/mil space general/ To what extent have states militarized space,

Too expensive, the ISS is $100 billion dollars. Better to spend a billion a piece on small fancy spy satellites.

>Is there such a thing as a clandestine rocket launch?
Not really, it's hard to hide a giant flaming tube flying through the sky.

>>28511676
I have wondered this as well, their a great deal of people who leak info all the time.

>>28511676
>Are there secret space stations, comparable to the ISS? Would it be possible to hide an elaborate program like that?
No

>Is there such a thing as a clandestine rocket launch?
No

>Are militaries planning for space warfare over asteroids or the moon?
No

File: Space Gun.jpg (65KB, 980x490px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 980x490px

>>28511676

There really isn't any advantage to have a military presence in space other than satellites which provide useful things like intelligence gather, communications, and GPS. As for putting actual weapons in space? The soviets tried it. It didn't accomplish much.

>>28511676
>Would it be possible to hide an elaborate program like that?

No, not unless the military has some super advanced cloaking tech. Amateur astronomers can easily find and view the ISS with hobbyist-level telescopes.

>>28513782
>Amateur astronomers can easily find and view the ISS with hobbyist-level telescopes.
That's because they know where to look.

>>28511676
>Transorbital
>electrogravitic

>>28513903
Bunch of my friends track a few sats which they suspect to be military, they dont publish it though, best not to draw attention. Besides, it would only be helping the enemies of this great nation.

There is no space, don't be retarded.
We live on a flat earth and the governments are deceiving you.
How stupid do you have to be to believe that space is real?
Let me disprove space with one question.
If space is real, why doesn't the air we breathe go out into space?
God, people are so fucking dumb.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/declassified-u-s-military-s-secret-cold-war-space-project-revealed/

:^)

File: tumblr_o0lg4z0Zst1r57ixdo1_1280.jpg (193KB, 1024x1434px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 1024x1434px

>>28511676
>Are there secret space stations, comparable to the ISS? Would it be possible to hide an elaborate program like that?
No, it would be completely visible to the public eye, not to mention it's literally impossible to launch a rocket without someone knowing.
>Is there such a thing as a clandestine rocket launch?
See above.
>Are militaries planning for space warfare over asteroids or the moon?
No ;_;
>Thread is open to anything related to weapons and warfare as practiced in space currently and near future
Reminder that if space warfare ever becomes a thing, conventional and kinetic weapons will reign supreme.

>>28513903
Not really, if you live away from any major light pollution and you sit out a night you know it's going to be overhead you'll see it pass over no problem.

If there was any sort of secret space station up there, we would know.

File: dafuq.jpg (95KB, 577x960px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 577x960px

>>28517070
How in the fuck does this make any sense to you? Even trolling. Okay if there was just ground spread out beneath us and it goes on forever, fine. There is still an upwards direction, you think there is another flat Earth on top of flat Earth to hold it all in there between the two?

>>28517464
>Reminder that if space warfare ever becomes a thing, conventional and kinetic weapons will reign supreme.
How do you figure they'd ever hit anything? Nothing is standing still it's all moving very fast any sort of change in their direction would send most things coming its way off course from them.

>>28517570
>How do you figure they'd ever hit anything?
My point is *if* space warfare ever becomes a thing, that's the precise reason it probably never will.

>>28517464
>Reminder that if space warfare ever becomes a thing, conventional and kinetic weapons will reign supreme.
What is the 3rd law of motion

>>28517570
We live in a dome. Antarctica is the border. There is no "south pole". That's just the area the NWO doesn't want you to see because then you would ask more questions. Any missile launch we've made to "space" was actually missiles carrying nuclear warheads to make an attempt to penetrate the dome. What is outside the dome, I do not know.

In order to have something in orbit it would have to be disguised as something else and the people that put it up there would have to like, take an oath on pain of death or something. And it would still get out somehow.

>>28517595
>dude lasers are a practical concept lmao

Also, in space, specifically engineered guided rockets will be the weapon of choice.

