[meteorite-list] X37B Orbital Bomber

From: Sterling K. Webb <sterling_k_webb_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 23:41:12 -0500
Message-ID: <D53AAA5EAE87451FAA6CFC84E5AE64B1_at_ATARIENGINE2>

Darren, Count, List,

The term "meteor-like weapons" is vague and imprecise.
However, a low orbit platform is traveling at just a hair
under 8000 m/s in the lowest possible orbit. "Firing"
the kinetic weapon is just a matter of reducing the
velocity of the projectile to a degree necessary to cause
its new elliptical orbit to intersect the surface of the
Earth at some specified point. The more you reduce
its velocity the closer the point to the release and vice
versa.

The crucial factor in passing through the atmosphere
without loss of velocity is the aspect ratio of the falling
projectile. Here we mean the ratio of length to diameter.
At an aspect ratio of 20:1, there is virtually no loss
of velocity. Above 10:1, the loss is less than 10% of
the original orbital velocity. This is assuming an
aerodynamically "clean" projectile.

Picture a big stainless-steel needle 6 to 8 feet long,
4 to 8 inches in diameter, with a long tapering point
and polished to a high finish. It would impact the Earth
at roughly 7000 m/s. It would penetrate weak surfaces
and explode (vaporize) at hard ones.

The US Navy announced, in 2007, plans to build a
prototype for a 64 megajoule kinetic weapon (tungsten
rods) to be fired from naval vessels. It would have a
range of 200 to 250 miles, fly in a parabolic trajectory
90 to 100 miles high, and the 40 pound rod would
impact at target with the energy release of driving a
3100-pound Ford Taurus into the target at something
like 380 mph.

Sounds unpleasant. Air bags? But this impressive
gravity assist is piddling compared to dropping rocks
from the freeway overpass of low orbit. The big stainless
steel needle described above would impact with about
120 times the force of that same Ford Taurus.

If all of this sounds counter-intuitive, well, the aim of
re-entering a spacecraft is to get it to do so as slowly
as possible, to dissipate its kinetic energy in the most
efficient manner, and to arrive at the surface with the
least kinetic energy. The aim of these weapons is to
accomplish precisely the opposite in every regard.


Sterling K. Webb
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Darren Garrison" <cynapse at charter.net>
To: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 10:36 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] X37B Orbital Bomber


> With all due respect to your old pilot friend, that sounds like a
> steaming pile
> of crap.
>
> Meteoids enter the atmosphere at a range of 11 to 72 KM/s (according
> to this,
> which excepts the Encyclopedia Britannica)
>
> http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/glossary/meteor.html
>
> At the lowest of LEOs, satellites travel at less than 8 KM/s, slower
> than the
> slowest meteoids (and of course, the higher the orbit, the lower the
> satellite.)
> You could be generous and call that "cosmic velocity", I suppose. But
> even so,
> that passive impactor would act just like a real meteoroid-- it would
> lose all
> of it's velocity and finish it's fall going at nothing more than the
> normal
> terminal velocity it would have if you dropped it from a high-flying
> plane. To
> retain "cosmic velocity", it would have to be HUGE. Remember the
> space shuttle
> Columbia burning up on reentry? Remember any of the big fragments of
> it
> destroying any towns?
>
>
>
> On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 20:40:27 -0400 (EDT), you wrote:
>
>>List,
>>
>>I post because this unmanned orbital bomber uses passive meteor like
>>weapons to destroy terrestrial targets at cosmic velocities. I was
>>formerly Director of Aviation Facilities for the Hughes Tool Company
>>in the late 60's and an old pilot friend with high field grade USAF
>>and NASA connections sent the communication below.
>>
>>The X37B using an Atlas V booster was sent up yesterday. I was told by
>>another NASA type that five years ago somebody in the Pentagon
>>responsible for USAF weapons development saw an "It Came From Outer
>>Space" movie and got the idea to use man made impactors to destroy
>>targetslike the errant asteroids in the movie. NASA had this
>>hypersonic craft already under development, transferred it to the USAF
>>in 2006, and re-engineered it to carry multiple impactors and
>>guidance. Star Wars has arrived.
>>
>>Count Deiro
>>IMCA 3536
>>
>>
>>
>>Farouk,
>>
>>I believe you are referring to the X37B reusable space plane that was
>>launched on the 21st four hours after DARPA's Mach 20 Hypersonic
>>Vehicle went up.
>>I'm not briefed in on either so can talk freely. However, it's like
>>relating the contents of a letter I haven't read.
>>
>>We have long needed something like the Global Hawk, but lingering in
>>space and having additional capability; something that can take stuff
>>up, maneuver while up there, place satellites, pick up satellites and
>>move them or even bring them home. GPS and com satellites are a huge
>>requirement as well as all the secret stuff that's required to be up
>>there. Originally, the space shuttle was going to do these things but
>>it never panned out.
>>Reportably the 37B will be capable of station times of 9 months or
>>longer.
>>Don't see why it couldn't eventually stay much longer since they don't
>>need to take a supply of M&M's to reward the navigators.
>>Also, there's the weaponization angle. From space, one only needs to
>>hit a target: no explosive required.
>>A pound or so of depleted uranium dropped from space and goodbye
>>battleship, building or whatever.
>>A hypersonic ball, dropped from space and landing on the centerline of
>>Tehran airport would send a stark message.
>>
>>A Mach 20 Hypersonic Vehicle could strike anywhere in the world
>>without warning. On the test shot they are maneuvering hypersonic and
>>that's just in the "Glide" phase. What is cleverly not said here is
>>how fast was it going under power? They will complete the test by
>>dunking it into the ocean at more than 13,000 miles an hour. A wet
>>sponge at 13,000 miles per would hit like an atomic weapon. 13,000 mph
>>= about Mach 17
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Shack
>>
>>______________________________________________
>>Visit the Archives at
>>http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>>Meteorite-list mailing list
>>Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
> ______________________________________________
> Visit the Archives at
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Sat 24 Apr 2010 12:41:12 AM PDT