Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[RedKing]

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2010/0423/Shhhh%21-Air-Force-launches-top-secret-X-37B-robot-space-plane

So...yeah. The X-37B. Bastard child of a Predator drone and the Space Shuttle. So far, more of a proof-of-concept than anything, but it's a paradigm shift in US policy towards space weaponization. And it means that the "PEW PEW LASERZ!" crowd over at the Air Force are winning out over...well, EVERYONE else in the US military and intelligence communities, who are unequivacably opposed to weaponizing space.

Discuss.

[piecewise]

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2010/0423/Shhhh%21-Air-Force-launches-top-secret-X-37B-robot-space-plane

So...yeah. The X-37B. Bastard child of a Predator drone and the Space Shuttle. So far, more of a proof-of-concept than anything, but it's a paradigm shift in US policy towards space weaponization. And it means that the "PEW PEW LASERZ!" crowd over at the Air Force are winning out over...well, EVERYONE else in the US military and intelligence communities, who are unequivacably opposed to weaponizing space.

Discuss.

Bound to happen sooner or later. At least it's not a 10,000 pound piece of weaponized tungsten. When/if we start using relativistic kill vehicles is when I'll get nervous. 

[SanDiego]

Is there actually some consistent proof or at least solid reason to say it carried weapons?

[RedKing]

I doubt it did. This is just proof-of-concept. But once the platform is proven, it's not a huge feat of engineering to load weapons on it. We don't even have to be talking railguns or anything exotic. Moderately-powered lasers capable of temporarily disabling satellites would be sufficient to count as a "weapon" in space, and would be relatively straightforward to equip.

The thing is, once you have a weapon platform capable of space operation, then anybody else who wants to safeguard their orbital assets (like, I dunno...the Chinese, the Russians, the Indians, the Europeans...) are either going to develop a similar platform or counter-measures including defensive weaponry. India already has a similar platform in development (called AVATAR), and I would imagine the Chinese have something on the drawing board. God only knows what the Russians have.

[piecewise]

I doubt it did. This is just proof-of-concept. But once the platform is proven, it's not a huge feat of engineering to load weapons on it. We don't even have to be talking railguns or anything exotic. Moderately-powered lasers capable of temporarily disabling satellites would be sufficient to count as a "weapon" in space, and would be relatively straightforward to equip.

The thing is, once you have a weapon platform capable of space operation, then anybody else who wants to safeguard their orbital assets (like, I dunno...the Chinese, the Russians, the Indians, the Europeans...) are either going to develop a similar platform or counter-measures including defensive weaponry. India already has a similar platform in development (called AVATAR), and I would imagine the Chinese have something on the drawing board. God only knows what the Russians have.

India's space program is funded by James Cameron?

Also, this is russia we're talking about, the guys who never figured out how to accurately launch their nukes so they just built ones big enough so that that didn't matter. Imma guess their solution might just be to launch hundreds of redundant satellites. Or maybe just throw rocks, I dunno.

[smigenboger]

Or maybe just throw rocks, I dunno

They've already harnessed the power of asteroids?

[Jualin]

This reminds me of the Red Alert games, particularly the Magnetic Satellite and Satellite Drop abilities in Red Alert 3.

On a more serious note, I hope the Air Force doesn't step over that paper-thin line. That is all.

[piecewise]

Or maybe just throw rocks, I dunno

They've already harnessed the power of asteroids?

I was thinking more of a "Man in the moon" style giant cannon. Russia may not have good aim but it doesn't matter when the bullet is the size of a house.

[RedKing]

Or maybe just throw rocks, I dunno

They've already harnessed the power of asteroids?

I was thinking more of a "Man in the moon" style giant cannon. Russia may not have good aim but it doesn't matter when the bullet is the size of a house.

Well, it does when you're shooting said house at a distance of ~20km or more.

To clarify, I'm not concerned with the immediate effects of the X-37B. As I said, it's proof-of-concept. But the broader policy implications are what worry me. For decades, US strategic policy has sided with the planners in the Pentagon and CIA who said "We're better off with space as a demilitarized zone, because we need those GPS/photo recon/communications satellites". Whereas the Air Force was always at the other end of the spectrum, advocating for a range of ground-to-space weapons, space-to-space weapons, and even space-to-ground weapons and advocating what is known as the High Ground position, which is an extension of air superiority doctrine (whoever controls airspace controls the battlefield).

There's a lot of tactical sense to the High Ground doctrine, but strategically it's a fool's bargain. You gain a tactical advantage by being able to launch orbital strikes and/or deny the enemy access to GPS/sat communications/recon, but you trade that for a serious risk of losing your own space-based assets. You create an environment of a space arms race, and in the worst-case scenario you run the risk of a shooting war creating an ablation cascade and then we're all fucked. Nobody sends anything back into space for a few hundred years and global communications reverts to the pre-1950's.

