X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle (OTV)

IMOHO, It will depend on how the VLO pseudo satellites will fair in the future. But a robotic Space plane would probably still be needed for most dynamic situations. For example, with the risks of a war on orbital altitudes (debris mine field, nuke...), only something like the 37 would be able to support the on orbit recon mission deterrence aspect.
A similar Lunar based asset would fair even better.
 
TomcatViP said:
IMOHO, It will depend on how the VLO pseudo satellites will fair in the future. But a robotic Space plane would probably still be needed for most dynamic situations. For example, with the risks of a war on orbital altitudes (debris mine field, nuke...), only something like the 37 would be able to support the on orbit recon mission deterrence aspect.
A similar Lunar based asset would fair even better.
Click to expand...
No, on neither.
A. A space plane is just as vulnerable as any other VLO satellite. And it is no more responsive to dynamic situations. It can't maneuver any different that any other satellites except when it is in any highly elliptical orbit with a low perigee (useless for most tasks). And as it is maneuvering in the atmosphere, it can't do anything else like reconnaissance. The mitigation of "the risks of a war on orbital altitudes (debris mine field, nuke...)" is a multiple or constellation of satellites with maneuvering propellant. Now, an easier task with lower launch costs.

A lunar base asset is useless, it is several days away from any availability for imaging reconn.

There X-37B is not doing any imaging reconnaissance. It has been in poor orbits for such a task nor does it has the payload capacity.

edited for spellchecking changes and clarifications
 
Last edited:
TomcatViP said:
What is nonsense? VLO, the X-37 orbital geometry or the militarization of the moon?
Oh, wait, forget it. Save us some time.
Click to expand...
militarization of the moon, X-37 as game changer or replacing any existing platform or constellation, VLO is nothing new
 
Image from inside the bay of the X-37 released.... A not so subtle reminder to an adversary?



www.dvidshub.net

Novel space maneuver conducted by X-37B

An X-37B onboard camera, used to ensure the health and safety of the vehicle, captures an image of Earth while conducting experiments in a highly elliptical orbit in 2024. As part of the X-37B's seventh mission, the vehicle executed a series of first-of-its-kind maneuvers, called aerobraking, to...
www.dvidshub.net www.dvidshub.net
 
Byeman said:
No, on neither.
A. A space plane is just as vulnerable as any other VLO satellite. And it is no more responsive to dynamic situations. It can't maneuver any different that any other satellites except when it is in any highly elliptical orbit with a low perigee (useless for most tasks). And as it is maneuvering in the atmosphere, it can't do anything else like reconnaissance. The mitigation of "the risks of a war on orbital altitudes (debris mine field, nuke...)" is a multiple or constellation of satellites with maneuvering propellant. Now, an easier task with lower launch costs.

A lunar base asset is useless, it is several days away from any availability for imaging reconn.

There X-37B is not doing any imaging reconnaissance. It has been in poor orbits for such a task nor does it has the payload capacity.

edited for spellchecking changes and clarifications
Click to expand...
So you do nothing and let China dominate space ?
 
Desertfox said:
X-37B is amazing, a game changer, and we need more of them.
Click to expand...
And it could serve for the Iron Dome too and becoming the famous space based interceptor , an armed X-37 B able to maneuver near earth , change orbit and staying years in orbit is the game changer for Space Force, a bigger X-37 could have kill vehicle in his weapon bay.
 
dark sidius said:
And it could serve for the Iron Dome too and becoming the famous space based interceptor , an armed X-37 B able to maneuver near earth , change orbit and staying years in orbit is the game changer for Space Force, a bigger X-37 could have kill vehicle in his weapon bay.
Click to expand...
nonsense. X-37 can't maneuver or change orbit in low earth orbit any better than any other satellite (and other satellites last longer in space). It is just a matter of quantity of propellant. It is just a more expensive satellite bus. There are others that are cheaper and better. The X-37 can not rendezvous, it doesn't have the sensors.

It only can make large changes using wings from high orbits.
 
Halcyon66 said:
Awesome little airframe and has certainly put in the yards.

Regards,
Click to expand...
Huh? It's time in space is much less than the lifetime of most satellites. There is a KH-11 coming up on 20 years in orbit. 10 years is nothing.
 
Desertfox said:
X-37B is amazing, a game changer, and we need more of them.
Click to expand...
That is wrong. It only can carry 500 lb, it is heavier than an equivalent spacecraft. And it doesn't stay in orbit long. It is only good for R&D.
 
Byeman said:
No, X-37 and Starship are different in this regard. X-37 generates lift and this is used to change inclination. Starship does not create lift.
Click to expand...
Correction, the Starship does generate lift. The lift coefficient for the Starship is far far less than the X-37, but since lift is a Vsq function, that number can build very quickly. Keep in mind, the Apollo space capsule used aero-braking during the first phase of re-entry. With that being said, I doubt the Starship generates sufficient lift to have a meaningful cross range capability.
 
sferrin said:
How many have come back to Earth? And then went back into space?
Click to expand...
It doesn't make it perform any better than any other satellite that is a comsat, SIGINTsat, IMINTSAT, etc. Yes, so it can return items that have been exposed to space, so can Dragon (items that were mounted on the exterior of the ISS). Shuttle returned some satellIites).
 
Byeman said:
nonsense. X-37 can't maneuver or change orbit in low earth orbit any better than any other satellite (and other satellites last longer in space). It is just a matter of quantity of propellant. It is just a more expensive satellite bus. There are others that are cheaper and better. The X-37 can not rendezvous, it doesn't have the sensors.