>>28517570
any course correction will waste ^V its all about cost benefit

>>28517596
wow stop disinfo shillling you fuck. outside the dome is the demiurge. Holy shit the MIBs are locking this thread down

>>28517608
About as practical as space warfare, so i'd say we're in the right ball park

>>28517596

A bunch of assholes with camcorders.

Doesn't take a genius to figure that out.

File: rcs.jpg (252KB, 1600x1065px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 1600x1065px

Something like guided missiles and pic related for attempting to not get fucked by missiles are a couple of the only practical weapons for such a situation, anything else would be too hard to actually hit another spacecraft moving at insane speeds with.

>>28517596
>look mom I'm trolling

>>28517616

So it's like in The Silmarillion where Melkor was banished to the void. Space is actually a prison? In the bible Jesus mentions "the outer darkness". Sounds like outer space to me.

Maybe the demiurge was locked up in a prison like the triangles from Superman and outer space is the phantom zone.

Maybe the prison is to keep the demiurge safe from US 0_____0

Duuuuude.

File: Phalanx_Turret.jpg (39KB, 450x600px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 450x600px

>>28517647
That wasn't the pic I meant to attach.

>>28517654
CIWS in space
Good lord, imagine the keks that will be had when a ship with one of these goes flying ass backwards every time it shoots

>>28517669
You'd obviously need proper thrusters to control the reaction. It'd be tricky, but certainly possible.

>>28513778

What possessed them to try a fucking autocannon and not a rocket launcher?

File: 3.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

NASA not pussying out on Project Orion when.

>>28517654
>>28517669
Doesnt the US Navy already have a greenlit, laser CIWS?

>>28517679
no point, CIWS would be too much extra mass that could be weapons, ewar or more fuel

>>28517669
>implying there's oxygen to fuel primer detination

>>28517713
It's a tradeoff, I suppose on a station in a circular orbit it would work seeing as it would only rarely need to expend delta v to raise it's orbit, allowing for more mass.

>>28517725
Uh gee fuck it must be impossible to produce a self fueling primer

>>28517712
Yep; the LaWS Laser Weapon System.

>>28517725
You dont know much about modern propellants do you?

>>28511676
This plane exists, obviously the specs and probably name somewhat inaccurate. Lockheed has been working on SSTOs since the mid 60s, and it would be foolish to think we haven't progressed much since then.

Also for all of you anti-tinfoilers crying "WAHH WE COULD NEVER KEEP A ROCKET LAUNCH SECRET"
>It's called the NRO. Fucking heard of it? Yeah only since it was declassified in the mid-90s. How many of their satellites do you think we have in orbit alone? Holy fuc/k/ you guys are delusional if you think space hasn't been militarized

>>28517751
You don't know much about the basic principles of combustion, do you?

>>28517746
Word show me one fucking firearm that utilizes this apparently common and easily replicable technology

>>28517759
Explain to me how any major world power could keep an actual rocket launch secret, not the mission of the launch (that's been done many times before), but the entire launch itself.

>>28517767
sometimes I forget I'm on /k/ especially when I read posts like these

>>28517760
*cough* self-oxidization *cough*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUdkIn7C9fA

>>28517596
A dome? What. This isn't the damn Truman Show movie. You're not going to walk into a dome wall outside. So what's above the dome if it is there? How do you explain a sun and moon up there?

>>28517768
They don't need to. How many hundreds of "NASA research missions" have been launched? How any of those were actually NASA missions?

>>28517778
>oh noes i was wrong

>>28517792
Did you even read my post.

>>28517570
>Nothing is standing still it's all moving very fast
Yes, but extremely predictably so.
>any sort of change in their direction would send most things coming its way off course from them.
See >>28517610


That said, firing solutions for projectile weapons would be almost as rare as launch windows, whereas a beam weapon would be considerably more flexible in that regard (at the expense of destructive capability). I myself am not too sure which way the cards will fall between projectile weapons and beamed energy when it comes to space weapons.

