5 ms·

I'm so curious what is causing this to launch on a Falcon Heavy! Previous launches of the X-37B have been on a Falcon 9 with an RTLS landing, and now this one

I'm so curious what is causing this to launch on a Falcon Heavy! Previous launches of the X-37B have been on a Falcon 9 with an RTLS landing, and now this one is using one of the largest launchers there is. What is it doing with all that delta-v!?

DylanSp 3y ago
I'm curious how much delta-v there X-37B itself has; the Heavy can definitely get it to GEO, but can it get itself back down from there?
grecy 3y ago
Over on /r/spaceX everyone assumes it's going into a might higher orbit so they can eventually test re-entry with a lot more energy. It seems the only logical answer... unless for some reason it's really heavy this time.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- ImaCake 3y ago
  Does that imply nuclear weapons? It's not obvious to me if a payload of nuclear warheads would be that heavy to justify the delta-V though.
  - jauntywundrkind 3y ago
    Orbital kinetic impactor weapons - a quiver of giant heavy rocks - would be an extremely valid reason for a extra spectacularly big launch. I'm not sure why x37b would be the ship for it, other than that it's proven technology with good manuverability. Feels like most any old satellite full of rocks could do though. Ran into this next bug future article talking about what a ridiculous death-weapon Starship could be. https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2023/11/future-us-hypersonic-bomber-is-hiding-in-plain-sight.html https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2023/11/future-us-hypersonic-b...
  - vardump 3y ago
    No.
  - tekla 3y ago
    Why would you bother to send a nuke to high orbit?
    - dylan604 3y ago
      it's the only way to be sure.
  - meepmorp 3y ago
    We already have a way of delivering nuclear warheads from space - they're called ICBMs. What would a space plane add that existing launch platforms don't already provide?
    - dylan604 3y ago
      about 2 minutes (or less) of launch detection/warning vs 30?
      - meepmorp 3y ago
        We also have SLBMs that can be launched directly off coast of a target. And, tossing nukes at enemies isn't going to go unnoticed and that thing doesn't have nearly the capacity to make for a sufficiently large first strike to prevent retaliation. I guess it's possible, but (imo) it doesn't really make much sense.
        dylan604 3y ago
        That thing is essentially in beta/prototype. What happens when there's multiples of that thing? Is the time from a weapon being released to impact enough time to verify and take action?
        jamiek88 3y ago
        I think if it is something to do with our deterrence it’s more likely to be testing an anti ICBM weapon than carrying a warhead. The US stopped talking about missile defense because it’s destabilizing but they for sure did not stop working on it. With the MIRV warheads the only realistic intercept opportunity is in space.
        dylan604 3y ago
        I've played Missle Command, and once they separate, it's a nightmare! If there was a space based defense system, where would these items orbit? If it's a kinetic weapon, can something launched from geosync reach the target to cover the distance in time? Since most of the ICBMs would be coming over the pole, where else could you park your satellites that would be in position to defend against incoming missiles? Polar orbits are not stationary, so would you need a constant fleet of them over head like a Starlink constellation? Lost of questions that I've just never really slowed down to think about the logistics instead of just the old school "lasers are cool! pew pew pew!" that I thought about as kid when Ronnie Raygun was in office.
T-A 3y ago
The boring answer would be that it's just sharing the ride with a bunch of other satellites, as it did on the last three occasions. The fun answer would be that it's going way further than ever before. A Falcon Heavy can take 25 metric tons to GEO, and the X-37B is roughly 1/5 of that, so think a lot higher. What is there of interest to the US Space Force beyond GEO? Well... https://spaceforcejournal.org/3859-2/ https://spaceforcejournal.org/3859-2/ https://spacenews.com/space-force-studying-requirements-for-cislunar-space-domain-awareness/ https://spacenews.com/space-force-studying-requirements-for-... https://breakingdefense.com/2022/11/critically-important-new-white-house-strategy-for-cislunar-research-echoes-space-force/ https://breakingdefense.com/2022/11/critically-important-new... Edit: Falcon Heavy, not 9. Thanks, asadotzler.
- lamontcg 3y ago
  Yeah as others have pointed out, it probably wouldn't be possible to hide a TLI mission, so they'd probably be upfront about the mission instead, but this is fun enough science-fiction to think about that it is my headcanon now.
- ls612 3y ago
  Falcon heavy can't even take that much to GEO, only to GTO. But still, while it could have the fuel to send the X-37B into TLI it would not be possible to hide this. So they wouldn't lie about it.
  - T-A 3y ago
    Who says they are lying about it? From the article: So far, Space Force has only stated that the mission will "expand the United States Space Force's knowledge of the space environment by experimenting with future space domain awareness technologies," according to the statement.
- asadotzler 3y ago
  An F9 cannot take 25 t to GEO. F9 does just under 23 t to LEO. To GEO it's about 8 t expended or 5 and a half tonnes with a droneship recovery.
Elv13 3y ago
It actually make some sense if their official explanation for the purpose of the vehicle is true. If the main reason for the X-37b is to bring material to orbit and study the long term effect of being in space, then going higher make sense. In an elliptical orbit, you can cross the Van Hallen belt and magnetic fields over and over again. Then after a couple years return those samples to earth for study. This gives you valuable data to build better satellites in the future. For examples, the gyros flywheel on the Hubble and it's sibling spy telescope failed over and over until they realized the radiations caused some arcing in the bearings which degraded them much faster than predicted. When you spend billions on individual satellites, this isn't the kind of thing you want to discover in orbit.
- jamiek88 3y ago
  Yes and some of these satellites cost more than an aircraft carrier. Having the x37 try out new materials and parts etc is a great capability that is obviously needed if the US is to maintain its technical superiority.

