Wiki says it had a 23mm cannon so it must be trueRAIMIUS wrote:
The AF has wanted this capability for a LONG time. The Shuttle was supposed to be a joint NASA/USAF platform, but the operating costs and schedules did away with the real feasibility of that plan. If everything works, it looks like this will allow placement, repair, and retrieval of satellites.
To address some previous posts: nothing was mentioned about armament, and there is no visible indication of any weapons.
The Soviet Salyut/Almaz may have had a 23mm cannon, but I haven't seen any conclusive proof (in my limited readings).
Payload found?DBBrinson1 wrote:
They made Attack Drones... Holy crap, imagine the tactical capability. Have a few in orbit...
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
Rumsfeld wanted to take the nukes out of a few Trident missiles and use them for time sensitive strikes, scrapped cause it raised the risks of nuclear war :rollseyes:DBBrinson1 wrote:
Payload found?DBBrinson1 wrote:
They made Attack Drones... Holy crap, imagine the tactical capability. Have a few in orbit...
I think the Space Shuttleski (for lack of a better name) had the ability to carry a nuke.Noobpatty wrote:
is this the first time weaponry was put on a spacecraft?
Placing nukes in Orbit would violate the 1967 Outer Space Treaty (which the US signed).
I doubt that is what the AF is trying to do. It would be extremely risky.
Right now, without a weaponized space, the US is the leading power. If we suddenly weaponize it, out assets would be put at risk.
I doubt that is what the AF is trying to do. It would be extremely risky.
Right now, without a weaponized space, the US is the leading power. If we suddenly weaponize it, out assets would be put at risk.
It's not about nukes.
imo this is a serious topic.
Read some from the link above. I state the context you should about it in is: there has not been a major global conflict since WW2 because of MAD.
The U.S. is on a push to de-nuclearize war, and that will lead us once again to a global conflict.
These people are not stuck on stupid, this is what they want.
imo this is a serious topic.
Read some from the link above. I state the context you should about it in is: there has not been a major global conflict since WW2 because of MAD.
The U.S. is on a push to de-nuclearize war, and that will lead us once again to a global conflict.
These people are not stuck on stupid, this is what they want.
Imagine a few of these floating around space, and somebody decides to fuck around, the guys come into Earth's atmosphere and BAM a few AIM-120s up their ass or some MOABs or something.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
what-Sh1fty- wrote:
Imagine a few of these floating around space, and somebody decides to fuck around, the guys come into Earth's atmosphere and BAM a few AIM-120s up their ass or some MOABs or something.
Saying this could be a satellite that just follows Earth's orbit and whenever there's a war or something, just come down from space and fuck some stuff up. It's the ultimate fast response vehicle.phishsux wrote:
what-Sh1fty- wrote:
Imagine a few of these floating around space, and somebody decides to fuck around, the guys come into Earth's atmosphere and BAM a few AIM-120s up their ass or some MOABs or something.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
It doesn't look like a hypersonic aircraft. Based one the shape, it would perform horribly in a high-speed atmospheric environment. (I'm not up on the dynamics of atmospheric skimming/skipping, but it doesn't look like designs based on that either.)
It looks like exactly what they say it is: a military shuttle. Take payloads up, possibly perform repairs, and take payloads back to the US.
It looks like exactly what they say it is: a military shuttle. Take payloads up, possibly perform repairs, and take payloads back to the US.
I was thinking it could just glide straight to an intercept path, let go the missiles and bombs and then come home. Doesn't need to "Perform" really.
Am I dreaming here or is that somewhat plausible?
Basically, imagine a few of those always orbiting, engines cut and everything. Then somebody starts an attack or something; just start the engines, go drop a MOAB or shoot down some Chinese fighters and come home, or escape to space.
Am I dreaming here or is that somewhat plausible?
Basically, imagine a few of those always orbiting, engines cut and everything. Then somebody starts an attack or something; just start the engines, go drop a MOAB or shoot down some Chinese fighters and come home, or escape to space.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
Orbital mechanics and atmopheric heating would argue against that.
It takes a LOT of fuel to get back into orbit.
It takes some incredible heat resistance to fly hypersonic without melting.
The shape and size of this craft means its mission will roughly reflect what the shuttle is capable of.
It takes a LOT of fuel to get back into orbit.
It takes some incredible heat resistance to fly hypersonic without melting.
The shape and size of this craft means its mission will roughly reflect what the shuttle is capable of.
You are dreaming..-Sh1fty- wrote:
I was thinking it could just glide straight to an intercept path, let go the missiles and bombs and then come home. Doesn't need to "Perform" really.
Am I dreaming here or is that somewhat plausible?
Basically, imagine a few of those always orbiting, engines cut and everything. Then somebody starts an attack or something; just start the engines, go drop a MOAB or shoot down some Chinese fighters and come home, or escape to space.
I like this whole idea. I want to see more space debris so we can never get out of our tiny planet. It would be awesome to be stuck here and have shit-ton of brand new weapons to play with.
You make it sound like it's as easy as driving a car. You make Chinese sound like they would do nothing.-Sh1fty- wrote:
Basically, imagine a few of those always orbiting, engines cut and everything. Then somebody starts an attack or something; just start the engines, go drop a MOAB or shoot down some Chinese fighters and come home, or escape to space.
