12 ms·
Experimental USAF space plane breaks record for orbital spaceflight
- AstroJetson 7y agoCool a mini space shuttle that is still flying around for testing stuff. Any chance it has seats and can be used for rescues?
- forgotmysn 7y agoto rescue what exactly?
- wil421 7y agoChinese or Russian satellite “rescuer”.
- AstroJetson 7y agoExactly!
- biesnecker 7y ago"Liberator"
- GhettoMaestro 7y agoHold still while I freedom you!
- dang 7y agoCould you please review the site guidelines and not post unsubstantive comments to HN? We ban accounts that repeatedly do that because we're trying for a bit better than internet default here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- GhettoMaestro 7y agoSorry - I did not mean to contribute to BS drive-by comments. I will refrain from doing so in the future. Apologies.
- nine_k 7y agoI won't be surprised if a military satellite of any state capable of launching military satellites will self-destruct if taken away forcibly from the designated orbit. A simple acceleration test would suffice. I also won't be surprised if when self-destructing, such satellite will try to deliberately damage everything in its close vicinity.
- mc32 7y agoI don’t think they make boobytrapped satellites that explode, but they may remotely activate a self-destruct process which renders abduction pointless. If they exploded it wouldn’t it create more problems than it solves in terms of more flying debris they have to track as well as friendlies in the same orbital path? (Like when Iridium 33 crashed into a defunct soviet satellite.)
- bdamm 7y agoI also don’t think the attack would involve changing orbits. The attack would be inserting electronic backdoor etc.
- jonathankoren 7y agoNah. Bolt cutters on an arm, or even just spray paint. You don’t need to be close to do an electronic attack. If you’re close, you might as well hit it with a hammer or snip the antenna and solar arrays off.
- nine_k 7y agoThis kind of sudden malfunction, along with acceleration not due to firing of any engines, would be a signal for the self-destruction device, likely chemically powered (explosive) and mechanically actuated. It would be sure to shatter the interesting electronic parts, burning or detonating any remaining fuel for bonus points.
- 7y ago
- salex89 7y agoWell, the Russians are also doing some shady stuff... They call it the Sputnik Inspektor. https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/kosmos-2519.htm https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/kosmos-2519.htm
- RandallBrown 7y agoPeople in the International Space Station?
- NikolaeVarius 7y agoThey have Soyuz capsules that do exactly that
- perilunar 7y agoour dreams
- Phlarp 7y agoPresumably ISS? Seems unlikely US government would expose a military asset to the Russians willingly like that. Also life support systems are heavy and that will cut into the delta-v budget of the craft.
- rtkwe 7y agoI don't think the main mystery and classification is about the craft itself but about the cargoes and missions it takes. It probably could be outfitted to act as a rescue craft for 1-2 astronauts though in a pinch all you really need is a way to strap the astronauts in and the pack from their space suits for some short term life support (or maybe even just a CO2 scrubber pack and an oxygen bottle if the interior is already thermally managed enough for the astronaut to survive) being much smaller than the shuttle it can land at more places so they wouldn't have to be in the craft long.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- rladd 7y agoOr to send a brave crew to an asteroid to deflect it from a calamitous earthbound trajectory?
- avmich 7y agoWait for Dream Chaser, first unmanned orbital flight planned for 2020. That one looks more promising, at least it's bigger and originally planned to be used manned.
- radium3d 7y agoThat's what the plan was (is maybe?) for the X-37C variant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37#X-37C https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37#X-37C
- clarkrinker 7y agoAnyone with links to credible speculation on the x-37’s mission?
- jandrese 7y agohttps://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/07/23/former-secaf-explains-how-secret-x-37-space-plane-throws-enemies.html https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/07/23/former-secaf-... Long term heat management hardware for space electronics. Among other things no doubt.
- ggm 7y ago"I think it creates more misconceptions about what the mission of the X-37B is and could lead to more international concerns that it's some type of weapons platform," Weeden said. "I think that works against U.S. interests because it will create more diplomatic problems for the U.S. when it tries to point out Russian and Chinese 'unusual behavior in space' and push for discussions on space norms of behavior." In short, "it gives Russia and China one more talking point about how the U.S. is the one 'weaponizing' space, even if that's not true," he said. That's a huge potential downside. Like the Soviets believing in US first strike intent. Having this craft do odd things only reinforces belief the US is not operating in good faith at all times. And this, when manned spaceflight to the iss depends on international cooperation still.
