Military Space Plane vs. Ares 1...which could be operational first?

In sci.space.history Jochem Huhmann wrote:
Well, then it looks they have no mission for that thing...

It is going to deliver the mumified corpse of Curtis LeMay into orbit


rick jones
--
Process shall set you free from the need for rational thought.
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...
Me wrote:

1. Nope. no rendezvous capability


We don't know that; the rendezvous antennas could deploy from inside the cargo
bay, and it does have RCS and maneuvering engines:
http://a52.g.akamaitech.net/f/52/827...hematic_02.jpg


A statement from the Secretary of the Air Force, states the OTV program
will focus on "risk reduction, experimentation, and operational concept
development for reusable space vehicle technologies, in support of long
term developmental space objectives. The X-37B effort will be led
by the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-37B


RAPID CAPABILITIES OFFICE


Mission

"The Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office expedites development and fielding
of select Department of Defense combat support and weapon systems by
leveraging defense-wide technology development efforts and existing
operational capabilities. The Board of Directors tasks the office directly
to address needs that involve mission applications and operational concepts
requiring specialized expertise, and involve sensitive activities managed
by other government agencies. The office also conducts projects on
accelerated timelines."
http://www.af.mil/information/factsh....asp?fsID=3466


Notice the two important statements, that this office deals with
higly secret military systems which need to be ...QUICKLY....
developed.

Strongly reinforcing my conclusion the X-37B will win the
race to replace the shuttle.



s






Pat

"Jonathan" wrote:

My point....and I wish people here would actually try to discuss
the point, not just holler "you're full of ****".

We've tried to do so - but you insist on ignoring any discussions
which don't agree with your preconceived notions and routinely discard
facts inconvenient to your thesis. (That is, on the extraordinarily
rare occasions when you do confine yourself to the facts rather than
treating assumptions as facts.)

Which is why we keep hollering that you are "full of ****" - because
you have repeatedly demonstrated the truth of that proposition.

I mean once in a while it would be nice to have an adult conversation
around here.

You have no clue what constitutes an adult conversation. You wouldn't
recognize one if it smacked you in the face.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

"Jonathan" wrote:

RAPID CAPABILITIES OFFICE


Mission

"The Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office expedites development and fielding
of select Department of Defense combat support and weapon systems by
leveraging defense-wide technology development efforts and existing
operational capabilities. The Board of Directors tasks the office directly
to address needs that involve mission applications and operational concepts
requiring specialized expertise, and involve sensitive activities managed
by other government agencies. The office also conducts projects on
accelerated timelines."
http://www.af.mil/information/factsh....asp?fsID=3466


Notice the two important statements, that this office deals with
higly secret military systems which need to be ...QUICKLY....
developed.

Notice that the above says neither 'quickly' nor 'highly secret'.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

On Nov 16, 8:21*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:

My point is that the assumption around here is that all these
attempts were failures, got canceled, and that's the end of
the low cost reusable story. *I say, and it seems rather
obvious, that instead, the various technologies which /were/
successful are in the process of creating the latest attempt.
The X-37B. *All these programs just didn't get ****-canned.
The best of it went to the Pentagon black budget and
low cost reusable technology is not just alive and well, but
quickly catching up...imho.

Wrong.


A. The projects were canceled They did not go in the black budget.

B. the X-37 is old. It is not consolidation of the best of the
canceled projects. It is just an existing test bed.

On Nov 16, 8:21*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:

My point....and I wish people here would actually try to discuss
the point, not just holler *"you're full of ****". I mean once in a
while it would be nice to have an adult conversation around here.
My point, is that the X-37 B looks quite suitable for that kind
of military tactics.

Then listen. NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!m, you are wrong.

And the X-37 B is not suitable for the ORS.
A. It is not a launch vehicle, it is a spacecraft
B. It takes just as long as any other spacecraft to prepare
c. It flies on an EELV, this is not "Operationally Responsive"
D.

On Nov 16, 8:36*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:


Notice the two important statements, that this office deals with
higly secret military systems which need to be ...QUICKLY....
developed.

Strongly reinforcing my conclusion the X-37B will win the
race to replace the shuttle.

No again.

A. The Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office is not highly secret
B. Again. The X-37B is not a launch vehicle, it is a spacecraft
B. This is not a shuttle replacement. The shuttle replacements were
the Titan IV, Delta II, Atlas II, Atlas V and Delta IV

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
"Jonathan" wrote:

My point....and I wish people here would actually try to discuss
the point, not just holler "you're full of ****".

We've tried to do so - but you insist on ignoring any discussions
which don't agree with your preconceived notions and routinely discard
facts inconvenient to your thesis. (That is, on the extraordinarily
rare occasions when you do confine yourself to the facts rather than
treating assumptions as facts.)

Which is why we keep hollering that you are "full of ****" - because
you have repeatedly demonstrated the truth of that proposition.

I mean once in a while it would be nice to have an adult conversation
around here.

You have no clue what constitutes an adult conversation. You wouldn't
recognize one if it smacked you in the face.


You're so full of ****~



D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

"Me" wrote in message
...
On Nov 12, 10:01 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:

I'm starting to believe transferring the entire manned space program
to the military is the best way to go.



Whose says they can do better? Their management of space systems is
even worse


It just doesn't appear this administration is going to fund two tracks
for replacing the shuttle. Combine that with the rear-ward looking
"Vision" for space exploration returning to Apollo on steroids, and
I think the military has chosen the better long term path. Lower cost
reusable space planes. I wish NASA was running with it, but it appears
the last White House decided to take it out of the political process.
I'm starting to think that might be a good idea. In the black budget
there are few people looking over their shoulder.

NASA needs to stop trying to build the next generation of launchers, and
instead come up with a govt paid cargo that would jump start the commercial
launch industry. Considering how far robotic systems have come, it's becoming
harder to justify a civilian manned program anymore.

This could not only be the cargo that ushers in the commercial space age, but
also just might....Save the World. Unless NASA starts working to regain
public support with a worthy goal, a goal that widely inspires, nothing is
going to change. More half-assed programs from half-assed budgets.

Executive Summary
NASA'S SPACE SOLAR POWER EXPLORATORY RESEARCH
AND TECHNOLOGY (SERT) PROGRAM
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10202&page=1

On Nov 17, 8:24*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
"Me" wrote in message

...
On Nov 12, 10:01 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:

I'm starting to believe transferring the entire manned space program
to the military is the best way to go.

Whose says they can do better? *Their management of space systems is
even worse

It just doesn't appear this administration is going to fund two tracks
for replacing the shuttle. Combine that with the rear-ward looking
"Vision" for space exploration returning to Apollo on steroids, and
I think the military has chosen the better long term path. Lower cost
reusable space planes. I wish NASA was running with it, but it appears
the last White House decided to take it out of the political process.
I'm starting to think that might be a good idea. In the black budget
there are few people looking over their shoulder.

Can you read, fool?

There is no program to replace the shuttle with an RLV, the military
has the EELV's
Again. X-37 is not a launcher
Again, there is no black program and if the military were going to do
it, it would not be black,