It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

X-37B Space Plane will fly on the SpaceX Falcon9 in August

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2017 @ 10:21 PM
link   
Apparently, SecAF Heather Wilson testified before Senate that the X-37B will return to space in August. The plot twist is that the launch will be aboard the SpaceX Falcon9 rocket rather than the ULA Atlas V as had the previous four missions. This will be a significant savings, potentially as much as $50 million. It's not a bad decision, if SpaceX can keep the launch on time: they've had serious, serious slips for their commercial launches.

Are we taking bets on how long this one will stay up?

www.cnbc.com...

spacenews.com...

breakingdefense.com...
edit on 6-6-2017 by anzha because: forgot a link




posted on Jun, 6 2017 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Isn't time money? At least they're trying, when was the last time NASA did their job? 35 years ago?



posted on Jun, 6 2017 @ 10:50 PM
link   
a reply to: lordcomac

When NASA had actual funding.



posted on Jun, 6 2017 @ 11:37 PM
link   
Huh, they moved it up. They were originally aiming for October or November.

790 days.
edit on 6/6/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 12:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

And on an Atlas, I thought.

Something's changed.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 12:31 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Moving it up put them in a bind. They don't keep an Atlas handy, and usually receive them a couple months prior to their launch date. They're already at the back end of that window with an August launch date. They may have had a problem with the rocket, and SpaceX had a window open.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 02:58 AM
link   
Oooohhh this could be entertaining..



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 08:21 AM
link   
a reply to: BlackfingerI reckon the so called UFO is little more than an insect whizzing past the lens. Or it could be a weapon deployed by the X-37B in an earlier mission?




posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 08:25 AM
link   
How much does the x-37b cost?

NASA...





posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 09:30 AM
link   
They'll be testing the Advanced Structurally Embedded Thermal Spreader on this mission.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

If it was just a mission for testing, they wouldn't move it up like that and switch launch vehicles.

And SpaceX does NOT have spare vehicles. They are now in a multiyear backlog with sats sitting on the ground waiting for their ride. SpaceX announced a significant slip in all their payload launches other than government this past couple months, too.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Spare as in a window they could fit them into. Something may have been delayed. They also need to certify other launch vehicles for the X-37.

We don't know why they moved it up. They may have decided to see how fast they could turn it around, or they may have decided to see if they could use another vehicle for launch. For all we know they were in negotiations with SpaceX all along, and sm were told that the only way they could use a Falcon was to go earlier than planned. There could be almost any number of reasons.
edit on 6/7/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

so an private space agency lauching military sats?
when elon musk did that for the first time earlier this year,i lost all respect i still had for him



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: humanoidlord

A private space agency won't exist without customers. NASA and other agencies only have a limited number of launches a year. If they want to expand into other areas, they need to make money.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

wrong!
a true private space agency,doesnt have an nation attached to it,so they dont help GOV agencies
otherwise they become another NAssA



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: humanoidlord

And they wouldn't exist longer than a year or two. You can't survive on 4 or 5 launches a year.

They're in absolutely no danger of becoming another NASA. They can't become another NASA if they aren't getting a federal budget, which they aren't. You can say that they're not truly private all you want, or be as idealistic as you want, but without government contracts SpaceX would have disappeared years ago.



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 03:46 AM
link   
a reply to: humanoidlord
So by your reasoning a private bus company that gets a major contract and or subsidy from a Government department that has partly or fully privatised its bus services is not really a private company because it has a Government contract? Hmmm interesting logic.



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 04:23 AM
link   


Advanced Structurally Embedded Thermal Spreader

Chips,Reentry structures or something else?



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 06:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger
Something to do with oscillating tubes I believe. Not sure how that works, but I seem to remember hearing of it before somewhere.



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

Oscillating tubes that use the heat pressure to circulate the water through them.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join