The X-37B orbital mission in 2008

[j05h]

<i>>> "What's the USAF without wings?"<br /> /> What is it without air?</i><br /><br />USASF = US AeroSpace Force<br /><br />The Russians have a separate Strategic Rocket Corp, so it is not without precedent. Fly High, fly really high.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[PistolPete]

Don't forget about the Air Force Space Command <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><em>So, again we are defeated. This victory belongs to the farmers, not us.</em></p><p><strong>-Kambei Shimada from the movie Seven Samurai</strong></p> </div>

 

[hk8900]

please, don't say NASA is bad<br />NASA is doing very well on robotic explorations<br />many people are excited at the moment of pathfinder/spirit/opportunity touch down on Mars and Huygens touch down on Titan<br />Although I think Orion is not a good idea too<br />So, NASA should do the pioneering exploration instead of something like LEO missions

 

[holmec]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>What is it without air?<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />"High as a kite" <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /><br /> Step into an altitude chamber and you'll know what I mean. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

<font color="yellow">"please, don't say NASA is bad<br />NASA is doing very well on robotic explorations..."</font><br /><br />Quite right. To all the NASA bashers who think the private sector<br />will get right what NASA is too stupid to do, I say GREAT! I'm all for <br />cutting NASA's manned space program and putting the whole<br />budget into unmanned space exploration. Then we can all sit <br />back and wait for private industry to roll out the spaceplanes<br />and orbiting hotels. In the meantime... where's my flying car? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[wubblie]

Interesting... . USAF says that that the x-37B will launch in 2008, but it is not scheduled for the Delta or Atlas... . <br />Possible captive carry launch from SR-72 or Aurora ?<br /><br />

 

[j05h]

<i>> Interesting... . USAF says that that the x-37B will launch in 2008, but it is not scheduled for the Delta or Atlas... .<br />Possible captive carry launch from SR-72 or Aurora ? </i><br /><br />My guess is that X-37 flight is one of the "government payloads" SpaceX has mentioned (DoD is a customer), but I'm not sure where it would fit for a 2008 flight since it's not on their manifest. Maybe, maybe on the Falcon 9 demo, but that seems unlikely.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[PistolPete]

It could also be listed under another name for operational security reasons.<br /><br />There are several NRO flights from Vandenberg this year and a few flying from the Cape including the AEHF 1 launch this November that could be covers for an X-37B launch. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><em>So, again we are defeated. This victory belongs to the farmers, not us.</em></p><p><strong>-Kambei Shimada from the movie Seven Samurai</strong></p> </div>

 

[grdja]

Oh please, how can anyone believe Aurora exists? How long did it take for F117 and B2 to become public knowledge. I know NRO people might have head problems and are insanely paranoid... (China and Russia would have known about such aircraft for ages, only ones from whom it could be hidden are American taxpayers) <br /><br />But please, say it with me: "Aurora doesn't exist!"<br /><br />I'm not saying that dozens of different prototypes and concept studies arnt being flown from Area51.

 

[wubblie]

Perhaps, but I find it hard to believe that the USAF placed all its eggs in the Stealth basket. The Russians could develop a radar tomorrow (and may have already) that would make stealth worthless. Speed, however, is always effective. I read somewhere that something like 4,000 SAMS had been fired at the SR-71 during its lifetime, no hits. Even the Yugoslavians could shoot down an F117A. Stealth could be compromised, speed cannot, so I find it hard to believe that the USAF would completely give up it, and the first strike capability and invulnerability that speed offers.

 

[PistolPete]

Well, there's a lot more to that story than The Serbs <i>racist epithet deleted</i> shooting down the best that American technology had to offer with the Stealth Fighter with a bunch of obsolete Soviet-era SAMs. There were a lot of mitigating factors, especially on the USAF side, that led to the F-117 shoot down. Long story short, the reason for the shoot down was due to complacency and not with the actual stealth technology. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><em>So, again we are defeated. This victory belongs to the farmers, not us.</em></p><p><strong>-Kambei Shimada from the movie Seven Samurai</strong></p> </div>

 

[PistolPete]

Actually FY 2008 began at the beginning of October 2007 and will end in October 2008 <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><em>So, again we are defeated. This victory belongs to the farmers, not us.</em></p><p><strong>-Kambei Shimada from the movie Seven Samurai</strong></p> </div>