X-37B prepares for launch

Stacking of a two stage Atlas V, in its 501 configuration, began at the Kennedy Space Center. The payload is one of the two X-37B spacecraft. Launch is scheduled between 0900-1300 (9am-1pm), on May 6th.

The Air Force hasn't said which vehicle will be launched. Previous missions have lasted 224 days, 469 days, and most recently 675 days.

spaceflightnow.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58

Hi Zaph

I'm guessing they aren't giving us any idea what its going to be up to again either

Peace

M.

a reply to: murlock

Oh no. They only give launch, and eventually landing dates.

Over 1300 days of testing between the two? "testing?" When the last one landed there was a big discussion here about the "why" but I don't remember much of a "where" is that correct? I thought I remember amateur astronomers and hobbyists tracking it in orbit, is that much at least guaranteed or is it out and about somewhere? Just curious.

a reply to: Zaphod58

a reply to: DuckforcoveR

It's been tracked in orbit on every flight, yes.

Excellent!! Looks like we need more paint. And a few other things. Along with that I wonder what else they have up in her bay this time to test out.

Anyways, cool. I like it when the x37B goes up. Any word on when/if the X37C will be operable and going up? She has a much bigger payload bay correct?

Gave you a star and flag cause nobody ever gives you any.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

No. Not sure it will be built.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Might not need to be. But still a bummer if she doesn't get built. Gave you another star for that last post too.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: Zaphod58

But still a bummer if she doesn't get built.

I agree. I love the thought of it. Maybe the trigger will be the proposed space station when they need to start sending multiple workers and materials up there all at once.

Gave you another star for that last post too.

I thought Zaph was the only one permitted to receive stars in this forum so I decided to break protocol and give you one.

a reply to: howmuch4another

Ha. Stars and flags are fun, but dropping hints and watching the weird tangents you guys go shooting off on is better.

a reply to: howmuch4another

Whoohoo!!!! I likes me some stars.

a reply to: Zaphod58

D.U.D.E I never derail threads or go off on tangents.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

You? Never!

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: howmuch4another

Ha. Stars and flags are fun, but dropping hints and watching the weird tangents you guys go shooting off on is better.

Hey I didn't just come up with this fantasy by myself...



spacesafetymagazine.com

from source quoted in OP

Majestically rising off the launch pad on 860,000 pounds of the thrust, the 196-foot-tall rocket will be powered by the RD AMROSS RD-180 main engine for the first four-and-a-half minutes of flight.

Can't have it both ways.

Sorry to tell you, but the people who say: "UFOs are US mil" can't go whooping and hollering about this rocket. If indeed (I said 'if') the US really has the kind of space technology to travel 10,000mph and turn at 90° on a dime, then this 'old' rocket technology is a complete waste of tax payer money.

Just sayin'

originally posted by: Zaphod58
Stacking of a two stage Atlas V, in its 501 configuration, began at the Kennedy Space Center. The payload is one of the two X-37B spacecraft. Launch is scheduled between 0900-1300 (9am-1pm), on May 6th.

The Air Force hasn't said which vehicle will be launched. Previous missions have lasted 224 days, 469 days, and most recently 675 days.

spaceflightnow.com...

Does it matter which X-37B they use ? Is there a different role between the two

originally posted by: MarkJS


Sorry to tell you, but the people who say: "UFOs are US mil" can't go whooping and hollering about this rocket. If indeed (I said 'if') the US really has the kind of space technology to travel 10,000mph and turn at 90° on a dime, then this 'old' rocket technology is a complete waste of tax payer money.

Just sayin'

Good point....however the counterargument that NASA/conventional tech is a "Peoples space programme" which takes the financial hits to pave way for a more purposeful and advanced "Corporate/Military Space Programme" would also be compatible with your above summary.

Make the taxpayer pay for all the costly trial and error research and development, give them chemically propelled tin cans in return, then keep all the good stuff that falls out of it for you and your cronies (Corporations, MIC, Agencies etc).

a reply to: MarkJS

Well, we have to keep those rocket engineers employed somewhere

a reply to: BASSPLYR

I thought Boeing was going with the CST-100 as a more useful people carrier, no ? Maybe I am wrong

a reply to: nelloh62

No. One has much more time in space is all.