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.

 

USAF leadership making some curious statements about Space.

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 02:52 PM
link   
they have entire squadron's of aircraft equipped for space I've seen them on a flightline with my own eyes in the military this was over ten years ago

oh also, that was the Navy I can't imagine what the USAF has, I've heard space is their primary directive
edit on 8-2-2019 by toysforadults because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

the secret service does allot more than protect the president, i assure you of that.

take the OST for example. They are incharge of protecting, recovery and transport of nuclear devices and were seen in Needles when that drone crashed.

The secret service is also charged with protecting the President(like you said), you dont think they would use everything in the quiver to ensure his safety?

If the POTUS ever comes to your city that would be a good night to watch the sky.
edit on 8-2-2019 by penroc3 because: for got also



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 02:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: penroc3
If the POTUS ever comes to your city that would be a good night to watch the sky.

Oh, he has in the past, and the whole sky is filled jet contrails that are circular, from low down to way up. Very impressive that we should spend so much time and effort (and money) to protect somebody who is essentially replaceable and temporary to begin with.
edit on 8-2-2019 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

some of the most advanced platforms we have are used for detecting all sorts of nasty things like nuclear bombs and stuff.

if a president were to come to your city they do sweeps and all sorts of arial security.

They might not be flying some of the smaller triangles but they definitely task them with jobs from time to time.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

protecting the POTUS is a deadly serious job, even if he is replaceable the city that he is in, isnt.


Imagine he is in your city and a terrorist(or whoever) decides to take him out with a dirty or nuclear bomb, not only is that bad for the city but for the world, and avoidable.

besides if you can stop the assassination or attempted assassination of a sitting POTUS, they will.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 03:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: penroc3
a reply to: RadioRobert

you could use a rigid body and use a solar cell type skin and high density energy storage with electric propulsion, low noise and low IR signatures, it would be an effective way to stay on station and even help with lift. Heck if you wanted to get fancy you could beam power to it from a microwave transmitter on a satellite that way you would always have power and during the day you could just use the solar cells to charge up batteries for the systems on the ship or weapons.

you could use electrolysis to refill the blimp with hydrogen with the exase power and the only reason you would have to bring it down would be major retrofits.

the drones that it used to fuel the other aircraft would be used to refuel the blimp.

also using the normal air/thermal currents would help with staying high up.

it would still be quite the feat to make it survivable in a serious threat environment.


Rigid body = weight
Ever change your car battery? Weight
Going to carry water to make hydrogen? Weight
Too high to use thermals
Why have this gas station in the sky that needs constant refueling? It's ridiculously inefficient to transport it way up there and back down to use. If you've got the ability to deliver useful capacity from a drone that has the means to reach the mesosphere, you don't need a (relatively) small stash in the air to draw from.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 03:44 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert


water is in the air
rigid body can be the energy storage system and sensors
and im sure it would do more than carry gas at that point, if its up there might as well make it an ISR platform and
if it can refuel some aircraft great.
as far as limited gas supply, the same could be said about the current tankers, its not like they have an unlimited supply of gas.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Bhadhidar

At which point you get into the vicious cycle of less fuel on the mothership, because of the weight of the drone tankers, so you need more motherships, etc. And you'll need either a lot of the drone tankers, or some really big ones to refuel the bombers. And the engineering of putting a boom on a relatively small drone....
edit on 2/8/2019 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 04:50 PM
link   


oh also, that was the Navy I can't imagine what the USAF has, I've heard space is their primary directive

Wasnt there a thread about Space being Navy domain?



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

And at extremely high altitudes, in very thin atmosphere, propulsion systems based on things like magnetohydrodynamics (MHD), fueled by the hydrogen you synthesize, could go a long way toward station-keeping.

Then too, lasers and other DEW’s, tend to function better in thin atmospheres as well. Did someone say “defense”?

From the high ground it is easier to see all the slings and arrows thrown at you, long before they reach you.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

The “mothership” might be just the means to ferry the fueled drones to a holding position close to the battle-space. The drones themselves would require no fuel to drop to rendezvous altitude, powering up only to maneuver into refueling position with the fighters.

Once emptied, the drone glides to a pickup point and lands, or is discarded.

Recovered drones could then be refueled and re-launched aboard another mothership.

Current tanker designs require large slow aircraft to be positioned either so close to the battlefield that they become easy targets, or far enough away from the battlefield that they are safe from attack, but limit the engagement time of the aircraft they are intended to service due to those aircraft have to fly to be refueled.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Bhadhidar

And that doesn't change anything I said. You have to have fuel for the mothership, plus be able to carry all those drones. You have to fuel bombers, which can take more than one KC-135 to do, so you're going to need either very large drones on that mothership, or a lot of them, which means lots of motherships. And newer missiles that have ASAT capability can still reach them.



