what little return X-37 brings.

There is a legitimate reason for Space Force exist, much like the reason the Air Force was formed.

 

[Grey Havoc]

What is there left to replace it?

 

[Byeman]

What is there left to replace it?

Replace what?

 

[Grey Havoc]

The X-37.

 

[Grey Havoc]

The X-37.

 

[sferrin]

This has nothing to do with shortsightedness. It is actually the opposite. Not wasting money on what little return X-37 brings.

Yes, that's what shortsightedness is - a lack of imagination.

 

[Josh_TN]

The X-37 isn't an operational platform, as far as we know at least.

 

[Byeman]

This has nothing to do with shortsightedness. It is actually the opposite. Not wasting money on what little return X-37 brings.

Yes, that's what shortsightedness is - a lack of imagination.

There is no lack of imagination. X-37 is just a dead end. Just because it is cool doesn't mean it is useful.

 

[Byeman]

The X-37.

It doesn't need replacing

 

[sferrin]

This has nothing to do with shortsightedness. It is actually the opposite. Not wasting money on what little return X-37 brings.

Yes, that's what shortsightedness is - a lack of imagination.

There is no lack of imagination. X-37 is just a dead end. Just because it is cool doesn't mean it is useful.

And just because they can't think of a use for it doesn't mean there isn't any. Like I said - no imagination. (And no, I'm not talking mounting light sabers and hyperdrives on it.) It's as dumb as some comment from one of the suits on an older hypersonic program (RATTLRS/HyFly/X-51) that was basically, "well if it does work we don't know what we're going to do with it".

 

[stealthflanker]

Well for one it can have Satellite refuelling role.

Those multimillion dollars spy sats up there can use some top ups to extend their life or to have more flexibility to maneuver to evade any possible "visit" from another Satellite.

 

[sublight_]

This has nothing to do with shortsightedness. It is actually the opposite. Not wasting money on what little return X-37 brings.

Yes, that's what shortsightedness is - a lack of imagination.

There is no lack of imagination. X-37 is just a dead end. Just because it is cool doesn't mean it is useful.

What does this even mean? Nobody knows what X-37 is really used for.

 

[Lc89]

This has nothing to do with shortsightedness. It is actually the opposite. Not wasting money on what little return X-37 brings.

Yes, that's what shortsightedness is - a lack of imagination.

There is no lack of imagination. X-37 is just a dead end. Just because it is cool doesn't mean it is useful.

What does this even mean? Nobody knows what X-37 is really used for.

Jadc2 maybe?

 

[Josh_TN]

I suspect the X-37 is used for exactly what the USAF says its used for: testing new ideas and payloads with lower risk, and with the ability to return them to earth for post orbital study. There aren't many practical uses or advantages to the platform compared to a dedicated satellite other than being reconfigurable and returning test equipment to earth.

ETA: it also seems clear it doesn't have a specific job it is relied upon for, since there are only two of them and sometimes neither is on orbit. If it had a role to play outside testing, they'd probably build another one.

 

[sublight_]

This has nothing to do with shortsightedness. It is actually the opposite. Not wasting money on what little return X-37 brings.

Yes, that's what shortsightedness is - a lack of imagination.

There is no lack of imagination. X-37 is just a dead end. Just because it is cool doesn't mean it is useful.

What does this even mean? Nobody knows what X-37 is really used for.

Jadc2 maybe?

Uh no.... JADC2 is gonna be software and unified representation of data.

 

[bob225]

Don't Believe Russia: The X-37B Spaceplane Isn't a Secret Space Bomber

That isn't even a good idea.

www.popularmechanics.com

 

[TomcatViP]

Found this : an ambulance version (although I am skeptical with the prone position of the evacuee facing trajectory head down!):

 

[publiusr]

100 years…

Now…though expensive…X-37 atop a very fat storable Trans-Stage launched by Falcon heavy…that could be quite agile in LEO and have reach. The trans-stage could have a trunk and the payload bay of X-37 itself hide a ride-up/rise-up robot for telepresence missions?

You can have a virtual astronaut…Andy Serkis style…motion capture…no suit.

If the fairing can be made of metamaterials keep it and have it extend backwards during coast…

 

[TomcatViP]

500 days.

Air Force's X-37B robotic space plane wings past 500 days in Earth orbit

That enigmatic U.S. military X-37B robotic space drone has now chalked up more than 500 days circling the Earth.

www.space.com

 

[Flyaway]

Via Jonathan McDowell:

Multiple orbit changes Oct 17-25 (385 x 390 km up to 445 x 447 km and then down to 322 x 349 km)
and release of the Falconsat 8 satellite (which means USA 300, released at the start of the mission, is *not* Falconsat-8!).

 

[RavenOne]

According to Google earth, they are seen parked at NASA Armstrong Research Center at Edwards AFB …

Cheers

 

[quellish]

According to Google earth, they are seen parked at NASA Armstrong Research Center at Edwards AFB …

Cheers

Those are X-34 vehicles, and they have not been at Edwards for a long time. That image must be old.

 

[publiusr]

While the economics of space-based solar power as envisaged by Gerard O'Neill are uncertain at best, I've often thought that the likeliest/soonest application would be to provide power to remote military bases and expeditions where there is no infrastructure.

Now is the time to push for that with OSTP vacant-Lerner left after making enemies in the Biden Admin. I suggest Garritson-pro Solar...and can reach across the aisles.