- RobertoG 7y ago>>"Like the Soviets believing in US first strike intent." the soviets? We are really going back, aren't we?
- colechristensen 7y agoObvious missions for a long-mission mobile shuttle like this include * intercepting and deorbiting space junk * fixing friendly or sabotaging unfriendly operational satellites * future weapons platform for offense or defense (say intercepting ground-launched sat-killing missiles) * on-demand surveillance (with ordinary spy satellites you have to wait until your orbit is in the right spot, adversaries will know when your satellites are above them and adjust their activities to avoid surveillance) * more routine human activities in LEO (spacecraft assembly, staging for higher orbits or interplanetary activities, shuttling between stations in LEO) * Netflix and chill with our alien overlords * Prep for mining activities further out
- enkid 7y agoLiterally all of these could occur more cheaply without deorbiting the spacecraft.
- bigiain 7y ago"Bringing back an opponent's satellite for examination"...
- Tuxer 7y agoSpace isn't like a highway where you can move from A to B at minimal expense. Switching orbits, both orbit heights but mainly orbit inclinations, comes at a very high delta-V expense and therefore propellant expense, which this craft simply doesn't have the volume to hold. This cannot shuttle between LEO stations and switch orbits to imitate multiple observation sats unless those sats and stations are very close in terms of orbits.
- walrus01 7y agopeople who haven't played kerbal space program (with mechjeb for data) usually don't fully understand how expensive, in terms of delta V, a large inclination change maneuver is.
- 7y ago
- kanox 7y ago> breaks record of orbital spaceflight It broke it's own record of "time-in-orbit" and as far as spaceflight records go this is one of the least relevant. Once a spacecraft gets to orbit it is very easy to stay there almost indefinitely. Hell, the ISS breaks the record for "continuous habitation in orbit" every day.
- mabbo 7y agoWhile true, and I see your point, it's also worth pointing out: the ISS doesn't need to make any trips back down again. This is a re-usable spaceship, albeit one humans don't get to ride in.
- lukeschlather 7y agoThe ISS problem is arguably harder. It doesn't need to survive reentry but you also can't take the whole thing apart, clean it, and put it back together again in a nice climate-controlled machine shop. You have to do it in cramped zero-gravity and keep most of the systems online while you're doing it.
- LargoLasskhyfv 7y agoThis one changes orbits. Multiple times per mission.
- kanox 7y agoAlmost all spacecraft carry propulsion and can change their orbit. There are even known cases of spysats deliberately shadowing comsats.
- scarecrowbob 7y agoMan, if you wanna get points in Tony Hawk Pro Skater, you gotta land the trick. Same thing... I don't think the ISS is gonna land that trick, as far as I know... I'd be stoked to find out I'm wrong about that, though.
- 7y ago
- Herodotus38 7y agohttps://spaceweathergallery.com/indiv_upload.php?upload_id=154946 https://spaceweathergallery.com/indiv_upload.php?upload_id=1... Here is an impressive photograph that an amateur astronomer took in June/July of this year.
- themodelplumber 7y agoThat is really impressive...though I don't quite understand why the illustration looks so different; even though there's likely a lot of bloom in the photo, the parts don't seem to match up with the illustration based on the general brightness values.
- TheSpiceIsLife 7y agoThe illustration shows the payload bay doors open. In the photo perhaps they are either closed, or open with something hanging out of the payload bay, or some other configuration, making the brightness the way it is???
- sandworm101 7y agoThe doors are almost certainly open. Just like shuttle, there are no external radiators on this plane. They are relatively delicate structures that wouldn't survive reentry. So they have to be inside the doors somewhere. Shuttle had to open its doors within a fixed time, else abort and return, and keep them open while on orbit. No doubt this spaceplane follows a similar profile. (Also, solar panels. Shuttle didn't use them but if this thing is spending years in space it is probably using solar panels too. They would be mounted at 90* to the radiators, creating a T-shaped structure with different albedos that should be identifiable in even a blurry picture.)
- TheSpiceIsLife 7y agoAh right, thanks, wasn't aware of that.
- 7y ago
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- thorum 7y agoI'm mainly surprised that we have reusable space planes at all. You'd think that would get more attention.