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 07:49 PM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

Warm, high pressure air like that around you as A LOT more capability to hold water vapour than low pressure thin air. I'm too lazy/disinterested to do the math on this silly idea, but you're welcome to look it up and work some figures for maximum saturation values.

ISR gear, chemical lasers, etc all need more power, which is more weight, which is more volume, which is more weight, which is...



posted on Feb, 8 2019 @ 09:13 PM
link   
Dave Goldfein and Dash Jamieson are simply speculating on future capabilities. Whether we go that way or not remains to be seen; it will be determined by warfighter requirements to counter adversary capabilities.

Maintaining status quo digs a hole that is very difficult to climb out of. A great example is the failure of HUMINT during the Clinton years: the US administration and the intel apparatus came to rely too heavily on technology, neglecting feet on the ground and fundamental pencil-and-paper analysis. We paid dearly for it in intel losses and missed opportunities.

We have to consider all possibilities because our adversaries--that can afford to--are doing the same.

Another piece to this is curious release is the disinformation aspect: very little information about future military capabilities seeps out accidentally.




posted on Feb, 9 2019 @ 03:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Blackfinger



oh also, that was the Navy I can't imagine what the USAF has, I've heard space is their primary directive

Wasnt there a thread about Space being Navy domain?


....any thread Bedlam participated in on the subject??
No one sells secret space Navy like Bedlam did.


There was a thread on another website that I cant be bothered to link where a few former ATS'ers (who should know better) took everything he said to heart and proclaimed their Secret Space Navy musings as verified.

He is/was very good at it though.....even just the little things like implying there is a special Navy funeral process for crewmen lost in space- with appropriate verse change to reflect the circumstances - brilliant.



posted on Feb, 9 2019 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

of course it's silly, but it's fun to imagine


impracticable yes but not impossible.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 02:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Jukiodone
....any thread Bedlam participated in on the subject??
No one sells secret space Navy like Bedlam did.


There was a thread on another website that I cant be bothered to link where a few former ATS'ers (who should know better) took everything he said to heart and proclaimed their Secret Space Navy musings as verified.

He is/was very good at it though.....even just the little things like implying there is a special Navy funeral process for crewmen lost in space- with appropriate verse change to reflect the circumstances - brilliant.






posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 03:13 AM
link   
I found this article of how the MoD in the UK also seem to be (albeit on a more modest scale) very much keen to get more Space focused in the near future.

In the article the subject of refueling also came up, with a more understandable angle of refueling satellites using drones.

But then, again, another curveball came our way with this statement:


and life extension may just be the beginning of a larger orbital industry, predicts SSTL’s Sir Martin Sweeting. 3D printing and robotics he told the audience, are now opening up what he considers to be the biggest breakthrough in space technology – ‘in-orbit manufacturing’ in the next 10-15 years.


The source article from Tim Robinson has many fascinating insights gathered from the first MoD Space Conference in May of 2018.

It would appear some think we might see orbital manufacturing within 10 to 15 years, which again is a little strange if the cost of launching payloads does not come down significantly very shortly. And what kind of infrastructure will be needed to both service and support this kind of endeavour? Much less protect it?

In the UK it also seems that it is the RAF that will lead the way into Space, blending air and space as a warfighting domain.

A very interesting read on many levels.
edit on 10-2-2019 by beetee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 01:18 PM
link   
This is simply prep for what they will inevitably talk about in the future



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 06:11 PM
link   
The quote from the first article references this idea of prepositioned supply dumps from space.



What happens if we preposition cargo in space? I don’t have to use terrestrial means, I don’t have to use water means. I can just position in space and have a re-supplying vehicle come up and come back down. I don’t have to have people there, I just have to have the cargo there. Automated loading systems, those types of things


With LEO possibly in danger of getting rather crowded Gen. Carlton D. Everhart II of Air Force Mobility Command goes on to suggest a more secluded spot:


This is me thinking out loud,” he said.“Low earth orbit? Fine. But I’m telling you if the commercial industry is going to launch 5,000 satellites, I don’t know if it’s going to work…It’s cluttered up there. So, is it…the halfway point between the Earth and the moon? …Maybe we can put it in GEO…I don’t know, I’m going to ask the industry…If you’ve got ideas, I’ll take them


Prepositi oned supply depots in Space

Another pretty ambitious idea, especially with a suggested time frame of 5 years to concept stage and 10 years to where this becomes routine.

I think this makes absolutely no sense whatsoever from any perspective, unless you want an excuse to build military infrastructure in space for some other reason.







 
19
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join