>>28517800
>>28517767
>>28517786
Well that solves that then

>>28517801
Did you even read mine? There's no need to hide rocket launches; like you said just say it was something else. As for SSTO craft, what the fuck do you think Area 51 and Diego Garcia are for? Why the fuck would they have elongated Area 51's runway by 2000 feet in the 90s?
I'm not saying it's aliens, I'm just saying the US is really fucking good

>>28517768

I'm not him, but this >>28517792

And also, we haven't needed to use rockets to get in orbit for a very long time.

>>28517788

We do live in a bubble. We definitely do. Call it a gravity well, solar system, whatever... we definitely do live in a bubble of sorts. An information containment sphere.

If there are outsiders, I hope they enjoy the show because it's really not worth the associated karmic curses. It's like in the movie "The Ring" when the girl crawls out the tv... I pity the people that watch this show without living it themselves. I hope this curse stops though. It's no different than getting a disease or computer virus IMO... It's not funny it's crushing :c

Plus, hopefully those outsiders can help us figure out things and we can help them. Jolly cooperation.

>>28517759
>and it would be foolish to think we haven't progressed much since then.
...Why?
>It's called the NRO. Fucking heard of it? Yeah only since it was declassified in the mid-90s. How many of their satellites do you think we have in orbit alone?
This shit ain't exactly secret.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NRO_Launches

>>28517767
It's called putting an oxidizer in the propellant you god damn moron

>>28517809
why would the air force bother to build the x-37 if they have a working SSTO?

hardmode: you cant say misdirection

>>28517812
are you fucking kidding me? you're a reptillian arent you? everyone knows the "outsiders" are the ones in control. please stop your shilling it doesnt work on this board

>>28517815
>hurr why would the world's largest military power try to develop and improve this incredible information-gathering and weapons platform technology as much as possible?
>hurr durr bcoz its on wikipedia that means every launch is isted, and the NRO would never piggyback a mission on something like, say, the Space Shuttle
goddamn you people are fucking stupid

>>28517809
You definitely could not hide something big enough to need a 23,000 feet landing strip to touch down at area 51.

Also,
>SSTOs
>launching from area 51
I am fucking laughing, do you know how hard it is to build and SSTO? Let alone on that could launch from a latitude that far off the equator.

>>28517829
>NRO would never piggyback a mission on something like, say, the Space Shuttle
There have been PLENTY Shuttle payloads that are classified, I just highly doubt that any of them are more than spy satellites.

How do you defend satellites in space?
Seems like taking satellites down would be a thing to do, and I think some nations already have the means to do so.

>>28517829
why the fuck would they launch a spysat on the shuttle? thats a few hundred million more than needed for a bog standard sub ton launch

>>28517847
china did that and it caused a lot of space trash. People got Very Mad. if it was done en masse it would mean no more space travel for the next 50 years

>>28517819
Boeing built the X-37. both of them.

It's because the X-37 is designed for operations/experiments that necessitate a sustained zero-g environment.
You're also making the ignorant assumption that an X-37 type vehicle would have to precede an SSTO vehicle. Which is fucking dumb

>>28517850
The Shuttle had a launch scheduled anyway, why not chip in an extra bit and throw another payload in instead of paying for a whole new launch.

>>28517845
And I haven't suggested that they're anything more than that

>>28517832
It went from 4 to 6k feet you idiot.

And no, I don't know how hard it is to build an SSTO, but yours or my knowledge in this area is fucking irrelevant.

File: 111aaa.png (974KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

974KB, 1366x768px

>>28517866
Cool, we agree than, I thought you were suggesting they were weapons platforms or something.

Nice dubs too.

File: skull.jpg (122KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 640x640px

>>28517812
You know some people call that bubble the atmosphere. When you take your medication it makes a lot more sense. Do you have a cold or something? It really sounds like you need to visit the doctor.

>>28517873
My point still stands, anything that needs a runway that long would be impossible to conceal in any way.