It only can make large changes using wings from high orbits.
Click to expand...
From then SecAF Heather Wilson 6 years ago:

Wilson called the X-37B "fascinating" because it "can do an orbit that looks like an egg and, when it's close to the Earth, it's close enough to the atmosphere to turn where it is."

"Which means our adversaries don't know -- and that happens on the far side of the Earth from our adversaries -- where it's going to come up next. And we know that that drives them nuts. And I'm really glad about that," she added.

 
TomcatViP said:
37 has WINGS. Whatever your diploma was, you might be aware what their effect have in presence of density.
Click to expand...
Wrong. I worked shuttle and X-37 and I know orbital mechanics, which you don't seem to understand.
The wings have little advantage (other than to return to earth) in low earth orbit. Any dip into the atmosphere from low earth requires more propellant to come back out. This and that plane changes in LEO are inefficient, is why it is done with highly elliptical orbits like the current mission is using. The wings are only effective for altitudes much lower than 100 miles (entry interface is typical 400,000ft). Above that, they are only drag.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
zebra159357 said:
From then SecAF Heather Wilson 6 years ago:

Wilson called the X-37B "fascinating" because it "can do an orbit that looks like an egg and, when it's close to the Earth, it's close enough to the atmosphere to turn where it is."

"Which means our adversaries don't know -- and that happens on the far side of the Earth from our adversaries -- where it's going to come up next. And we know that that drives them nuts. And I'm really glad about that," she added.
Click to expand...
I forgot a word "It only can make large changes using wings from high elliptical orbits" which is "an orbit that looks like an egg"
 
Just a refresher on some basic orbital mechanics. Only adding or subtracting velocity (scalar math), not doing plane change or orbit rotations (vector math). Any impulse affects the orbit, 180 degrees from the point of application/
 

Attachments

  • Slide2.jpeg
    Slide2.jpeg
    39.5 KB · Views: 11
  • Slide1.jpeg
    Slide1.jpeg
    37 KB · Views: 11
Byeman said:
It doesn't make it perform any better than any other satellite that is a comsat, SIGINTsat, IMINTSAT, etc. Yes, so it can return items that have been exposed to space, so can Dragon (items that were mounted on the exterior of the ISS). Shuttle returned some satellIites).
Click to expand...
That's true but you can bring X-37 down and outfit it for something else. If you want to put something in space, and then be able to examine it in detail, satellites aren't really an option. I suppose you could have them drop RVs with material samples but it still lacks the versatility of the X-37.
 
sferrin said:
That's true but you can bring X-37 down and outfit it for something else. If you want to put something in space, and then be able to examine it in detail, satellites aren't really an option. I suppose you could have them drop RVs with material samples but it still lacks the versatility of the X-37.
Click to expand...
ISS has been for decades .
 
Would not the X-37B have an ability to make minor inclination changes? Or is its in atmosphere ability strictly limited to the vertical and thus only decreasing velocity/apogee without a propellant burn?

In any case, I’m confident that the platform is trust used for tests than involve sample return, along with space awareness calibration testing and the advertised object tracking/avoidance. I doubt there is any operational capacity in a fleet of only two vehicles, and if that were a needed role, they would be making more of them. They are strictly experimental, though I suspect their performance envelope does allow for some very unique testing and experiments.
 
Plane changes, how we hate you. One example: Hubble is on a 28.5 inclination orbit, ISS at 51.6. Moving Hubble to ISS would take more delta-v than sending it in a lunar flyby, 3 km/s. Plane changes are hell.

Example Problems

Example problems relating to orbital mechanics and rocket propulsion.
www.braeunig.us
 
Last edited:
Josh_TN said:
Would not the X-37B have an ability to make minor inclination changes? Or is its in atmosphere ability strictly limited to the vertical and thus only decreasing velocity/apogee without a propellant burn?
Click to expand...
It can make significant plane (inclination) changes using aerodynamics but only from highly elliptical orbits
 
Archibald said:
- like Dynasoar was supposed to do ?
- because the orbit perigee is low and deep in the atmosphere ?
Click to expand...
yes, which is not VLO. And while at perigee (low and deep in the atmosphere), it won't be taking data with sensors in the bay because the bay will be closed to protect them and the vehicle attitude will be driven by the manuver (plane change)
 
Last edited:
Nice to know it isn’t just Buran you look down on :)

At any rate—let me throw this into the mix.

They were very careful to show only a bit of the payload bay—but the aft section is what interests me.

Falcon Heavy gave this bird quite the thump…it may have a bit more hypergolics—but there may be another another way to give X-37 a bit more agility.

Byeman is right about wings not being of much use at its altitude.

What if it has a big tether?

Spin down for an orbital change—THEN use wings.

Not even a thruster puff visible. Just hang out…gradually feed out some line—then turn loose.

Falcon upper stage the counterweight…maybe like the one that broke up over Poland? It might be interesting to backtrack that.
 
I don’t particularly think we know at all what it can do, outside it’s unique ability to bring things back. I think it probably fills a huge role from a testing poiof view but I doubt it is something that is a practical operational platform. Certainly not at a force of only two. If it had a real operational mission, there would be more of them. Chances are it is exactly what the USAF says: a test play they use to do analysis where bringing back samples from long duration orbital missions is the goal.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom