The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

Mystery X-37B robot spaceplane returns to orbit on Tuesday

Second flight for small, secretive 'space warplane'

Cloud based data management

The United States Air Force will mount the third mission into space by its small space-shuttle lookalikes, the X-37Bs (once memorably dubbed "secret space warplanes" by the Iranian government) on Tuesday if all goes to plan.

The third Orbital Test Vehicle mission, aka OTV-3, will see the same X-37B which flew the inaugural OTV mission take off from Cape Canaveral, Florida, just after 1pm EST, contractor United Launch Alliance announced.

The X-37Bs are prototype space planes that, in the vague words of the American military, supports "space experimentation". It is understood the goals of the X-37B project include aiding the development of reusable spacecraft and to test new technologies for long-duration space flight.

What distinguishes a space plane from other spacecraft is its ability to return to Earth and land on a runway. The wings, wheels and propulsion kit needed to successfully touch down in such a way make the planes significantly heavier, more expensive and harder to control than other types of craft, which either don't return in useable condition or drop in by parachute.

A rendering of the X-37B plane

The Air Force keeps the details of the space planes strictly classified, meaning that there has been no public justification of these expensive experiments, and the life and times of the X-37B planes remain something of a mystery.

The second super-secret space shuttle OTV2 returned to Earth in June after 469 days in space.

It was rumoured to be hovering over China quietly slurping in wireless data as well as other wild speculation about its possible purpose. It's likely we won't hear many more hard facts about the third plane either.

In general we here on the Reg space desk consider that the X-37B is really more or less what the US Air Force say it is - a platform for trying out new secret technologies in space quickly without the expense and delay of building a dedicated satellite, and without the downsides of capsule parachute landings which naturally would tend to involve some risk of one's top-secret spysat tech being recovered by someone else.

However the craft's shuttle-like wings do suggest that it could potentially be used for more interesting missions, which we have analysed previously here. ®

SaaS data loss: The problem you didn’t know you had

X-37 - Prototype weapons platform?

What can you do with this? Launch satellites? Yes, but it's easier and simpler to use a rocket rather than a mini-spaceplane on top of a rocket.

Do general research? Yes, but it's easier and simpler to do it without a spaceplane, just throw up a capsule (Dragon, CST-100, Orion etc) and do it there.

To me, the X-37 is built for Space Control (Defensive or Offensive). Refuelling/repairing satellites? A Dragon capsule can do that and probably cheaper too.

Carrying an anti-satellite weapon? Yes, it's capable of doing that.

But wait, wouldn't it need to be able to significantly change its orbit for a mission like that? Why yes, and it's supposed to be able to do that - a delta-V capacity of 3.1km/sec was an early mission requirement.

Weaponising space - the last thing we want to do in the last place we want to do it.

2
0

Re: The Black Budget

I think you may have misread my post. I said they like being in the craft they're piloting. Whether they resist the move to UAVs or not, it is likely that drones will become the de-facto aerial weapon. They're cheaper to build and their operators are cheaper to train.

I was reasoning that the only place 'real' pilots could maintain their 'highly trained, high-kudos jobs' was on other planets because the time delay makes flying drones remotely from Earth an impossibility. Now that I've thought about it a bit more though, it'd probably be easier to place a command centre on another planet (or possibly in orbit) and use UAVs for the exploration.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Hovering over China?

Wrong

Geosynchronous is an orbital period of 24 hours.

Geostationary is geosynchronous with a circular orbit and an inclination of 0 degrees (i.e. aligned to the equator)

1
0

More from The Register

New material enables 1,000-meter super-skyscrapers
Before you read on, see if you can guess how the new stuff will be used
Boffins build headless robo-kitties
Soft kitty, warm kitty, cuddly little ball of wire kitty
 breaking news
Latest NASA ASTRONAUT class is HALF FEMALE
Newbie 'nauts include lady Marine fighter pilot, male doctor
 breaking news
You've seen the Large Hadron Collider. Now comes the HUGE Hadron Collider
International Linear Collider ready to rock and roll
Boffins find evidence Atlantic Ocean has started closing
'Embryonic subduction zone' that flattened Lisbon headed for Blighty
Google launches broadband balloons, radio astronomy frets
A careless Loon could blind the square kilometre array
Hubble spies unlikely planet being born in hostile neighborhood
Hoovering a cloud of sand 7.5 billion miles from a tiny star
 breaking news
Jaguar to open new car-making factory in Blighty (virtually)
Britain still makes stuff, it's just not real any more...
 breaking news
Spin doctors brazenly fiddle with tiny bits in front of the neighbours
Quantum computer address bus just nanometres wide
 breaking news
China's second woman 'naut blasts off for coupling in HEAVEN
Wang and pals test the cosmic waters for Chinese space station