- riffraff 7y agothis still gets launched with a rocket, it's basically a very small unmanned space shuttle, so it's not as "cool" as, say, something that goes to orbit from the ground on its own.
- TeMPOraL 7y agoAre single-stage to orbit (SSTO) spaceplanes even possible on Earth with current chemical rockets? They're a PITA to build in Kerbal Space Program, and there the universe is 1/10 the size of the real one (albeit with the same gravitational acceleration).
- mabbo 7y agoThey are possible, but not economically feasible. Tim Dodd has a fantastic video showing just how ineffective they are. Two (or three) stage rockets are just so much more efficient.
- mabbo 7y agoWent and looked it up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sfc2Jg1gkKA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sfc2Jg1gkKA Tim Dodd (The Everyday Astronaut) is just a very good speaker on all space-related topics. Him and Scott Manley (with a healthy dose of Kerbal Space Program) are incredible teachers about space.
- SEJeff 7y agoThere was a lot of discussion after Elon Musk said that Starship (aka the BFS aka Big "Falcon" Spaceship aka the second stage of their starship) will be able to do SSTO, however it would only be able to SSTO with virtually zero payload whatsoever, so isn't very useful.
- neom 7y agoExcellent. Never the less, still super curious about the tictac thing. :)
- jedberg 7y ago> NASA began the X-37 program in 1999; Maybe officially, but I definitely know people who were working on a Space Plane program in the early 90s.
- sandworm101 7y agoThere have been people working on spaceplanes continuously since the Nixon administration. Shuttle was a spaceplane but there were/are lots of other programs that fit that title.
- JKCalhoun 7y agoThe (unfortunately named) Dynasoar, or X-20, strikes me as the first: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-20_Dyna-Soar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-20_Dyna-Soar (So, Eisenhower.)
- sandworm101 7y agoX-15 actually flew in space before the X-20 program. Not orbit, but a plane in space above 100km. And there were plans to mount a deployable wing thing on Gemini, making it something like a spaceplane. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Gemini#Winged_Gemini https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Gemini#Winged_Gemini Most kerbal realworld thing ever: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gemini_paraglider.JPG https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gemini_paraglider.JPG
- ChuckMcM 7y agoPersonally, I put the beginning of this program with the NASA Lifting body program[1]. The most famous one for me being the M2-F2 which was shown crashing in the opening sequence of the six million dollar man TV series. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifting_body#List_of_Armstrong_Flight_Research_Center_lifting_body_vehicles_(1963_to_1975) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifting_body#List_of_Armstrong...
- smacktoward 7y ago
- rezeroed 7y agoWhy does the vehicle look rusty? And what the the duct tape looking stuff on the wing leading edge?
- dexen 7y agoThe vehicle in the photo has clearly been processed, and is ready for handling or shipping. Not sure if the photo is after-flight or perhaps before. >rusty The "rusty" parts look like crevices between protective tiles being sealed with kapton tape[1] - general protective material that handles well extreme environment, and is often used in consumer electronics, especially in places where high temperatures are expected. >duct tape looking stuff on the wing leading edge Looks like temporary protective coating of foam, for safe on the ground handling, to prevent damage to the wing leading edge. If the leading edge is anything similar to Space Shuttle's, it's hollow inside, surprisingly thin, and somewhat brittle. Any cracks or damage would cause risk of overheating during re-entry, thus need for extra protection. -- [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapton https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapton
- ryanmercer 7y agoRalf Vandebergh has some photos of it on his twitter @ralfvandebergh https://twitter.com/ralfvandebergh https://twitter.com/ralfvandebergh He has some good ISS captures too.
- sudoaza 7y agoI dont consider the X-37 experimental anymore, how long has in been flying? It's kinda old news already, cool though.
- ncmncm 7y agoWithout knowing anything about the classified missions of this thing, I can, with complete confidence, say that the program is mismanaged; my guess is the problem is at the very top. The only unique quality of this vehicle is that it can re-enter the atmosphere and then be launched again. Everything it does while in orbit, including grabbing something to bring back, could be done by something else not unique. Yet, they have exercised its unique capability only three times, and the rest of the time kept it to activities that could be better done without it. The alternative is that there really isn't much use for this thing, so they keep it parked in orbit between uses.