The Little Spaceplane That Couldn't (2008) • Hacker News Board

Re: The Little Spaceplane That Couldn't (2008)

#21

Post by aidenn0 » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 11:58 PM UTC

LargoLasskhyfv wrote: post #20

aidenn0 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to know a little German, but I'll admit I had to look up "ab sein" to get that. At least my dictionary claims it's colloquial...

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ab- That aside I'm really fasicinated by those fast planes. I mean, it's now public knowledge that the SR-71 leaked fuel between gaps in the fuselage onto the tarmac. Because of that they only fueled it up a little to get into the air without leaking too much. Then after take off, speeding up until the thermal expansion closed those gaps, and full aerial refueling directly after that. H…

My understanding is that the fuel in the SR-71 was also the coolant, so it might not have been the fuel-loop that was leaking, but the coolant loop, as the coolant necessarily must go to hotter parts of the aircraft.

I doubt that the fuel served this dual-purpose on the XB-70, and exotic coolant might not have been needed for <30 minutes at Mach 3 anyways.

Re: The Little Spaceplane That Couldn't (2008)

#22

Post by Fatnino » Wed, Oct 12, 2022, 12:57 PM UTC

ncmncm wrote: post #17

sterlind wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how do you know it's not on a mission? aren't its missions heavily classified? I have no idea what it's supposed to do, but e.g. spying on or interfering with enemy spy satellites would give it a reason to stay up there for a long time.

A vehicle whose chief feature is that it can take off and land and be launched again not landing and being launched again tells us all we need to know. If it is just changing orbit while up there, it doesn't need reusability. Just launch another one.

It's is far cheaper to temporarily bring down and upgrade a spy satellite than to build a new one. Probably leads to faster iteration on new designs as well.

Also, the fact that the secret satellite stuff is in the payload bay with doors that can close is likely very desirable when a Russian or Chinese nosey satellite matches orbit. And once that does happen, the ability to move to another orbit is on tap as well.

I'd say that the fact China has launched their own nearly identical copy is evidence that the X37 is not useless, but China copying someone's space thing is just another day ending in y and not actual evidence of anything except their copying prowess.

Re: The Little Spaceplane That Couldn't (2008)

#23

Post by ncmncm » Thu, Oct 13, 2022, 2:46 PM UTC

Fatnino wrote: post #22

ncmncm wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A vehicle whose chief feature is that it can take off and land and be launched again not landing and being launched again tells us all we need to know. If it is just changing orbit while up there, it doesn't need reusability. Just launch another one.

It's is far cheaper to temporarily bring down and upgrade a spy satellite than to build a new one. Probably leads to faster iteration on new designs as well. Also, the fact that the secret satellite stuff is in the payload bay with doors that can close is likely very desirable when a Russian or Chinese nosey satellite matches orbit. And once that does happen, the ability to move to another orbit is on tap as well. I'…

Copying is how China and Japan became industrial powerhouses. There is no shame in copying, except where you have been tricked into copying something useless.