Why Russians Think X-37 is a Nuclear Space Bomber
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 04. 2024
- Discord: / discord
Patreon: / nwyt
X-37 is an interesting space program. It is publicized a lot, but little is known about it. We think X-37 is #NotWhatYouThink #NWYT #longs
Music:
Make No Mistakes - Bonnie Grace
Twilight Mystery - Marten Moses
In America (Instrumental Version) - Badskum
Kissed by Thunder - Elliot Holmes
Safeword (Instrumental Version) - Torii Wolf
Kowli - i.am.in - / koli
Dark Mind - Wendel Scherer
Coming Back for More - Jon Bjork
New Horizons - Jon Bjork
Lost Touch (Instrumental Version) - Flux Vortex
Elastic Powers - Dream Cave
Sidelined - Dip Diet
Camp Crossing - Anthony Earls
Footage:
US Department of Defense
Note: "The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement."
00:00 Open Secret
01:23 X-37 Known Specifications
02:54 Why Wear Hazmat Suits
04:44 Official Mission of X-37B
06:30 Why Russians Think X-37 is a Nuclear Bomber
12:10 HL-20 & HL-42
13:55 X-41
14:57 HTV-2
15:39 Avangard Hypersonic Missile
16:52 X-37 Speculation
19:21 Kinetic Weapons
20:45 Outer Space Treaty Debunked
I mean anything can be a nuclear bomber… at least once.
*slaps roof of Fiat 500*
This single use nuclear bomber can fit so many shopping bags.
@@stalincat2457
*single use?*
@@stalincat2457 bruh lol
Eat taco bell, becomes atomic bomb.
HA!. Nice.
“Rocket scientists just don’t like to die” is a bold statement, most just tread the line of “maybe we die, maybe we make something cool, only one way to find out”
Rocket/test pilots say this. The rocket scientists tend to go into concrete bunkers when testing the rockets.
As Scott Crossfield said "They call this building the pilot's confidence." He was in the seat of an X-15 when it exploded on a test stand. :)
“We don’t like to die, but when we do it better because of something the makes the front page news.”
“But, given the option, we’d PREFER not to die.”
SCAPE baby!
I prefer the Klingon warrior's motto: Today is a good day to die.
“It can stay in space up to 279 days” next sentence “it’s longest mission was 700 days.” 🤦♂️
Fortunately, it can extend it's reentry glide for 421 days, giving it a significant crossrange/downrange capability, and a secondary aerial recon ability. 😀 (I am an inveterate YT comment section poster and I have NEVER used an emoji before. I am of the emoticon generation. :-] )
@@digitalnomad9985 then my point still stands it can stay up for 700 days not 279. I too am part of the “page me” Generation.
@@dontimberman5493 He just used an emoji for the first time since 1986, and you’re making fun of him? How dare you!
maybs sometimes the classified part is difficult to hide? idk
Meeting topic: What's gonna be our cover story?
Employee: Well let's pick something onboard that's dangerous and say we wanna protect ppl on the ground.
Employee 2: Okay it's got a big tank of hydrazine.
Everyone: ok everybody no more laughing. I think we're going with that.
To be fair, it *did* have a big tank of hydrazine, and China had deliberately destroyed a satellite themselves a year before the US destroyed 193. Regardless of that though, the US had no reason to do a test since we already could destroy satellites in the 80s, with a 2-stage missile fired from an F-15. (Solwind / P78-1) All in all, no need for it to be an ASAT test coverup, it likely really was just a failing satellite with a lot of toxic fuel.
The problem with believing Yan Novikov, is that he has an interest in Russia spending money on weapon development. For him, it is beneficial if Russia thinks that this is a nuclear space bomber.
Exactly. He sells defense weapons. He loses money if it's not carrying weapons.
The same goes for USA/NATO industries, so in the end, it doesn't really matter because both sides will be developing weapons
@@l.palacio9076 It kinda doesn't. You don't see Gregory Hayes going around giving power points on how Almaz-Antey is going to develop sci-fi stuff if you don't buy their stuff.
@@l.palacio9076 That's what Pro-Russians say to make themselves feel better
That was my thought exactly. He’s got vested interests to make the Russian government not only spend money, but spend it on his company.
The speed in space numbers are always funny to me because...yeah it goes fast, it's in orbit. The ISS is going really fast and it's basically a building.
The ISS is just a big balloon (as are all satellites) we can't go to space. We can't go to "orbit" NASA is the largest consumer of helium in the world. And no helium is not useful as a fuel it's inert
Technically the max speed any object in space can achieve is the light speed
@@deusvult6920 lol, bait.
@@deusvult6920 Ha thank's for making me laugh today
@@deusvult6920 so funni
Step 1: create a vague space vehicle
Step 2: let your enemies give you ideas on how to use it by listening to them complaining about it being an obvious space weapon
Step 3: turn it into space weapon designed by the enemies
I used to just catch your shorts, but I’m pleasantly surprised by your long form videos. Good research, good information, very clearly and evenly presented.
I think the vehicle is designed to tether other satellites and drag them out of orbit. It has insane orbit changing capabilities and would be very hard to track when moving orbits so often.
