US X-37B robot minishuttle: 'Secret space warplane'?

Wrong-sized keyhole

There's some pretty basic optical theory which limits what you can do with an optical system of a specific size, so an X-37 derivative smaller than the Shuttle is not going to be able to handle some spy satellites.

Shit, Matt Irvine was right

future spacecraft will indeed be made by kitbashing Airfix Space Shuttle and Saturn V kits, then detailing their launch bays with bits of Hornby trackside furniture

Shuttle polar orbits

It was the Shuttle's ability to fly polar orbits that really freaked the Kremlin into funding Buran. The Soviet military got it into their minds that a Shuttle carrying a nuclear weapon could lob a warhead at the Soviet Union, avoiding all of their early warning systems and anti-missile networks and still be back in California in time for mai-tais.

Brezhnev not only ordered the horrendously expensive Buran project, but also got the USSR to resume anti-satellite weapon research; both of which were canned right at the collapse of the Soviet Union. They got quite a long way, right up to launching the enormous Polyus satellite; which failed to reach orbit - but looks wonderfully sinister on its Gerry Andersonesque launcher:

http://i.imgur.com/7NefF.jpg

If you want the world to end in a thermonuclear toasting you want it to end because of weapons that look the part.

Getting the Shuttle to fly polar orbits would probably ended in disaster even if the Soviet Union wasn't panicked into lobbing a missile back at the US. The launches would have required extremely light weight solid rocket boosters. These were canned after Challenger exploded because they would have been even more prone to joint failure.

Sat-napping

It wouldn't be that covert after the first few satellites disappear over America and they're the only ones with the secret space warplane.

Don't forget

NASA basically punted it to the USAF after they ran out of money for anything other than Shuttle/ISS. So the USAF probably doesn't really know what it's for either, and you *know* they're going to look at it and go "oooh! space fighter!" themselves.

X-20 Dyna-Soar anyone?

So finally, the USAF is getting a capability that they have been after since the late 50's, a spaceplane!

The dimensions and apparent capabilities of this vehicle do seem to be similar to the X-20 space glider that was cancelled by Mcnamara in the early 60's. A lot of the missions put forward for this craft tended towards various reconnisance tasks. However a lot of these are now carried out by satellites more efficiently. Where a spaceplane capability would score is if you need to make a quick response overflight, the kind of thing that the old SR71 Blackbird was good at. It's no secret that the Blackbird's capability has been missed in the last 15 years.

Bear in mind (and Lewis hints at this too) that this is an X-Plane, it is an experimental vehicle designed to demonstrate and prove a capability. What the USAF will eventually deploy may be completely different to the X-37B and be launched in a completely different way. This latter suggestion is based on two pieces of information, both in the public domain.

1. Lockheed has been testing models of a fly-back rocket booster over that last few years and are remaining tight lipped over it's purpose.

2. I saw a report yesterday about a new USAF requirement for a vertical launch flyback booster vehicle for satellite launch.

Putting these two together you come with a potential launcher for an evolved X-37 - that incidently would not look unsimilar to the original space shuttle concepts from the early 70's.

Will this actually happen? Normally I would say no, most of the USAF space vehicle projects we know of get cancelled. But this time?

Well, they are about to actually fly hardware so who knows?

Andrew Newstead

Covert recovery unlikely

Covert recovery of foreign satellites would be highly unlikely due to the hazards imposed by thrusters and the like. The mere act of interfering with a satellite's orientation would trigger its attitude control system to recover from the perturbation, firing thrusters and so forth.

In order to snag said vehicle, you'd have to find a way to disable the thrusters -- hot gas, cold gas, or whatever. Spin stabilized vehicles would be even more difficult to snag -- imagine snagging a misbehaving gyroscope weighting hundreds, or even thousands of pounds.

Once snagged, you'd still have the hazard of dealing with hydrazine or any number of equally nasty fuels.

Snoop, damage, disable maybe. Recover, no.

Cool, but...

...every time I see something like this I'm reminded of one of Bill Hicks' many rants on the subject...

"Take all that money we spend on weapons and defenses each year and instead spend it feeding and clothing and educating the poor of the world, which it would pay for many times over, not one human being excluded, and we could explore space, together, both inner and outer, forever, in peace."

What's it for?

It's for the same as most of the US budget - keeping the military stocked with toys and jobs. That's what happens when you let the military run the country: the country gets run for the military.

does this mean

NASA = Cardassian High Command

USAF = Obsidian Order

Or any other such trekkie reference. Apologies, I just watched an episode of DS9 where Riker stole the Defiant.

Mass produced, off earth nukes?

With spaceships, I suppose USA could fill them with nukes and have them move around in space somewhere inside the solar system, like space ships, then have them as an alternative to having any earth bound nukes, while simultaniously promoting a world (earth) free of nuclear weapons.

Maybe they could be parked on the moon until they were to be used, or just being left there as a deterrent? :)

These shuttles looks like to be much smaller than the familiar space shuttles. I suppose they could be mass produced.

Covert recovery unlikely?

Haha, I did not think of the possibility of these vehicles capturing other nations satelites.

Afaik, there are EMP munitions (non nuclear) that perhaps could be used to disable satelites prior to retrival. And if retrival isn't the objective, then mabye killing off select satelites could be an idea?

Maybe the shuttles could contain equipment that makes it possible to put a satelite under direct surveillance?

Fun to speculate!

Scooping up a target

Wasn't this the theme to an old James Bond movie?

Is Ernst Stavro Blofeld secretly building a X37 launch site inside an old volcano?

Wing Shape

That wing shape is needed to support the extremely high angles of attack needed during reentry. its also the same wing shape as the Mig 29/31, the corresponding Sukhoi's as well as the F/A-18 and the F16.

In a dogfight its not about how fast you can go, its about how slow you can go.