Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Experimental USAF space plane breaks record for orbital spaceflight

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 114 posts

Re: Experimental USAF space plane breaks record for orbital spaceflight

#51

Post by sandworm101 »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #31
themodelplumber wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is really impressive...though I don't quite understand why the illustration looks so different; even though there's likely a lot of bloom in the photo, the parts don't seem to match up with the illustration based on the general brightness values.

The illustration shows the payload bay doors open. In the photo perhaps they are either closed, or open with something hanging out of the payload bay, or some other configuration, making the brightness the way it is???

The doors are almost certainly open. Just like shuttle, there are no external radiators on this plane. They are relatively delicate structures that wouldn't survive reentry. So they have to be inside the doors somewhere. Shuttle had to open its doors within a fixed time, else abort and return, and keep them open while on orbit. No doubt this spaceplane follows a similar profile.

(Also, solar panels. Shuttle didn't use them but if this thing is spending years in space it is probably using solar panels too. They would be mounted at 90* to the radiators, creating a T-shaped structure with different albedos that should be identifiable in even a blurry picture.)

Re: Experimental USAF space plane breaks record for orbital spaceflight

#52

Post by 0xffff2 »

egdod wrote: post #23
walrus01 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

people who haven't played kerbal space program (with mechjeb for data) usually don't fully understand how expensive, in terms of delta V, a large inclination change maneuver is.

I have so far resisted mechjeb (and other mods). Should I give it a try?

Mechjeb was far more useful/necessary 3-5 years ago. The stock game has added so many features at this point that I really didn't feel the need for any mods at all when I picked it up again a few weeks ago.

Re: Experimental USAF space plane breaks record for orbital spaceflight

#53

Post by sandworm101 »

jedberg wrote: post #49

> NASA began the X-37 program in 1999; Maybe officially, but I definitely know people who were working on a Space Plane program in the early 90s.

There have been people working on spaceplanes continuously since the Nixon administration. Shuttle was a spaceplane but there were/are lots of other programs that fit that title.

Re: Experimental USAF space plane breaks record for orbital spaceflight

#54

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

sandworm101 wrote: post #51
TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The illustration shows the payload bay doors open. In the photo perhaps they are either closed, or open with something hanging out of the payload bay, or some other configuration, making the brightness the way it is???

The doors are almost certainly open. Just like shuttle, there are no external radiators on this plane. They are relatively delicate structures that wouldn't survive reentry. So they have to be inside the doors somewhere. Shuttle had to open its doors within a fixed time, else abort and return, and keep them open while on orbit. No doubt this spaceplane follows a similar profile. (Also, solar panels. Shuttle didn't us…

Ah right, thanks, wasn't aware of that.

Re: Experimental USAF space plane breaks record for orbital spaceflight

#55

Post by Phlarp »

forgotmysn wrote: post #3
AstroJetson wrote: post #2

Cool a mini space shuttle that is still flying around for testing stuff. Any chance it has seats and can be used for rescues?

to rescue what exactly?

Presumably ISS? Seems unlikely US government would expose a military asset to the Russians willingly like that.

Also life support systems are heavy and that will cut into the delta-v budget of the craft.

Re: Experimental USAF space plane breaks record for orbital spaceflight

#56

Post by JKCalhoun »

sandworm101 wrote: post #53
jedberg wrote: post #49

> NASA began the X-37 program in 1999; Maybe officially, but I definitely know people who were working on a Space Plane program in the early 90s.

There have been people working on spaceplanes continuously since the Nixon administration. Shuttle was a spaceplane but there were/are lots of other programs that fit that title.

The (unfortunately named) Dynasoar, or X-20, strikes me as the first: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-20_Dyna-Soar

(So, Eisenhower.)

Re: Experimental USAF space plane breaks record for orbital spaceflight

#57

Post by Phlarp »

bdamm wrote: post #21
mc32 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think they make boobytrapped satellites that explode, but they may remotely activate a self-destruct process which renders abduction pointless. If they exploded it wouldn’t it create more problems than it solves in terms of more flying debris they have to track as well as friendlies in the same orbital path? (Like when Iridium 33 crashed into a defunct soviet satellite.)

I also don’t think the attack would involve changing orbits. The attack would be inserting electronic backdoor etc.

mems accel gyro on the sat to detect when an exterior craft docs, rig up some airbags to propel shrapnel / acid / thermite in all directions when it triggers.

Cheap satellite does asymmetrical damage to space plane.

Re: Experimental USAF space plane breaks record for orbital spaceflight

#58

Post by sandworm101 »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #56
sandworm101 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There have been people working on spaceplanes continuously since the Nixon administration. Shuttle was a spaceplane but there were/are lots of other programs that fit that title.

The (unfortunately named) Dynasoar, or X-20, strikes me as the first: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-20_Dyna-Soar (So, Eisenhower.)

X-15 actually flew in space before the X-20 program. Not orbit, but a plane in space above 100km.

And there were plans to mount a deployable wing thing on Gemini, making it something like a spaceplane.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Gemini#Winged_Gemini

Most kerbal realworld thing ever:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gemini_paraglider.JPG

Re: Experimental USAF space plane breaks record for orbital spaceflight

#59

Post by Phlarp »

gvb wrote: post #32
Tuxer wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Space isn't like a highway where you can move from A to B at minimal expense. Switching orbits, both orbit heights but mainly orbit inclinations, comes at a very high delta-V expense and therefore propellant expense, which this craft simply doesn't have the volume to hold. This cannot shuttle between LEO stations and switch orbits to imitate multiple observation sats unless those sats and stations are very close in t…

The U.S. Air Force's former top civilian, Heather Wilson, said it dips into the atmosphere and uses its aerodynamic surfaces to change its orbit. Ref: https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/07/23/former-secaf-...

It uses an oblong orbit to gain a small window where the next orbit cannot be perfectly predicted by an adversary that can only watch half the sky.

You can't gain delta-v by inducing additional drag on the craft.

Re: Experimental USAF space plane breaks record for orbital spaceflight

#60

Post by therein »

raverbashing wrote: post #42
Tuxer wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Space isn't like a highway where you can move from A to B at minimal expense. Switching orbits, both orbit heights but mainly orbit inclinations, comes at a very high delta-V expense and therefore propellant expense, which this craft simply doesn't have the volume to hold. This cannot shuttle between LEO stations and switch orbits to imitate multiple observation sats unless those sats and stations are very close in t…

Yes, orbital mechanics are very non-intuitive. Thinking "you're in space so can go anywhere" makes as much sense as thinking it's easy to go from Canada to the top of the Everest just because they're both on land.

Definitely, and in fact that's probably the first epiphany one reaches when one starts playing KSP.
Post reply on HN