>>28517877
That would be impractical. The weapons platforms were sent up as other NASA rocket payloads, or as part of other classified payload deployments that could operate independently or rendezvous with other space-based vehicles.

Nice dubs three.

>>28517893
I'd love to know where you're getting these data-proofed numbers regarding the necessary runway length for SSTOs

>>28517895
Do you actually believe we have weapons platforms in space? What sort? I can't think of anything that would actually provide any valuable assets to the US.

>>28517863
the classified payload shuttle launches were entirely structured around said payloads. It's more likely the DOD was testing super secret materials and sensors rather than deploying basic spy sats. Remember what made the shuttle (and now the x-37) so great was its ability to recover satellites.

>>28517895
the only useful weapons platform would be a nuclear delivery system and that would be a pretty Big Deal.

>>28517858
a SSTO is superior to the x-37. If the airforce built one why would they still be using the x-37?

>>28517901
The Shuttle Landing Facility in Florida is 15,000 feet, the one in groom lake is 23,270 feet, any aircraft returning from space is going to need somewhere close to what the Shuttle needed, or more. If there were an aircraft returning from space and landing in groom lake, we would know.

>>28517916
Uh fucking no.
Kinetic kill vehicles are a pretty big fucking deal. Brilliant pebbles, brilliant buzzard and the like laid the foundations for a new generation of military technology and you fuckers all think its tinfoil.

>>28517827

We are all reptilian, anon.

You have parts of your brain that are pretty much identical to what reptiles have. Monkeys, too. It's the brain layers that you have that other animals don't that makes you human.

Besides, if shape shifters are real how do you know they are reptilian? They could be whatever they wanted to be. If they lost energy to hold their shape they would probably turn into goo or something.

>>28517942
You and every other fucker in this thread. "Oh yeah, we would know"
No we fucking wouldn't, that's the point of clandestine military operations. Especially ones that happen in a domain where we don't have a publicly acknowledged military presence. Like fucking space

>>28517886

>that pic

If the universe is inside your mind, how do you know you even have a skull? You could just be a brain in a jar, only processing the information you're given.

File: NYKbFpZ.jpg (233KB, 1534x1494px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 1534x1494px

>>28517953
It's a rocket launch anon, it's not exactly a "clandestine military operation" no matter what you do.

>>28517943
by the time you de-orbit your rod from god a mobile target will have left the killzone. a hardened target will indeed be royally fucked. Any weapons platform with any hope of economy would need to be positioned in an orbit that passes over such an installation. Considering major military powers already track each other's spysats it WILL be tracked. Now the US must explain what its unusually large satellite is doing orbiting over Ivan's sub pen.

>>28517952
yeah but we didn't fly here from Algol on quantum state fluctuators did we? Reptoshills BTFO

>>28517976
I was talking about SSTOs. Which are specifically not rockets. And in reference to launching secret shit on rockets, see all the previous shit about piggybacking and the NRO/related agencies. I feel like I'm explaining this to toddlers

>>28517993
Stop using the term "SSTO" so broadly, what sort of SSTO are you actually referring to?

>>28517984
This post displays an extraordinary lack of knowledge surrounding KKVs. They don't have to hover over their target, they can easily be "led" onto a target the way a sniper does with his scope, and one rocket launch could disperse dozens of KKVs to posts around the world. Read, nigga

>>28517943
a nuke platform would be a Big Deal because it would violate the Outer Space Treaty and upset current nuclear doctrine by allowing the rapid deployment of nuclear ordinance.

>>28513903
Sweet Jesus, do you live in a huge-ass city with no visible stars?

Anyone who ever spent a night or at least an evening in his yard saw at least one satellite traveling across the sky, illuminated by the sun far behind the horizon of the viewer.

>>28517993
SSTOs use rockets once they reach high enough altitude

>>28517970
Row row row your boat gently down the stream
Merily merily merily life is but a

Honestly I'm just glad no one mentioned Rods of God. Prefer to pretend that wouldn't be a real thing because of how simple it is.