That's a really interesting idea because it solves the problem that conventional explosives have which is that they create space debris when they blow something up.
That's a very interesting idea, but it would probably have to match the satellite's speed and heading for that if the process takes any time, right? In that case it probably takes a huge amount of energy per mission.
@@T33K3SS3LCH3N It would need to be a close approach but any craft passing inside 600km of a nations satellites are tracked anyway - The idea of debris from explosions causing huge risk is not really a thing
Almost all satelietes need a fuel store for maintaining station keeping as the orbits are subtly altered over time by the gravity of the moon
This video didn't list the real most likely use of the X-37 - Satellite interceptor
If the X-37 uses an orbital skim to match a rough orbital plain it would only need a missile like that of a SM-3 with a long burning rocket to match a kinetic intercept - Any debris would be limited as it would be a purely kinetic impact and it most cases could be angled from a head on contact, maximizing contact energy and making it so any debris is decelerated radically and rapidly de-orbits
The X-37 could have a 8 to 12 missile on a rotary launcher and could perform multiple satellite take downs per launch
I believe it could also be used to steal russian/chinese satalites and bring back to earth safely so they can copy or scrutinise them
It will be used to inject techno parasites into Chinese and Russian satellites to reprogram them to produce erroneous data without detection.
X37 was a NASA project to build a space craft to service satelites. The project was taken over by DARPA. Being able to monkey around with other peoples satelites would be something to keep secret.
Not really, you could research U.S. Air Force Space Command's offensive space doctrine online as early as the mid 2000s. Of course, it now falls under Space Force.
I wonder if the work on spaceplanes is to make a cheaper shuttle that the military can use on it's own to deploy and service their own satellites using their own orbital platform / delivery system. If they worked out a system like spaceship two the Space Force could do it without a rocket launch from the more secret airbases in the US, as well as land there too, without as many prying eyes as you would have at established rocket launch sites like Vandenburg or Canaveral.
It took me scrolling too far to find this is pretty simple service us satellites and spy on other's
This is silly. It doesn't have the ability to maneuver. It is too small to carry enough fuel to make such maneuvers for such a long time. At best, it would be able to do it once, then it would have to come back to Earth and refuel; and even then, that is a HUGE maybe. The X-37b is just too small. I do like that you thought about its potential uses. But you are going to have to keep thinking, because this one a dud.
That's my bet. Pretty sure a part of the shuttle program design was the ability to mess with other's satellites. I'd guess the X37 is just a smaller remote control version of a mobile satellite hacking platform.
The most unique thing I've heard postulated about the X-37, as opposed to conventional satellites, is that it can drop into the upper atmosphere to make major course changes.
I’ve heard sonic booms plenty before living near Mcdill and with the space ship launches. This one was different when it came back recently, it wasn’t loud so much as house shaking, vibration type of deal. It woke me up because it sounded like someone opened and shut my front door violently. I popped up and grabbed my pistol. There is something special about that thing.
Something special about bud light drinkers too. 😂
22:04 It's the Budapest Memorandum, not the Bucharest Memorandum. And controversial that NWYT left out that Russia didn't hold their side of the agreement on 2014 either..
“Rocket scientists, just don’t want to die” *spits out coffee in shock….. WHAT?!?! 😂
Kerbal Space Program moment
I think, at this point in time with use being still so early in the space warfare age, the X-37 is just being used to test technologies related to space warfare instead of being a weapon itself. May it be imaging hardware, exposed material experiments, or systems to be implemented on future missions. This way it’s cheaper than creating a disposable satellite and is able to keep near peers on their toes trying to figure out what it is.
Cheaper and safer than sending people up there
@@rogerdavies6226 Well it is always safer to send an automated machine in to do anything.
Great content as always 👏 thanks
Frankly with how open they were with the launch of this and video of it i'd start looking for anything else they might have done during the launch to see if this is another case of deception like the Zircon satellite thing.
@@baylog9679 ???
@@xlieusly978 The UK had this whole really expensive satellite program that they thought was superduper top secret. It got uncovered by... an accountant. When a journalist asked one of the dudes in charge about zircon. His jaw dropped and he got all wide eyed. 100% couldn't believe the general public knew about it. There's video of the interview on YT somewhere. It's pretty funny.
@@xlieusly978 it's around the 23 minute mark. czcams.com/video/s1CKnFqeXkg/video.html
Aye it is a very complicated matter but another theory was that they allowed the public to gain knowledge of this in order to draw their eyes away from something else.
@@enzicalabs6166 its actually thought that Zircon was a ploy and that one of the other three "weather" satellites were spy sates. This video has some pretty compelling evidence as to why that is the prevailing theory czcams.com/video/s1CKnFqeXkg/video.html
My take is that the X-37 is an all-purpose utility vehicle, and that shear utility lends itself very well to any number of military uses. That role it's filling is determined solely by the payload, which is by default completely modular. Many of the various scientific tests are about things that both civilian and military fields would find of interest. Additionally, its flight profile is far more flexible than older satellites, and as everybody's orbital watch programs were build around those old limitations renders them far less valid by default. Previously, satalites were like rail roads, and the X-37 is a truck that can go off road. There are many reasons to want something that can go off road.