They clearly wouldn't. Their technology consists of a few WWII planes and tin cans on strings.BLdw wrote:
I like this whole idea. I want to see more space debris so we can never get out of our tiny planet. It would be awesome to be stuck here and have shit-ton of brand new weapons to play with.You make it sound like it's as easy as driving a car. You make Chinese sound like they would do nothing.-Sh1fty- wrote:
Basically, imagine a few of those always orbiting, engines cut and everything. Then somebody starts an attack or something; just start the engines, go drop a MOAB or shoot down some Chinese fighters and come home, or escape to space.
That said, it was pretty funny that they shot down a satellite by just putting a whole lot of crap in its way instead of trying to blow it up (therefore creating space litter, but oh well).
Do you know what kind of missile they used to shoot that satellite?some_random_panda wrote:
That said, it was pretty funny that they shot down a satellite by just putting a whole lot of crap in its way instead of trying to blow it up (therefore creating space litter, but oh well).
There's more than satellite to target.some_random_panda wrote:
They clearly wouldn't.
Not sure, but they just loaded up some relatively-low tech missile with shrapnel.BLdw wrote:
Do you know what kind of missile they used to shoot that satellite?some_random_panda wrote:
That said, it was pretty funny that they shot down a satellite by just putting a whole lot of crap in its way instead of trying to blow it up (therefore creating space litter, but oh well).
Sarcasm detector's battery is low there.BLdw wrote:
There's more than satellite to target.some_random_panda wrote:
They clearly wouldn't.
Last edited by some_random_panda (2010-04-26 05:11:34)
I don't like the idea of being dropped on China from spaceRDMC wrote:
You are dreaming..-Sh1fty- wrote:
I was thinking it could just glide straight to an intercept path, let go the missiles and bombs and then come home. Doesn't need to "Perform" really.
Am I dreaming here or is that somewhat plausible?
Basically, imagine a few of those always orbiting, engines cut and everything. Then somebody starts an attack or something; just start the engines, go drop a MOAB or shoot down some Chinese fighters and come home, or escape to space.
It can be argued how low tech it actually was. At the moment there are easier ways to blow up satellites than with non-explosive missiles. Non-explosive missiles tend to rely on precision.some_random_panda wrote:
Not sure, but they just loaded up some relatively-low tech missile with shrapnel.BLdw wrote:
Do you know what kind of missile they used to shoot that satellite?some_random_panda wrote:
That said, it was pretty funny that they shot down a satellite by just putting a whole lot of crap in its way instead of trying to blow it up (therefore creating space litter, but oh well).
I'm, uhh... out of money to buy new batteries.some_random_panda wrote:
Sarcasm detector's battery is low there.
Last edited by BLdw (2010-04-26 05:40:18)
Say like maybe a fully fueled Atlas V? I seriously doubt the X-37B will be able to re-enter orbit without it. NASA also makes it a point to launch rockets from certain parts of the Globe. The closer to the equator the better when it comes to heavy lifting.RAIMIUS wrote:
Orbital mechanics and atmopheric heating would argue against that.
It takes a LOT of fuel to get back into orbit.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
F15?BLdw wrote:
It can be argued how low tech it actually was. At the moment there are easier ways to blow up satellites than with non-explosive missiles. Non-explosive missiles tend to rely on precision.some_random_panda wrote:
Not sure, but they just loaded up some relatively-low tech missile with shrapnel.BLdw wrote:
Do you know what kind of missile they used to shoot that satellite?
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
That's great and all, but consider the cost of creating them, launching them, protecting them, maintaining them, arming them, monitoring them, fueling them, for years on end. Considering the budget of NASA was 16.5 billion, and the average US defense budget has been hovering somewhere around 90 billion. I think i can find a few ways my tax dollars could be better spent than a space born attack aircraft.-Sh1fty- wrote:
I was thinking it could just glide straight to an intercept path, let go the missiles and bombs and then come home. Doesn't need to "Perform" really.
Am I dreaming here or is that somewhat plausible?
Basically, imagine a few of those always orbiting, engines cut and everything. Then somebody starts an attack or something; just start the engines, go drop a MOAB or shoot down some Chinese fighters and come home, or escape to space.
- Superior Mind
- (not macbeth)
- +1,755|6967
Interesting article.ATG wrote:
It's not about nukes.
imo this is a serious topic.
Read some from the link above. I state the context you should about it in is: there has not been a major global conflict since WW2 because of MAD.
The U.S. is on a push to de-nuclearize war, and that will lead us once again to a global conflict.
These people are not stuck on stupid, this is what they want.
That bit caught my eye in particular.the article wrote:
US analysts have also warned of the risk that Chinese or Russian monitors might mistake a hypersonic launch for nuclear attack. “The short flight time ... leaves very little time for an assessment of the situation, putting an enormous strain on national decision-making mechanisms and increasing the probability of an accident,” argued Pavel Podvig of Stanford University.
Last edited by Superior Mind (2010-04-26 22:36:57)
Sober enough to know what I'm doing, drunk enough to really enjoy doing it
back to the drawing board
Tu Stultus Es
Don't think so. Its the Boeing X-37 we're talking about. The one in the article is built by Lockheed.King_County_Downy wrote:
This isn't the same thing, is it?