>>28517996
Single stage to orbit. It's a catchall term for spaceplanes. If my phrasing offends you, then perhaps the internet is not for you

>>28518005
>countries don't regularly violate treaties

>>28518003
orbital mechanics, like a spysat they do not hover, they pass over at high altitude. one rocket could not disperse hundreds of kkvs across the world because that would require massive ^V for plane change manuevers. That is unless your weapons platform is not orbiting but simply an ICBM in which case why not simply put a nuke on it? Even then a MIRV has a limited payload and can certainly not blanket the world in KE submunitions

>>28518019
>It's a catchall term for spaceplanes
Not necessarily .

How big is this SSTO you're describing? Do you actually have any proof for it existing other than pure speculation?

>>28518016
Not necessarily.

>>28518025
not when they invite nuclear retaliation

>>28517990

The bible records life first coming from outside the earth. Fuck, if you want to get into it, life existed before light and dark were separated. Before time and space existed, even.

You would be no more alien than them.

That said, I'm much more concerned about mind controlling parasites.

>>28518019
>spaceplanes
go to bed anon, the shuttle could be considered a spaceplane and it was certainly not SSTO

I wonder if either the US or Russia has a plan in place to annex the ISS. They both have a heavy investment in it and in the event of a war I'd imagine intercountry crew co-operation would fall through the floor.

>>28518031
I said dozens, not hundreds. Strapping a few telephone poles of tungsten with what's essentially a JDAM aero package is well within the United States operational capability, and the realm of possibility. Nukes are messy and inefficient, plus they carry all the political fallout of not only using a space-based weapon but a NEWKEWLUR one. please stop posting about shit you don't know much about

>>28518033
SABRE type engines are rockets, they just include an air-breathing component

File: galenface.jpg (69KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 720x480px

>>28518019
>It's a catchall term for spaceplanes

>>28518019
>he thinks the first SSTO will be a spaceplane
laughingwhores.jpg

>>28518049
yes but why would you spend the money to put a bunch of telephone poles with guidance in orbit when you can do the whole thing much more cheaply with a plane or drone?

>>28518050
Yup, it's a neat design too, but not all SSTO designs use them.

>>28518047
The Russians have made vague threats about not letting the US on the Soyuz before.

>>28518061
what is a good TtW alternative to chemical propulsion?

>>28518017

I think simplicity is a wonderful thing.

I've trying to think of a way to get a motor with unlimited fuel. Project Pluto used a nuclear reactor to heat the cold air pulled in the intake and the expanding air out the exhaust was what gave it motion.

What about compressing the air to heat it up, and using that instead of fuel?

I'm trying to think of a way to power it with atmospheric gasses, too... but nothing common reacts to nitrogen, sadly.

An engine that uses atmospheric gas as fuel and heats atmospheric gas to propel itself...

I'm probably forced to use a reactor of some kind, unfortunately :c

>>28518033
Aurora. DynaSoar. VentureStar. The 2-piece job that was rumored to be used in the 80s. Kodak slides from lockheed showing spaceplane concepts from the 60s onward. I don't think all these billions of dollars have been spent for nothing but mothballed projects and "research"

>>28518070
>I don't think all these billions of dollars have been spent for nothing but mothballed projects and "research"
You underestimate Congress's continual NASA budget cuts, and why would they develop a top secret SSTO with a public program?

You still have no actual proof.

>>28518017
please see>>28517943
>>28517984
>>28518003
>>28518031
>>28518049
>>28518057

>>28518078
The Air Force, not NASA, would run any spaceplane or SSTO military operations. You underestimate the power of black budgets

>>28518089
there is no stealth in space, its safe to say Ivan and Xiao Mei know all about Uncle Sam's super secret SSTO

I was wondering why night /k/ was so shit, then i realized I'm arguing with a bunch of brits and convict ex-brits down under. you're all shite and your gun laws are shite.

