All of the photos in the SpaceFlightNow article are real. Anyone who says otherwise is just being foolish.

The foam blocks were placed under the vehicle to protect the underside in case the landing gear collapsed. One of the main tires blew out during landing so they weren't taking any chances.

There is nothing sinister about the X-37B. It is just a technology demonstrator. Someday the data collected with this vehicle will be applied to an operational system unless requirements change or the budget is cut.

I suppose it's neither here nor there whether the photos are 100% authentic or not. What we DO know from previous historical examples of high-tech craft being unveiled is that it is generally done to throw the scent from something *really* secret that was nearly discovered, like the unveiling of the stealth fighters / bombers.

Why else announce the landing of a secret shuttle mission on the Internet?

I can't wait for world war 3 ...IN SPACE! Seems like USA, China, and Russia all have new toys to play with and with which to drain our bank accounts.

This relies on assumptions of course and may be a bit far fetched, but has anyone suggested yet that it might be used to transport anti-matter to orbital generators or batteries?

1) Nuclear reactors are banned from space in the Geneva convention (we only allow nuclear reactions here on Earth haha), but antimatter devices are not as far as I know. Not that this would stop the USAF anyways.

2) The US Gov't is spending record breaking amounts on its defense budget, anti-matter takes record breaking amounts to create, it is not outside of logic to say the Gov't has found a way to 'mass produce' it secretly and contain it for longer periods of time.

3) It does not have solar panels and it is unclear what exactly is the the power source of this thing for 200+ days, so like traditional atmospheric USAF tankers it could run off its own payload to an extent.

4) Not much space would be required to transport effective quantities of anti-matter, still leaving room for some sensory equipment possibly for a secondary mission or defensive awareness.

5) Since anti-matter is no secret to the public, the transport itself would not be required to be highly classified, but revealing its purpose would reveal we have certain technologies/devices in orbit. People would think it has purposes as an attack craft and forget about the bombardment satellite in orbit that it is transporting its cargo to when it 'disappeared' for a moment. Keep in mind recent advances in visible light cloaking materials and technology, a sheet could literally be pulled around the craft and its host between it and Earth and light would travel around it.

What do you think?

Originally posted by RSF77
1) Nuclear reactors are banned from space in the Geneva convention (we only allow nuclear reactions here on Earth haha)

Atomic reactors are not banned, in fact the US and USSR developed and deployed the first atomic reactors in the 60's, and the USSR eventually sent about 30 atomic reactors into space.

All you guys are missing the big point, the program is called "Space Maneuver Vehicle". What does "Space Maneuver" mean you ask? Don't current satellites change their orbits (maneuver) in space? Yes, but it takes a lot of fuel to change orbits. The X-37 instead does a small re-entry burn, when it gets down to 300,000 feet uses it's wings to change orbital plane aerodynamically, then another small burn to boost back up into space. This technique uses a fraction of the fuel to change orbits compared to normal satellites.

Right now with normal satellites the enemy can predict their path, and hide when they are known to be coming over. Normal satellites don't carry enough fuel to make numerous surprise orbit changes to catch an enemy off guard. The X-37 on the other hand does have that ability. It could be in an orbit thousands of miles away, then do a quick orbit change and sneak up through "space maneuver" to photo or bomb a target, and do it a dozen times or more for the mission duration.

In some respects it's a replacement for the SR-71, since the SR could overfly a target without warning. Or it can attack a target same as a B-2 Stealth bomber but without violating enemy airspace.

Originally posted by boyg2004

Would it just be my way of thinking, or is it more thrifty to employ USAF Technicians to run the show at the vehicle side than NASA employees, plus there's the added bonus of not having to justify what exactly it is that you're up to.

No, it takes many years of specialized training and experience to work on this one of a kind R&D project, it's cheaper to let the people who designed and built it do the processing than spend years training Airmen for just one or two missions. They are Boeing employees, not NASA employees. Also they already have Top Secret security clearances.

I was always interested in type of "killer satellites" etc.. And everytime I look in the night sky I try to imagine what kind of types of space drones etc may be spying on us... Kind of creepy