Granted, the X-37B may never be deployed as an armed craft. But the potential that it could be is enough to start the ball rolling.

[piecewise]

Or maybe just throw rocks, I dunno

They've already harnessed the power of asteroids?

I was thinking more of a "Man in the moon" style giant cannon. Russia may not have good aim but it doesn't matter when the bullet is the size of a house.

Well, it does when you're shooting said house at a distance of ~20km or more.

To clarify, I'm not concerned with the immediate effects of the X-37B. As I said, it's proof-of-concept. But the broader policy implications are what worry me. For decades, US strategic policy has sided with the planners in the Pentagon and CIA who said "We're better off with space as a demilitarized zone, because we need those GPS/photo recon/communications satellites". Whereas the Air Force was always at the other end of the spectrum, advocating for a range of ground-to-space weapons, space-to-space weapons, and even space-to-ground weapons and advocating what is known as the High Ground position, which is an extension of air superiority doctrine (whoever controls airspace controls the battlefield).

There's a lot of tactical sense to the High Ground doctrine, but strategically it's a fool's bargain. You gain a tactical advantage by being able to launch orbital strikes and/or deny the enemy access to GPS/sat communications/recon, but you trade that for a serious risk of losing your own space-based assets. You create an environment of a space arms race, and in the worst-case scenario you run the risk of a shooting war creating an ablation cascade and then we're all fucked. Nobody sends anything back into space for a few hundred years and global communications reverts to the pre-1950's.

Granted, the X-37B may never be deployed as an armed craft. But the potential that it could be is enough to start the ball rolling.

Eh, I'm no more worried then a I was years ago. Mankind has had the capacity to pretty much destroy civilization for many years now so anything more is just overkill. Coldwar never really ended, it just shifted from nukes to biological weapons and more subtle use of political manipulation. As long as we have the technology to end the world spread amongst several different world powers there will never not be a time when we're teetering on the edge of Armageddon.

[Pwnzerfaust]

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2010/0423/Shhhh%21-Air-Force-launches-top-secret-X-37B-robot-space-plane

So...yeah. The X-37B. Bastard child of a Predator drone and the Space Shuttle. So far, more of a proof-of-concept than anything, but it's a paradigm shift in US policy towards space weaponization. And it means that the "PEW PEW LASERZ!" crowd over at the Air Force are winning out over...well, EVERYONE else in the US military and intelligence communities, who are unequivacably opposed to weaponizing space.

Discuss.

Conclusions, you jump to them. Why couldn't the Air Force just be using it for what they said: unmanned cargo transport?

[Kebooo]

This is the natural step to get my own Star Destroyer, so I must support it.

[RedKing]

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2010/0423/Shhhh%21-Air-Force-launches-top-secret-X-37B-robot-space-plane

So...yeah. The X-37B. Bastard child of a Predator drone and the Space Shuttle. So far, more of a proof-of-concept than anything, but it's a paradigm shift in US policy towards space weaponization. And it means that the "PEW PEW LASERZ!" crowd over at the Air Force are winning out over...well, EVERYONE else in the US military and intelligence communities, who are unequivacably opposed to weaponizing space.

Discuss.

Conclusions, you jump to them. Why couldn't the Air Force just be using it for what they said: unmanned cargo transport?

That's like asking why couldn't Iran just be pursuing a peaceful nuclear energy program.
Besides, there are far more cost-efficient ways to get payloads into space than developing a reusable robotic drone.

[Leafsnail]

That's like asking why couldn't Iran just be pursuing a peaceful nuclear energy program.

Because we must always assume there's some kind of conspiracy?

[Pwnzerfaust]

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2010/0423/Shhhh%21-Air-Force-launches-top-secret-X-37B-robot-space-plane

So...yeah. The X-37B. Bastard child of a Predator drone and the Space Shuttle. So far, more of a proof-of-concept than anything, but it's a paradigm shift in US policy towards space weaponization. And it means that the "PEW PEW LASERZ!" crowd over at the Air Force are winning out over...well, EVERYONE else in the US military and intelligence communities, who are unequivacably opposed to weaponizing space.

Discuss.

Conclusions, you jump to them. Why couldn't the Air Force just be using it for what they said: unmanned cargo transport?

That's like asking why couldn't Iran just be pursuing a peaceful nuclear energy program.
Besides, there are far more cost-efficient ways to get payloads into space than developing a reusable robotic drone.

Because there are tangible reasons to think Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons (the fact that they're enriching uranium beyond 20%, for instance). On the other hand, there's no evidence that the Air Force has put weapons on, or plans to put weapons on, the X-37.