File: 144513323492.png (51KB, 1025x840px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 1025x840px

>>28518089
Still waiting on that proof lad.

>>28518095

>shite

Irish detected.

>>28518095
Sorry lad, Washington state here.

>>28518068
I just heard about Pluto recently. It probably should not have been scrapped as a plan, it doesn't really need different fuel for the design purpose. That's far from a space object though and definitely not simple.

Simplicity is pretty good but the rods concept is like a miniature controllable extinction level event. I really don't think it's stoppable if it were launched. Practically impossible to prevent because of the actual ease of the system relatively speaking. It's neater than Pluto and probably the absolute best first strike option, but..
Pluto on the other hand is a completely psychotic idea and fits the concept of mutually assured destruction to a T.

some titanium clad bullshit being spouted in here. Funny to read actually, in between the repto truthers, flat earthers, tin foilers, and people who think orbiting weapons platforms have been deployed by the US government

>>28518095
maybe you can give us a good reason why the x-37 is still being used despite the deployment of SSTO?

>>28518129
inb4 "false flag"

File: fick.jpg (57KB, 350x250px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 350x250px

>>28518110
please read up on rods from god and then get back to me
>extinction level event
>mfw

File: beavis.jpg (129KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 500x500px

>>28518137
Dude it's like getting hit by an asteroid.
What happened to the dinosaurs?

>>28518019
SSTO is not a catchall term for spaceplanes.....
What do you think the whole fucking cold war was about?
You can't launch rockets to spawn without shit being noticed & tracked.

>>28518143
please run the math on a de-orbiting 1 ton tungsten rod.

>>28518143

The rods have much less energy than an asteroid.

They would do as much damage as a 16" shell from an Iowa. Fatten vegetation a couple hundred feet or so around it with a 20 foot deep crater.

The only difference is the rod would go much deeper into the earth. Which is lost energy.

Most all the energy a rod would have would be wasted.

>>28518143
:^))))) nice bait

>>28518123
pretty sure those all fall under tin foilers

File: carlathf.jpg (885KB, 1800x1165px) Image search: [Google]

885KB, 1800x1165px

>>28518176
It's only bait because the world is flat.

>>28518185
thats what the reptillians want you to think!

>>28517806
Beam weapons attenuate thought they do offer much better results than missiles or rails. If you have the ^V economy to fit a megawatt reactor a laser could be a possibility

>>28517070
>If space is real, why doesn't the air we breathe go out into space?

This is actually what happened to Mars

>>28511676
Okay so in this thread there are a lot or people who aparently never look at the science section of any news source and shut out any and all space based news.
>Clandestine rocket launches
YES! Not clandestine as in they launch in secret, because that is not currently possible, but clandestine as in the rocket is owned by the DOD and they dont tell anyone whats on it when it goes up.
Secifically there was a space vehicle that went up a while ago and disapeared for two years (even DOD was all like "we lost that shit yo") only to have it land where it was supposed too.
They also launch stuff all the time without making any announcements before hand. So one night you look out your window and there is a fireball going up into the sky.
>Could there be secret space stations?
Yes, but it would have to be painted black and either far enough away to remain unseen or stationary over a place where people cant observe. Still, due to cost and support needed its unlikely.

>>28518211
Oh fuck please let this be bait

>>28518211
>it would have to be painted black
No one is actually this retarded right?

>>28518232

Well, space has a lot of black so... It's camo.

That's true.

>>28518321
>>28518211
Painting objects black in space doesn't do much, because we have the means to detect thermal radiation.
Every human made space object, if it's functioning, must emit thermal radiation in some way. Especially if it's a space station, which must have life support, so crew doesn't cook alive.
Hiding objects in space is very hard. You could theoretically contain thermal radiation and then release it later, but you still have to release it and that's pretty noticeable.
People really fail to comprehend how empty the space is.

>>28511676
>To what extent have states militarized space, beyond what is disclosed publicly?

Why do people think /k/ knows this kind of stuff?

