Air Force Launches Robotic Space Plane on Secret Mission

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
After several weather delays, the Air Force was finally able to launch the X-37b into orbit. The unmanned space plane has been called a mini-space shuttle due to the similarities in shape. The vehicle itself is no secret, but the mission certainly is. No information has been officially released by the Air Force, but the speculation indicates the testing of new spy satellite technology.
 
Let's see...ummm, X-37b sounds awfully like X-71, "secret mission" is drilling a hole ? 2012 ?
 
Its on a Polar orbit you can guess what its up too...
most likely there see how well it can do putting a payload in to that kinda of orbit and getting back

it looks like the shuttle becouse it has/had the same mission reqs ie get a payload in to a polar orbit and get land back on the west coast

shuttle was to do the same thing it just never happened becouse of Challenger
 
MindBuster said:
Let's see...ummm, X-37b sounds awfully like X-71, "secret mission" is drilling a hole ? 2012 ?
Click to expand...
The movie used that, because the X-# designation is a long standing designation for experimental aircraft and rockets in the US, dating all the way back to the X-1 in 1946 which was the first plane to go supersonic.

There's a whole list of them here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-plane_(aircraft)
 
Another multi-billion dollar project that will serve what purpose ? Spying ? Give me a break.
 
[mild rant]

Funny how anything remote controlled or remote control + autopilot is now call "robotic".
I know there is a rather blurry line between . . some autopilots and robotic . . but EVERYTHING? :confused:

A robot should be or have the capability of being autonomous . . the more sensors and greater ability to make decisions on it's own only strengthens the definition.

But remote control, or simplistic control should not equate to being robotic
- Robot wars = remote controlled killer cars . . no robots on the show ever . .
- Simple autopilot (keep heading and or altitude can be done without computers and entirely electromagnetically) first analog robot?? or no :p
- Even the robot mars landers where pushing the definition a bit. (replayed remote control from earth with some avoidance fail safes)
- Bomb robots? nope more remote controlled track/cars with a remote controlled arm.
- Air force drones? getting there nicely with allot less human control.
- DARPA driving prize? now there are some robots . . still simple but quite autonomous.

very very few real robots out there. :mad:

It is really robotic? or does it have some avionics (like the lager shuttle) that automate the flight . . and is controlled from the ground?
need more info for this one . . . :D
 
my guess its technology already 20 years out of date and would of been awesome in the 1980's.
 
jroe52 said:
my guess its technology already 20 years out of date and would of been awesome in the 1980's.
Click to expand...

you win a cookie
most aircraft are like that take the year they first fly subtract 20 thats age of the tech in them
 
bah lack of edit also the shuttle is 50s tech crazy huh?
space craft tend to be really slow ISS is running on mostly 80s tech
 
it'd be interesting to see how well this unmanned "shuttle" will work. Sending people into space can be quite restrictive and expensive, what with all the food, water, air, etc that they need.
 
Elios said:
bah lack of edit also the shuttle is 50s tech crazy huh?
space craft tend to be really slow ISS is running on mostly 80s tech
Click to expand...

I think part of it is that the systems being used have to prove themselves in years of harsh enviroments before becoming vetted for space use.
 
wizdum said:
Yes, because the public has never gained anything at all from military research.
Click to expand...

also the military doesnt have to deal with congress shifting its priorities every few years like nasa does.

space programs are long term ventures which dont react well to constant changes by each and every new administration.
 
Volumetrik said:
Another multi-billion dollar project that will serve what purpose ? Spying ? Give me a break.
Click to expand...

wizdum said:
Yes, because the public has never gained anything at all from military research.
Click to expand...

AND single use launch vehicles are so cheap comparatively

AND fixed orbit spy satelites are vastly superior because you know exactly where and when they are passing over

:rolleyes:
I hate Luddites

and elevators...
and hospitals...
and islands...
 
@dmin said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunokhod_programme Soviet Russia Landed a nuclear "robot" on the moon in 1970 lets get with the times people.
Click to expand...

You should re-read that article:
"Power was supplied by a solar panel on the inside of a round hinged lid which covered the instrument bay, which would charge the batteries when opened. A polonium-210 radioactive heat source was used to keep the rover warm during the long lunar nights.
 
weebling1 said:
You should re-read that article:
"Power was supplied by a solar panel on the inside of a round hinged lid which covered the instrument bay, which would charge the batteries when opened. A polonium-210 radioactive heat source was used to keep the rover warm during the long lunar nights.
Click to expand...

meh.. I guess It is subjective to what your definition of nuclear is. I think this qualifys for that term because it used radioactivity to function. Infact that was the Achille's heel of it. It would exhaust it's it radioactive supply in 11 months. If a better heater design would have been used It was estimated that the thing would last for about 2 years or better. What's crazier to think is that while this thing was crusin' on the moon while both Apollo 14 and 15 landed on the moon.

If you care the documentary "tank on the moon" is pretty cool it talks about it and how it was made.

The guys that made that thing also went on to help nasa with the mars rover after the fall of the ussr.
 
MindBuster said:
Let's see...ummm, X-37b sounds awfully like X-71, "secret mission" is drilling a hole ? 2012 ?
Click to expand...

All the potential military prototype planes have the "X" name, the X-29 with the reverse angles wings, the X-1 went supersonic, the last two that fought over who was going to be the next gen fighter were both X planes (now the F-35).

Since NASA don't have a budget to replace the shuttle, and are relying on someone else to cough up a production model, here's an unmanned version, by, another...government....agency.

Is this the equivalent of throwing a pie in the face of NASA?
 
Was a beautiful launch. My family and I had planned a vacation around the STS133 launch but we got there the 26th (their window was supposed to open on the 27th) but they bumped it up to the 24th. One night in the hotel we caught a local news blurb about the X37B heading up atop an Atlas V on Saturday because both attempts on Friday were no-go's (due to weather, iirc).

9KuJA.jpg


We had hoped to see it from the Saturn V building, but we decided to leave around 5:15 and try to make it to Jetty Park because I read it's got a great view of SLC41. We knew we weren't going to make so we stopped a few minutes before it was scheduled to go. There were a bunch of parked cars right before a bridge so we pulled over, figuring that they had some idea of what they were doing. Got this shot with my T1i and EF-S 55-250mm IS lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top