X-37B lands after 719 days

Darn it! Missed the pool by 22 days!

I had money on 731 days in orbit (two years plus one day hold for bad weather).

Time to start a new pool. When did you say the next launch was scheduled?

a reply to: Montana

Later this year. They haven't announced a date beyond that. Probably November or December going by the timing of the other missions.

originally posted by: yuppa
Maybe they were planting remote explosives on chinese,russian,iranian,and NK satellites in case they have to take them out.

They need drones that can attach and de-orbit enemy craft, rather than blowing them up.

Just hoping the data can go towards getting the Mars mission going quicker.Damn NASA has been talking about that since the 80,s..I feel old..

I said before, the deepest XB37 mission would be to completely swap out enemy satellites for clones, or "drones", so to speak.

a reply to: FlyingFox

It's the X-37B, not XB-37. And it's far too small to even try something like that for just about anything but a microsat.

There's a very good reason that they're called Orbital TEST Vehicles. People are making far too much of them.

I don't even get a star for the concept?

A slip of the blip.

www.fiddlersgreen.net...

Really they couldn't make it an even 720... total piece of crap...

originally posted by: FlyingFox
I said before, the deepest XB37 mission would be to completely swap out enemy satellites for clones, or "drones", so to speak.

As people have said it's a test vehicle so unlikely HOWEVER....malicious code weighs nothing if you're feeling in a stuxnet kind of mood.

In addition to the weight restrictions, there would also be problems with properly copying cryptography keys employed in hardware- but having a go at them with custom made RAT's and MITM's would be a good use of time and effort just on the off chance..

Dont actually know what physical IT security on a satellite is like.. a lot of "well protected" systems are actually very vulnerable to local attacks (i.e having physical access to connectors and ports) and I cant help but wonder whether localised pwning might have been overlooked when the sats were launched.

a reply to: FlyingFox

Which has what to do with anything.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: ElGoobero

They far too small for much. Their actual mission is so routine and boring it's usually ignored when brought up.

Did you just actually cover it up? You can't, its already 'classified'. As 'classified' as the recent 700 day 'mission(s)'...

Eet is nutteeng, don' wurry 'bout it.

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: intrptr

those probably have proximity fuses installed, you can´t just grab them. Blinding lenses and jamming antennas however...

'Accidental' discharge of self destruct devices would litter earth orbit with dangerous fragments, surely out of the question.

Today nobody has conceived of the need to prevent 'capture' because besides the original shuttle there has been no cargo return capability.

Despite its military nomenclature, this 'mini shuttle' as the term denotes, is shuttling something to (and therefore it follows, from space.

Having the ability to change orbits and match intrinsics of other orbiting objects is a dead give. Since it isn't 'meeting' the ISS, then what is it doing?

a reply to: intrptr

Today nobody has conceived of the need to prevent 'capture' because besides the original shuttle there has been no cargo return capability.

Well, officially. Are you 100% sure there are no proximity fuses that trigger at least a disable of the electronics on mil-birds?

Having the ability to change orbits and match intrinsics of other orbiting objects is a dead give. Since it isn't 'meeting' the ISS, then what is it doing?

Idk, maybe test some EW capabilities, examine satellites of interest...aliens

Well, officially. Are you 100% sure there are no proximity fuses that trigger at least a disable of the electronics on mil-birds?

Show me one that was...

But yah, pretty sure.

Because the need to protect secrets is outweighed by risk of static or micrometeorite setting off the charge and disabling the very expensive satellite.

Satellites are expensive enough anyway, don't employ additional costs associated with self protection because there hasn't been a need, ( up till now(?) ).

That may be changing though, if you had secret spy sats up there and saw the mini shuttle landing footage, you'd be upgrading technology too.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Where did you get it wasn't announced? I live in FLORIDA about an hour from the KSC and my ex husband works on this program. It was all over the news here. It was no secret it was landing. Not even close.

a reply to: mblahnikluver

Hundreds of people took to social media and contacted local media to find out what caused the big boom.

“Shook our house in Davenport and drove the dog into a brief frenzy,” Patrick Reikofski posted on his Twitter account.

Jeff Savage tweeted, “Just heard a loud sonic boom here near Disney World. What was that??!!”

But it wasn’t just Central Floridians who heard the spacecraft. Reports came from as far away as Tampa and Fort Myers.

“Didn't sound from where I live [like] a sonic boom,” said Cherie Doughan, who heard the noise near Cape Haze in Southwest Florida. “Sort of unnerving with things the way they are world wide.”

www.orlandosentinel.com...

That sure doesn't sound like it was all over the news in Florida. And the original articles in both FLORIDA papers said that it was unannounced until landing. The previous landings were at least rumoured a week before the landing occurred.

article in The Atlantic

www.theatlantic.com...

This is where official information from the Air Force usually stops, and the speculation begins. Some in the military-space community believe the military might be tinkering with advanced surveillance sensors, or testing the electric-propulsion devices, known as thrusters, so it can put future reconnaissance satellites in lower orbits, where they can better see targets on the ground. Others say the military wants to use the spaceplane as a weapon capable of approaching other satellites to observe them and, perhaps, interfere.

which is about what we've been saying here.

Space junk...

originally posted by: pteridine

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: BASSPLYR

A little of both. They were doing some of the same, and doing the equivalent of a long soak of the ion thrusters, and something new.

Why the environmental suits for the runway crew? I'd guess that it was for unspent rocket fuel [UDMH+N2O4 and such] rather than the xenon for the ion thrusters although a spill of liquid xenon could suffocate those nearby. It looks like they had a drain line of some sort on the ship.

Possibly also for reasons you stated above but more likely because 2 years in continuous orbit means the craft would have had absorbed a load of radiation, how much, I don't know, but it would be seen as a precaution. I also think the suits would help keep the craft contained from cross-contamination whilst it's being thoroughly inspected by research crew/maintenance crew.