>>28518228
>>28518232
>>28518321
Exactly its cammo. I am under the asssumption radar is mitigated and we are speaking about actual visial observation.

>>28518731
>>28518983

Pretty much all stealth aircraft are black, so why wouldn't a stealth space station be black? :)

Hey... what if it's orbit was synchronous with the sun and it was painted white, or given a mirror finish :D the sun has a thermal wash, right?

STEALTH :DD

>>28518731
Space around Earth is kinda crowded. I am assuming it would only need to be hidden from civilians.
But since you mentioned thermal signatures...all they woukd really need to do is put a barrier between the station and Earth, such as a large peice of sheet metal (or even plastic) that is the same temp as the empty space around it. With nothing to conduct heat it would be the same temp as empty space. This is like when you try to look through a window with thermal cameras

>>28519017

Or, they could use a sheet of mylar. Right?

>>28518123
You're remaining willfully ignorant. The soviets had space based nukes and non nuke weapons platforms from 68-83, and that's common knowledge.
there's so much
>REE I HAVENT SEEN PIX SO THERE CANT BE SPACE WEAPONS
in this thread. that's just as fucking retarded as believing the earth is flat, or that reptilians run the gov't

File: leland-melvin-800.jpg (261KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 800x600px

>>28517669
>he only has CIWS mounted on one side of his ship
>he doesn't mirrior-mount all point defence systems for maximum stability
>stardate 2016.1.12
>not spraying lead in all directions while engaging a single target
>mfw you're missing out on glorious death blossoms

>>28518129
i answered that earlier in the thread. tl;dr different jobs for different pieces of equipment. Why do we still have runways despite the development of carriers? coming up with something new doesn't always render it's predecessor obsolete.

To those crying "tinfoil" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_weapon
just putting this out there. 30 seconds of reading should inform you that yes, there are quite obviously weapons in space

>>28520215
you really dont understand do you? Yes, we have the technology to construct orbital weapons platforms. however ballistic missiles offer the same returns as space based systems with a fraction of the cost. Plus they are much easier to hide. Just because we can do something doesn't mean we do.

>>28520272
>different jobs
they're all going to be aerospace engineers dude. I'm sorry you are clinging to this idea of SSTO so much but if the government was using them they would be so vastly superior to the x-37 program that there would simply be no point in continuing it. A SSTO requires enormously less money to launch than the x-37 (protip that money is not being used to pay workers, it's being used to purchase rocket fuel)

>>28520272
linking to a wikipedia article isnt proof that space weapons exist. No one is arguing that they arent feasible and within the reach of the US government. We are trying to point out why they are impractical from a cost standpoint.

>>28519017
sheet metal or plastic would light up on IR due to reflected light from earth

>>28517812
NEETs with drugs

Not even once.

>>28518040
Well you shouldn't worry about it.

Your mind would make them starve.

>>28521110
You're thick as hell I meant the two airframes perform different jobs, not the people working on them. Also you're making all types of assumptions based on shit you don't know about unnamed, unspecified SSTO platforms vs top secret missions of the x-37. No one knows enough to say which platform is currently superior, and again just because we have something better than the x-37 doesn't mean we wouldn't use it. We have stealth UCAVs but we still do bombing runs with f-16s and a-10s
>>28521092
seems like you don't understand that an unannounced ballistic missile launch would likely be interpreted as a nuclear act of aggression. There's plenty of scenarios where space-based weapons would be preferable to ICBMs

>>28521457
why are you clinging so hard to this? its not about the mission profile. Please go back and read my post, SSTOs are cheaper to launch than the x-37

>>28517043
Yeah your autist friends can track it but the other military powers cant...

>>28521484
They are? which ones? how much do they cost?

