Shuttle as bomber

[tomnackid]

I first came across this in a Stephen Baxter novel and since he is an engineer and was involved in the space program (he applied for a guest post on Mir) and has done extensive research about NASA history and culture I didn't dismiss it out of hand.<br /><br />A character in one book (it might have been "Titan") mentions that Air Force astronauts trained for using the Shuttle to do bombing runs over the USSR. Can any of you shuttle experts or insiders confirm or deny this? I have attempted to research it but haven't come across any information about the shuttle being used as a weapons platform. The most aggressive thing it would do (at least stated openly) would be capture Soviet satellites during a conflict. I guess since the shuttle is fully orbital (unlike an ICBM) carrying weapons would be a violation of treaties. Still, since the original mission for DyanaSoar was to carry nuclear bombs and as far as the Air Force was concerned the shuttle was the "son of DynaSoar on steroids" I would imagine that they would at least explore the idea.<br /><br />Maybe this is one of those "I could tell you but then I'ld have to kill you." situations! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[vogon13]

Soviets spent money on a craft with the capability to shoot at the shuttle. Project canceled after Challenger accident. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>

 

[nexium]

Because of the 17,000 miles per hour speed of the shuttle, a bomb would need to be dropped plus or minus about one millisecond for reasonable accuracy. Pushing the bomb out the air lock may be so inaccurate the bomb would hit the wrong country. My guess is the astronaughts were not trained to drop bombs. Neil

 

[tomnackid]

I didn't think they would be "pushing the bomb out the air lock"! (Visions of WWI fighter pilots tossing grenades and hand thrown bombs from their planes!)<br /><br />Dynasoar was originally conceived to deliver (is that putting it better than "drop"?) bombs. I assume some kind of maneuverable reentry vehicle or multiple vehicles containing the weapons would be released from the payload bay.

 

[liquidspace2k]

For the time it seems like we win wars now, well the last two was only a month or two long for the major combat. You would only be able to lauch 1 or 2 shuttle for the war. The shuttle would be basically useless for war, cause it doesnt launch freguent enough. Plus it would cost way way too much in peace time to keep it in good enough shape to keep it flying in case of a war.

 

[drwayne]

In the spirit that was the "gamesmanship" of the cold war, there are occasions in which one attempts to convince an adversary that you are going to do thing "X", which requires them to spend time and money and resources to defend for it, even if you really never were going to do "X", or even had the capability to do "X".<br /><br />I suspect this is the case with the "Shuttle as a Bomber" scenario. <br /><br />Dynasour was a concept from another time, of different capabilities and limitations.<br /><br />Wayne<br /><br />p.s. The Russians had fun with us in this "game", as we already tended to give their systems credit for more capability that they actually had, both for reasons of semi-legitimate fear and budgets... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[spacefire]

what could the Shuttle do that am ICBM couldn't? I guess it could stay in orbit for a week or so, untouchable, provided it launched before the US became a radioactive wasteland.<br />The astronauts could then drop warheads at will.<br />Like the previous poster said, the concept was probably enough to scare the Soviets. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[drwayne]

"The astronauts could then drop warheads at will."<br /><br />Keep two things in mind <br /><br />(1) Warheads are in fact quite heavy, so you would not be carrying that many of them.<br /><br />(2) You would not "drop" them per se, you would deploy them, and they would deorbit themselves.<br /><br />The only advantage I can see is that you could do your deployment somewhere where the "enemy" can not observe it. If your warhead is stealthy, then an attack can be a "bolt from the blue". That is stretching things quite a little bit though...<br /><br />Wayne<br /><br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[chriscdc]

The shuttle however is not difficult to track. The russians may not be able to hit it but they could detonate a nuke near it and fry the astronauts and electronics.<br />

 

[igorsboss]

The glide slope of the shuttle resembles that of a bomb more than it does a bomber.

 

[paleo]

Why would the Americans drop a bomb on the USSR via the Shuttle only to be turned to crispy critters by Soviet ICBMs within hours?

 

[drwayne]

My only speculation in that area was posted earlier. If used with a stealthy RV, it might be possible to place the warhead (or warheads) on target without them being tracked.<br /><br />This is probably highly unlikely to be sure....<br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[ronatu]

Why would the Russians prepare their Burans to drop a bombs on the command centers of USA?<br />Because military guys have their own logik... <br /><br />

 

[spacefire]

is that the Lifting Body version of the Buran? <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[ronatu]

Yes.

 

[spacefire]

that was a joke. that thing cannot be used for re-entry since it has no control surfaces whatsoever. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[nacnud]

Where did you find that fantasy?

 

[tomnackid]

Check this out: http://www.astronautix.com/craft/mtkva.htm<br /><br />A large lifting body was the Soviet engineers first choice for the Russian version of th US Shuttle. It would have used a RCS for manuvering and parachutes and retro rockets for the final landing. The Soviet powers that be decided it was too risky and decreed that the designers go with the already proven double delta wing design of the American shuttle.

 

[nacnud]

Yeah I've seen that but thanks anyway, I really like the idea sorta a fully reuseable shuttle c <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[ronatu]

Ye, I have my own doubts too...<br /><br />BUT: this picture was taken from OFFICIAL web site<br />www.buran.ru and did represent luckely not materialized response on SDI.<br /><br />Each Buran type body has inside typical military payload - small manevreable in air sets of Nuclear bombs...

 

[spacefire]

I have to say I have a huge crush on the Spiral system.<br /><br />oh and check this out:<br />http://www.buran.ru/htm/spiral.htm<br /><br />I can't find an English version of this page. Gonna try babelfish.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[ronatu]

http://www.buran.ru/htm/molniya.htm<br /><br /><br />Be happy and live longer...

 

[spacefire]

thanks <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>