Slashdot Mirror
Boeing Suggests Possible Manned Version of the X-37B Space Plane
garymortimer writes with an article in sUAS News. From the article: "A Boeing chief has suggested that the company's mysterious unmanned space-plane, called X-37B, developed for the US Air Force, could be scaled up and modified to carry astronauts. The company's X-37B project chief Art Grantz revealed that at least two more versions of the 9-meter long space-plane are under investigation – one of which involves adding a crew to a much-enlarged version of the space drone, New Scientist reported. If built, the new version would give the US back its ability to shuttle people to the International Space Station."
Promise a manned vehicle to access a space station that is to be de-orbited in 2016-2020. So considering it's almost 2012, you now have 4 years to finish this project. Yeah right. Oh wait I see the game now. The project will be finished 6 months before the ISS is de-orbited, and so there will be calls for a new space station to give this next generation "shuttle" a reason for existing. This is better than the job creation lawyers engage in!
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
And they plan to launch it with which man-rated rocket?
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
All you'd need is a targeting system with a big rotating mirror, and you'd have everything you need to vaporize a human target from space.
Flexible bare-metal recovery for Linux/UNIX
Would this the first manned unmanned space plane?? Exciting times!
giggity
And it's wings will have an 'X' formation, with laser beams that shoot out of the tips. Now, we just need to come up with a name for this thing.
No more teachers in space. Back to soldiers in space! It's the only way to fly!
All of the time and energy and money spent on this spacecraft and the space station needs to be leveraged to keep man in space to stay. Instead of discarding current platforms before there are viable replacements, lets try to actually use what we have while we have it, instead of throwing it away so we can "afford" a better one.
How likely is it that the Air Force already has this developed and is just bringing this out of the closet?
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
The whole point of this ploy is to distract from the much more efficient and low cost SpaceX system.
The primary competency of the United Launch Alliance group is managing government procurement, secrecy regulations, and Congressional politics.
The primary competency of SpaceX is cost-efficient rocket engineering.
If it can drop bigger bombs and kill more people, you will get funding.
"Boeing knows its stuff on crew rating - its spaceflight pedigree stretches back to the Apollo moonshot capsules." Do they? All the folks that worked on Apollo and the Shuttle are probably long gone. Nobody in the U.S. has designed a new man-rated space vehicle in 30 years. Does anybody even know what it takes to man-rate a vehicle these days. Back in the day there was a can-do attitude about space travel and a willingness to accept certain risks. I'm not sure that's true anymore. I'm not trying to be flip, and I do not mean this as a knock on Boeing. I'm just concerned. It's one thing to talk and to create budgets based on the perceived rules and requirements. But I wonder if anybody is going to be able to complete the process and get the required signatures in this political climate. I know SpaceX is on the path, but they're a long way from completion. I suppose SpaceX has a political advantage here. If things go bad, congress and NASA don't have to take the blame. They can point fingers at SpaceX and claim they were misled.
Basically, it is a can that is carried in the 'cargo bay'. With the shuttle, you had two different areas. This is actually a better design from a functional POV. One craft that can carry different types of cargo.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Ok, maybe they have to be internal bays, but surely there's a way we can mount guns/etc. on it!
THEN it's pure AirForce! :)
One of the problems with the Shuttle was that it was conceived of as a "truck", with drivers shuttling cargo. The problem is that you really don't need drivers for cargo; astronauts really ARE just spam-in-a-can, as far as the carrier is concerned.
Trying to carry both humans AND cargo made the design harder (and heavier) than it needed to be. A ship that carries one or the other makes both safer. This works very well for the Russians, who can just park whatever they want on top of a disposable rocket.
Yes, they could mount weapons in the internal bays, the question is what kind of weapons, I doubt conventional.
One of the big benefits of this platform is that they can launch the twinkie, have the twinkie let loose a short term satellite, and then recover the satellite to bring back home. Excellent for short term surveillance that cannot be predicted.
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
This could become the SUSTAIN platform the USMC has asked for. Spacedrop a squad of Marines anywhere in the world within 40 minutes. The main question though is whether the crewed X37 will include commercial access or is this military only?
gigantino.tv - Heavy but weighs nothing.
Space plane go... never come back!
This sig is not paradoxical or ironic.
The wings, as designed, were a poor choice.
The shuttle was designed to land at the Van, which is further north then Florida. In order to reach that far north they had to go with a delta wing. This meant that the wings were heaver, the flight path was steeper, and the reentry was faster.
And the shuttle never took off / landed there anyways. Sigh.
This seems like a good carrot to dangle to keep NASA from giving missions to smaller companies like SpaceX.
-- Jeff
You didn't really think they needed a reason, did you?
Would be good to have the USA back in the list of countries capable of launching its own astronauts for sure, the more countries the merrier. Also would be great to see some of the private concerns in the USA successfully launching man-capable spacecraft.
Why not just build more of them. If all you want to do is get people into space, you only need pilot plus one. Smaller rockets are easier, though more wasteful. However, a fleet is far more inspiring and will have far greater economies of scale than a handfull of expensive shuttles.
Aim for a launch schedule of one per month. Get to it!