http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47842589/

To be fair, the space plane isn't exactly secret but what it is used for is secret. Bad headline.

(06-16-2012 09:59 PM)RobertN Wrote:  To be fair, the space plane isn't exactly secret but what it is used for is secret. Bad headline.

The only thing that isn't a secret is the shape and designator as far as i know. Nearly 98% of everything else about the plane is secret. So I would say good headline.

(06-17-2012 12:16 AM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

(06-16-2012 09:59 PM)RobertN Wrote:  To be fair, the space plane isn't exactly secret but what it is used for is secret. Bad headline.

The only thing that isn't a secret is the shape and designator as far as i know. Nearly 98% of everything else about the plane is secret. So I would say good headline.

The Chinese were screaming about the X-37 earlier this year when we apparently did a flyby of their unmanned space lab with it.


16 month mission this time.

(06-17-2012 10:50 AM)WMD Owl Wrote:  

(06-17-2012 12:16 AM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

(06-16-2012 09:59 PM)RobertN Wrote:  To be fair, the space plane isn't exactly secret but what it is used for is secret. Bad headline.

The only thing that isn't a secret is the shape and designator as far as i know. Nearly 98% of everything else about the plane is secret. So I would say good headline.

The Chinese were screaming about the X-37 earlier this year when we apparently did a flyby of their unmanned space lab with it.


16 month mission this time.

The Chinese shouldn't piss off people who owe them money.

I'd bet the farm we have nukes in space, and I bet we're not the only ones.

(06-17-2012 08:08 PM)wild bill Wrote:  I'd bet the farm we have nukes in space, and I bet we're not the only ones.

Wouldn't be suprised if you are right on.

Since USAF and NASA have both been associated with anti-matter weaponry, where else but in space, would they find an appropriate testing environment?

(06-17-2012 08:08 PM)wild bill Wrote:  I'd bet the farm we have nukes in space, and I bet we're not the only ones.

Am I the only one that thinks that is a bad idea?

(06-18-2012 05:42 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(06-17-2012 08:08 PM)wild bill Wrote:  I'd bet the farm we have nukes in space, and I bet we're not the only ones.

Am I the only one that thinks that is a bad idea?

No.

I doubt there is an orbital "nuke station" up there.

1. You have to service and inspect warheads on a regular basis. That means a launch vehicle has to dock. You can't hid that from ISR Sensors.

2. Things in orbit eventually re-enter the atmosphere. You don't want to run any risk of a nuclear weapon coming back in, "armed" or not.

(06-18-2012 08:40 AM)WMD Owl Wrote:  I doubt there is an orbital "nuke station" up there.

1. You have to service and inspect warheads on a regular basis. That means a launch vehicle has to dock. You can't hid that from ISR Sensors.

2. Things in orbit eventually re-enter the atmosphere. You don't want to run any risk of a nuclear weapon coming back in, "armed" or not.

This. We don't need an orbital launch platform. We can hit anywhere in the world with our stuff on the ground in Montana or in our subs trolling the coats of Russia, China, and Iran.

(06-18-2012 08:40 AM)WMD Owl Wrote:  I doubt there is an orbital "nuke station" up there.

1. You have to service and inspect warheads on a regular basis. That means a launch vehicle has to dock. You can't hid that from ISR Sensors.

If a tree falls in the forest, and noone is there to see it did it make a noise?
2. Things in orbit eventually re-enter the atmosphere. You don't want to run any risk of a nuclear weapon coming back in, "armed" or not.

Low orbit, yes. High orbit requires little thrust to exit.

(06-18-2012 09:29 AM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:  

(06-18-2012 08:40 AM)WMD Owl Wrote:  I doubt there is an orbital "nuke station" up there.

1. You have to service and inspect warheads on a regular basis. That means a launch vehicle has to dock. You can't hid that from ISR Sensors.

2. Things in orbit eventually re-enter the atmosphere. You don't want to run any risk of a nuclear weapon coming back in, "armed" or not.

This. We don't need an orbital launch platform. We can hit anywhere in the world with our stuff on the ground in Montana or in our subs trolling the coats of Russia, China, and Iran.

Don't forget the awesomness that is kinetic energy space weapons. Giant rods of inert metal hurled from space impacting the ground with the force of a nuclear bomb without the fallout.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment

(06-18-2012 12:06 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(06-18-2012 09:29 AM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:  

(06-18-2012 08:40 AM)WMD Owl Wrote:  I doubt there is an orbital "nuke station" up there.

1. You have to service and inspect warheads on a regular basis. That means a launch vehicle has to dock. You can't hid that from ISR Sensors.

2. Things in orbit eventually re-enter the atmosphere. You don't want to run any risk of a nuclear weapon coming back in, "armed" or not.

This. We don't need an orbital launch platform. We can hit anywhere in the world with our stuff on the ground in Montana or in our subs trolling the coats of Russia, China, and Iran.

Don't forget the awesomness that is kinetic energy space weapons. Giant rods of inert metal hurled from space impacting the ground with the force of a nuclear bomb without the fallout.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment

What would happen if we dropped one of Obama's ears...or his ego...? Extension level event?

(06-18-2012 12:18 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(06-18-2012 12:06 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(06-18-2012 09:29 AM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:  

(06-18-2012 08:40 AM)WMD Owl Wrote:  I doubt there is an orbital "nuke station" up there.

1. You have to service and inspect warheads on a regular basis. That means a launch vehicle has to dock. You can't hid that from ISR Sensors.

2. Things in orbit eventually re-enter the atmosphere. You don't want to run any risk of a nuclear weapon coming back in, "armed" or not.

This. We don't need an orbital launch platform. We can hit anywhere in the world with our stuff on the ground in Montana or in our subs trolling the coats of Russia, China, and Iran.

Don't forget the awesomness that is kinetic energy space weapons. Giant rods of inert metal hurled from space impacting the ground with the force of a nuclear bomb without the fallout.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment

What would happen if we dropped one of Obama's ears...or his ego...? Extension level event?

I don't understand. Obama's not under contract. (After all, who would willingly pay him a salary?)

(06-18-2012 09:30 AM)OLD DIRTY Wrote:  

(06-18-2012 08:40 AM)WMD Owl Wrote:  I doubt there is an orbital "nuke station" up there.

1. You have to service and inspect warheads on a regular basis. That means a launch vehicle has to dock. You can't hid that from ISR Sensors.

If a tree falls in the forest, and noone is there to see it did it make a noise?
2. Things in orbit eventually re-enter the atmosphere. You don't want to run any risk of a nuclear weapon coming back in, "armed" or not.

Low orbit, yes. High orbit requires little thrust to exit.

The USAF has at least 4 Telescopes that can resolve a 6 inch sized object in a 500 mile orbit.

Any missile or rocket launched is picked up by an IR satellite. Radars and then telescopes then identify what's been put in orbit.