Secret space plane lands at US air force base after unknown two-year mission

a reply to: Zaphod58

Then by your definition space has been weaponised from the start, since the US has been launching military satellites since 1959, and the Soviets started in 1962 (first recorded military satellites).

Yes I think you are right. It depends on what the definition of weaponizing space is. Star Wars was supposed to be a way to defend against Soviet military might. I guess officially it's "putting weapons of mass destruction in space".

Interesting web site on defining weaponizing of space

ndupress.ndu.edu...

So in light of that as an International definition, I wonder what exactly our President was referring to when he said that. Was he inferring that the US military was planning to do that?
And then there's this www.33-minutes.com...

What is President Obama's view regarding unproven missile defense systems and will he deploy any missile defense systems to protect America? On one hand he has said, "I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space." On the other, he has said, "If we can responsibly deploy missile defenses that would protect us and our allies, we should - but only when the system works."

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

The US has only had the SM-3 as an anti satellite system since the Air Force system was canceled in the early 80s after two successful tests (the system used an F-15 Eagle as the first stage of the missile).

With several new ASAT systems being demonstrated, including a ground based laser, there was talk about satellites that would detonate near communications or recon satellites to destroy them, or satellites that were shells for small missiles or bombs that could launch on other sattelites.

I have not yet seen anyone mention the possibility that one mission of the X37B might be as an orbital "factory", maufacuring high-value material (or even meta-materials) that require a hard vacuum and/or low/zero gravity conditions to produce, and which might be crucial to certain "black" programs.

Anyone remember the "Getaway Special (G.A.S.)" canisters NASA once promoted for the STS/Shuttle?

Would this not explain the B's cargo carrying ability, long-duration orbit capability, and of course its returnabilty and re-usability. Not to mention those solar panels it can deploy.

a reply to: Swills

They were obviously flying around Ur-anus searching for Clingons...

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: AllIsOne

There is a really long mathematical formula, one of those that's all weird symbols and letters.

It turns out that if you leave the symbols and take the letters out, they spell "Throw something fast enough and it will fly".

Thanks for clearing that up. You are a great help.

My guess would be bio or weapons testing. Why else would a bunch guys in hazard suits be going over it with what looks like a geiger counter in their hands.

originally posted by: sean
My guess would be bio or weapons testing. Why else would a bunch guys in hazard suits be going over it with what looks like a geiger counter in their hands.

You do realise that space craft are radioactive right? The hazard goes up significantly the longer they are in space.

a reply to: auroraaus

Not necessarily. Contamination and exposure are two different things. These guys are dressed like they are heading into Fukashima.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Swills

Among other things, they're learning what they can and can't do with an RV. Eventually there will be bases on Mars and beyond. If they can use RVs to resupply it saves money and manpower. That's why each mission has gotten longer.

And while they're there anyway, it's the perfect platform for developing technology.

If there aren't bases there already according to the interviews with Randy Craymer or w.e his name is
Who knows right? Perhaps some on this website

a reply to: sean

It uses Hydrazine fuel. That stuff is nasty as hell. It's used on the F-16 as an emergency power unit fuel, and when that happens it's a major exercise in annoyance. The aircraft can't be closer than 400 feet to any other aircraft, and has to be vented for four hours, and requires personal protection gear to service. The X-37 is still venting when they're around it, so they require more protection.

a reply to: Zaphod58

You should know better than bring facts and common sense onto ATS

a reply to: AllIsOne

The F-104 is another great example. Tiny little T-Rex wings, huge engine. There were stories that the top speed listed in the book was only because if it went too much faster the fuselage came apart from the heat it generated.

a reply to: crazyewok

I know. It just slipped out.

Was it always in orbit or was it tracked leaving orbit?

If DARPA has anything to do with it then you'll know if it good for them then it's bad for us.

There's no use throwing out theories. Let's just wait and see if any info comes our way!

a reply to: Tedgoat

Id honestly take note of what Zaphod said, there's no super sinister conspiracy. The mission was just a test bed for the development of some important future technologies. There are a number of things you can do in space you cant do on earth in the manufacture of certain important materials ect

a reply to: crazyewok

Probably and Possibly. But in light of events in the last 20 years or so you can see my scepticism in these 'Covert' missions. They don't spend all that money just to study something that will be good for the people of Earth. No. They spend loads of money just like they do on Earth for KILLING people!

This mission was probably Military and not civilian. Any technological advances they do find will be for bigger and deadlier Weapon Systems!

Sorry to be negative but I do not believe they spend millions on what is good for the planet!

a reply to: Tedgoat

There are hundreds of things we take for granted every day that came from the military. It's a trickle down process. Just because the military develops it doesn't automatically mean that it's a weapon. There's a lot that has nothing to do with weapons.

Such as?

a reply to: Tedgoat

GPS, the internet, antibiotics, aircraft navigation aids, telescopes, meteorological aids, a few dozen aviation and vehicular advancements, rockets, camera advances, computer advances...

Some of the best devices we have were developed for the military to begin with.

Velcro and nuclear power were military projects that found its way to the civvie side.