 

[RavenOne]

Wondering if it’s loitering over the area of interest ……Ukraine right now ?? Or,it’s,payload,for,sure.

cheers

 

[TomS]

Wondering if it’s loitering over the area of interest ……Ukraine right now ?? Or,it’s,payload,for,sure.

cheers

Satellites do not loiter over a specific location (barring geostationary sats, which X-37 decidedly is not).

 

[edwest4]

I'm not convinced that satellites can't loiter. Satellite refueling is possible. Already, satellites are parked in key orbits. To be able to move in certain important circumstances would be a very important strategic development.

 

[TomS]

I'm not convinced that satellites can't loiter. Satellite refueling is possible. Already, satellites are parked in key orbits. To be able to move in certain important circumstances would be a very important strategic development.

You need to study orbital mechanics.

Yes, satellites can have their orbits changed but only slightly or very slowly because they cannot carry enough fuel for fast, radical changes. What they cannot do at all is loiter or hover over a single spot or region on Earth's surface (again excepting geostationary satellites, which orbit extremely high). Yes, satellites can be refuelled. However, the fuel needed for a satellite to loiter in space at low altitude would rapidly (in a small number of minutes) exceed the amount of fuel needed to place it into orbit in the first place.

 

[jeffb]

Wondering if it’s loitering over the area of interest ……Ukraine right now ?? Or,it’s,payload,for,sure.

cheers

Sats don't loiter. LEO orbits are ~90 minutes but they won't come back over the same point on the surface on the next orbit without significant orbital adjustment (propellant use).

Greater use of smaller, cheaper Earth imaging cubesats has allowed for larger constellations of (typically commercial) sats and as a result more frequent passes over areas of interest, albeit at lower resolutions.

Loitering really requires aircraft or airships, but these come with a number of vulnerabilities and drawbacks. Surveillance drones like the RQ-4 have been seen doing a fair bit of loitering around Ukraine's Western and Southern borders recently, including long east west runs over the Black Sea.

 

[publiusr]

They might “loiter” near other sats along the same orbital plane though….maybe kick some stealthy metamaterial out that comes apart during a meteor storm long after it has landed or inspected or moved on…be it a spaceplane or anything else.

But spacecraft really are more like trains than planes. You don’t “steer” a train. You might slow and skip off the atmosphere a bit a throw off folks looking for you a bit, is all.

 

[edwest4]

I disagree with this thinking. It would be of great strategic advantage to launch an orbital fuel tank and attach a satellite. Trains are a very bad analogy since they require tracks to rest on. The exact resolution level of current spy satellites is classified. I read about 'satellite inspection' being carried out by astronauts and the countermeasures that would be there to discourage this type of close examination.

I think the various defense contractors have better imaginations.

 

[quellish]

I disagree with this thinking. It would be of great strategic advantage to launch an orbital fuel tank and attach a satellite. Trains are a very bad analogy since they require tracks to rest on. The exact resolution level of current spy satellites is classified. I read about 'satellite inspection' being carried out by astronauts and the countermeasures that would be there to discourage this type of close examination.

I think the various defense contractors have better imaginations.

Those who ignore the laws of physics are doomed to repeat them.

 

[TomS]

I disagree with this thinking. It would be of great strategic advantage to launch an orbital fuel tank and attach a satellite. Trains are a very bad analogy since they require tracks to rest on. The exact resolution level of current spy satellites is classified. I read about 'satellite inspection' being carried out by astronauts and the countermeasures that would be there to discourage this type of close examination.

I think the various defense contractors have better imaginations.

Satellites in orbit CANNOT change their orbits dramatically without large amounts of fuel. This is a "laws of physics" thing, not a "we haven't thought of a better idea" thing. You can make very minor changes to improve a satellite's look at a specific target, but those changes have to be carefully considered lest you screw up a planned look at another target down the line or take a bunch of time off a satellite's life. Refueling would be nice, but it doesn't seem to be happening, yet. We know because there's a whole community of folks who track military satellite launches and maneuvers. They have a really good track record of seeing even sats that are not publicly discussed. They would know very quickly if a new launch (e.g., a tanker) had come close to an existing vehicle.

Satellite inspection would be a pre-planned evolution, with a vehicle launched directly into an orbit very similar to the satellite to be examined. CMs could include using delta-v to avoid the inspector but you'd have to weigh that delta-v expenditure against satellite lifespan. And the inspector would have to deal with the fact that they are spending literally tens to hundreds of millions of dollars just to see what a satellite looks like.

 

[edwest4]

Space gas stations: DIU to prototype commercial on-orbit satellite refueling - Breaking Defense

DIU is seeking companies with the "capability for bulk storage of liquid (>5,000 kg) and gaseous propellants on orbit," including hydrazine, liquid oxygen and others.

breakingdefense.com

 

[TomS]

Space gas stations: DIU to prototype commercial on-orbit satellite refueling - Breaking Defense

DIU is seeking companies with the "capability for bulk storage of liquid (>5,000 kg) and gaseous propellants on orbit," including hydrazine, liquid oxygen and others.

breakingdefense.com

And what does this have to do with your stated belief that satellites could "loiter" over a specific area?

 

[publiusr]

Now I will say this: a modest milsat launched atop a Falcon Heavy where most of the mass was propellant would be more “maneuverable,” within limits. I don’t know what that really gets you, besides a good tug…debris remover…