>>28521457
first of all, the only armed platform the soviets deployed was not capable of attacking ground targets. Second, a non nuclear weapons platform would be a waste of money. You spend a lot of cash putting your weapons into space where they can easily be seen and tracked and for what? at most a 40 kiloton boom that is only useful against immobile targets

>>28521536
I hate to break it to you man but Russian and china do track our birds, its pretty hard to hide in space

>>28521584
dude, you should know your SSTO shit, arent you the expert? If you were you would know that the recurring costs of using a SSTO are much smaller than a conventional rocket launch. Why else would people be interested in building them?

>>28521623
just tell me which ones are cheaper than the x-37 to launch. name one. i'll wait

>>28521687
Still waiting on those proofs.

>>28517877
me and OPenhimer did the math. the rod from god system would cost roughly $10mil per shot. its not economically feasible as a weapon.

>>28518092

That doesn't mean they would reveal it. What would be the point of publicly acknowledging that your rival is kicking your ass on tech? Neither of those nations are actually gearing up for war with the US. It's more important that they project to their citizens an image of parity, rather than actually being at parity. Making public the US's major tech advantage only harms that image of parity.

>>28521701
You and me both. I think we won't be seeing hard evidence of these things until mid 2020s

>>28521754
It's well documented that the US and Russia both deployed KKV platforms. I don't know how you came up with that number but it's probably inaccurate and I'd bet that a minuteman costs a lot more than 10mil

>>28521298

Drugs didn't make me like this. Repeated synchronicity made me like this. I have good reason to believe there are outsiders that see much more than I see.

>>28521313

U wot m8 ill bash your head in swear on me mum

>>28521687
Sure, SSTOs are cheaper than the X-3 in general, lets look at the skylon concept as an example. A single skylon would cost roughly $200 million to produce (at current estimates) and would be fully reusable only needing refueling after each mission. The launch vehicle for the X-37 (Atlas V) costs roughly $160 million- $200 million per launch. Hope that answers your questions

>>28522141
Dude, stop asking us for proof when you post bullshit like this. Who documented these platforms and what orbits are they in? Almaz doesnt count.

>>28523404
*X-37

File: wow.jpg (70KB, 248x252px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 248x252px

>>28523404

Sure, all SSTOs are cheaper because they only exist on paper.

>>28525204
But anon, didnt you hear? The US government uses them at area 51.

>>28511733

Depends on where you launch it, there's a while lot of nothing on earth. That said, the most effective clandestine rocket launch would be to launch a rocket like normal and just lie your ass off about the payload.

>>28517925

Because the SSTO was giving it's technicians cancer from the fuel.

>>28521110
>protip that money is not being used to pay workers, it's being used to purchase rocket fuel

Liquid Oxygen is something like $0.10/gallon.

>>28525640
how much liquid oxygen do you think it takes to lift a rocket into orbit?

>>28525572
maybe, got a source?

>>28525773
not much compared to spending 1 billion dollars to build the damn thing

All this talk is fucking meaningless, because Space X exists now, and has landed their first stage.

>>28525773
The fuel costs of launching a commercial satellite are generally about 1% or less of the total launch cost. The rest of the cost is primarily the vehicle itself, especially the first stage engine.

>>28528380
50%+ of the cost is likely the huge profit margin

>>28523404
I guarantee the Skylon will cost more than $200m. A Boeing 777X is about $300m and it doesn't have to reach orbit, travel at hypersonic speeds or carry cryogenic fuels.

Skylon will be $500m minimum, maybe as much as a couple of billion depending on how R&D costs are spread. Doesn't mean it won't be cost effective, just means it'll need to do more launches to make up it's cost.

>>28528395
Sure is, but they won't be charging the same amount, they're reducing the cost of getting things to space. IIRC SpaceX thinks they can reduce it by 3/4 just with Falcon 9's technologies. They've also been filing patents for completely autonomous refurbishment and relaunching, although that's some way away.

>>28511676
what the fuck is this? is this supposed to explain the phoenix lights or something?

>>28511676
So what's OPs image supposed to be, anyway, some kind of speculative fiction? Because as soon as I saw
>Electrogravitic
any possible suspension of disbelief vanished.