DylanSp 3y ago

I'm curious how much delta-v there X-37B itself has; the Heavy can definitely get it to GEO, but can it get itself back down from there?

grecy 3y ago

Over on /r/spaceX everyone assumes it's going into a might higher orbit so they can eventually test re-entry with a lot more energy. It seems the only logical answer... unless for some reason it's really heavy this time.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ImaCake 3y ago
Does that imply nuclear weapons? It's not obvious to me if a payload of nuclear warheads would be that heavy to justify the delta-V though.
- jauntywundrkind 3y ago
  Orbital kinetic impactor weapons - a quiver of giant heavy rocks - would be an extremely valid reason for a extra spectacularly big launch. I'm not sure why x37b would be the ship for it, other than that it's proven technology with good manuverability. Feels like most any old satellite full of rocks could do though. Ran into this next bug future article talking about what a ridiculous death-weapon Starship could be. https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2023/11/future-us-hypersonic-bomber-is-hiding-in-plain-sight.html https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2023/11/future-us-hypersonic-b...
- vardump 3y ago
  No.
- tekla 3y ago
  Why would you bother to send a nuke to high orbit?
  - dylan604 3y ago
    it's the only way to be sure.
- meepmorp 3y ago
  We already have a way of delivering nuclear warheads from space - they're called ICBMs. What would a space plane add that existing launch platforms don't already provide?
  - dylan604 3y ago
    about 2 minutes (or less) of launch detection/warning vs 30?
    - meepmorp 3y ago
      We also have SLBMs that can be launched directly off coast of a target. And, tossing nukes at enemies isn't going to go unnoticed and that thing doesn't have nearly the capacity to make for a sufficiently large first strike to prevent retaliation. I guess it's possible, but (imo) it doesn't really make much sense.
      - dylan604 3y ago
        That thing is essentially in beta/prototype. What happens when there's multiples of that thing? Is the time from a weapon being released to impact enough time to verify and take action?
        jamiek88 3y ago
        I think if it is something to do with our deterrence it’s more likely to be testing an anti ICBM weapon than carrying a warhead. The US stopped talking about missile defense because it’s destabilizing but they for sure did not stop working on it. With the MIRV warheads the only realistic intercept opportunity is in space.
        dylan604 3y ago
        I've played Missle Command, and once they separate, it's a nightmare! If there was a space based defense system, where would these items orbit? If it's a kinetic weapon, can something launched from geosync reach the target to cover the distance in time? Since most of the ICBMs would be coming over the pole, where else could you park your satellites that would be in position to defend against incoming missiles? Polar orbits are not stationary, so would you need a constant fleet of them over head like a Starlink constellation? Lost of questions that I've just never really slowed down to think about the logistics instead of just the old school "lasers are cool! pew pew pew!" that I thought about as kid when Ronnie Raygun was in office.

T-A 3y ago

The boring answer would be that it's just sharing the ride with a bunch of other satellites, as it did on the last three occasions. The fun answer would be that it's going way further than ever before. A Falcon Heavy can take 25 metric tons to GEO, and the X-37B is roughly 1/5 of that, so think a lot higher. What is there of interest to the US Space Force beyond GEO? Well... https://spaceforcejournal.org/3859-2/ https://spaceforcejournal.org/3859-2/ https://spacenews.com/space-force-studying-requirements-for-cislunar-space-domain-awareness/ https://spacenews.com/space-force-studying-requirements-for-... https://breakingdefense.com/2022/11/critically-important-new-white-house-strategy-for-cislunar-research-echoes-space-force/ https://breakingdefense.com/2022/11/critically-important-new... Edit: Falcon Heavy, not 9. Thanks, asadotzler.

lamontcg 3y ago
Yeah as others have pointed out, it probably wouldn't be possible to hide a TLI mission, so they'd probably be upfront about the mission instead, but this is fun enough science-fiction to think about that it is my headcanon now.
ls612 3y ago
Falcon heavy can't even take that much to GEO, only to GTO. But still, while it could have the fuel to send the X-37B into TLI it would not be possible to hide this. So they wouldn't lie about it.
- T-A 3y ago
  Who says they are lying about it? From the article: So far, Space Force has only stated that the mission will "expand the United States Space Force's knowledge of the space environment by experimenting with future space domain awareness technologies," according to the statement.
asadotzler 3y ago
An F9 cannot take 25 t to GEO. F9 does just under 23 t to LEO. To GEO it's about 8 t expended or 5 and a half tonnes with a droneship recovery.

Elv13 3y ago

It actually make some sense if their official explanation for the purpose of the vehicle is true. If the main reason for the X-37b is to bring material to orbit and study the long term effect of being in space, then going higher make sense. In an elliptical orbit, you can cross the Van Hallen belt and magnetic fields over and over again. Then after a couple years return those samples to earth for study. This gives you valuable data to build better satellites in the future. For examples, the gyros flywheel on the Hubble and it's sibling spy telescope failed over and over until they realized the radiations caused some arcing in the bearings which degraded them much faster than predicted. When you spend billions on individual satellites, this isn't the kind of thing you want to discover in orbit.

jamiek88 3y ago
Yes and some of these satellites cost more than an aircraft carrier. Having the x37 try out new materials and parts etc is a great capability that is obviously needed if the US is to maintain its technical superiority.