Finally, its entirely possible that both the program itself is perfectly clean and there are direct military uses being developed. The payload bay is of known design, so handing those numbers off to a separate team/program with otherwise no connections is completely possible. This is basic compartmentalization, and allows people to truthfully say they don't know about things that are happening.
This is without a doubt the answer- this way each field's experts can be tapped with clear conscience, far fewer OSINT concerns, etc
my exact thought tbh
An open platform to be utilized for whatever situation demands
Negative Ghost rider. It has one use and one use only. He he
I'd say mostly this, with a primary emphasis as a test platform for new propulsion systems - i.e. advanced plasma thruster prototypes or similar that are coming via black projects and not the open R&D pipeline. Where better to test one panel of a Millennium Falcon style thruster cell than with a craft we already admit has odd ability to change orbit much more than most previous vehicles could... well, yeah.... great way to more or less admit what you're using it for while still being quiet about actual capabilities (as long as you use limited power during tests so nothing too quick/fishy happens that would raise their suspicion more) :D
Thank you for posting the metric units on screen
@7:49 is a good photo of the bottom of the nose of the aircraft. The heat shield tile layout looks particularly interesting. As of those around the oval tile could fold forward over the oval tile like petals of a flower closing at night. This would allow a telescope to be housed behind and have the secondary mirror on the back side of the oval tile. This also fits with why the front looks significantly thicker than the space shuttle design, the odd location thrusters at the nose area and why the heatshield tiles go so far up the side of the nose...to protect sensitive equipment located therein. This is a moveable telescope that can change predictable orbits (something that known about satellites and is used in mission planning on the ground to hide assets). Tthe cargo bay probably houses fold out communication equipment to pass data to other satellites or ground stations. I doubt the vehicle would carry a warhead in the cargo bay, or it would have to jettison it each time before landing. A payload like that would be too heavy and high risk to attempt a landing at any of the known sites. Now, they could have tested the effects of space on warhead components, but bringing a device back is again, very high risk and would probably land at a less populated site.
The Space shuttle RCS used hydrazine as fuel. That’s why they would always “safe” the orbiter after each landing.
safe?
@@NoNameAtAll2 insure that there is no risk of hydrazine exposure of the operators. It is highly reactive, toxic and corrosive substance. They generally purge the RCS tanks on track or shortly after.
@@NoNameAtAll2 Have you ever seen a video of the space shuttle been moved from the landing strip to the orbiter processing facility (OPF)? There are always two trucks that tail each side of the orbiter and they are connected to it with cables. Those trucks are there to contain any remaining benzene that is still left inside after each flight. Nobody is allowed to exit the orbiter until those trucks are in position and connected.
yeah I remember during the columbia disaster they were telling people not to go near any of the debris because of this reason
@@zashbot they might said that to keep ppl away from picking up debris, but still true.
I’d wager that the OTV is doing exactly what the military is saying it’s doing, but it probably has the operational capability to be a weapons platform. IE it has yet to be used as a weapons delivery system, and with any luck, it never will be called to do so.
@Longan B yes I think though too. We also should look at the fact that those theories existed also for the Spaceshuttles and they were never intended or used as a weapons platform .
It's so we can visit our alien friends.
Satellite deployment and recovery too.
@@nighthunter3039 They were however made to capture satlites and preform recon... hince the large wings... But again they never did.
Sure but like so can a Starship or a Falcon 9 and no one is saying they would be used for space war... Which monerd space craft designs are ineffect to be used for war... No downward bays... They can bearly fly in atmosphere... they have very limited fuel supply... I mean it's like using a Toyota truck for war you can but it just does not work well...
Really interesting. i love your delivery.
Really well made video
The reason why people like this channel because this channel always give interesting videos with a lot of information and facts for us to listen to. Even I got interested in watching their videos.
i agree
Or really really good misinformation that’s entertaining nonetheless. 😂
@@tonyroberts7481 how is it misinformation
you are literally a subscriber
@@meisya7181 Spam Reports Please
" even you" ? Whats that supposed to mean, youre a special boy?
It’s sad that NASA had to cancel “winged re-entry vehicles” in part due to cost, but the military industrial complex has unlimited funding so they took up the project.
Funny that people think this is more expensive. Those vehicles are very useful, but the Shuttle failed not because they are costly, but because congress made it so. Designed by committee, doomed to fail. The X-37 probably runs on a fraction of the budget for a single manned mission. After all, keeping the squishies alive takes up so much effort and resources, mass and space more than half of the allotted funds for a given mission goes into that. It is successful because it was designed with all the lessons learned put into it, and less amount of people pulling strings and getting in each other's way.
@@stratometal Yes, the shuttles were complex and costly. The promise of putting stuff into orbit cheaply with a reusable space plane didn't pan out and the loss of two shuttles and many lives was proof that it the system was too complex to be safe. Most still dream of a true SSTO space plane, but at this point reusable falcon rockets are the best cheap solution.
@@Phrancis5 As mentioned the process for the design that lead to a complex and inefficient system was the result of politicians doing what they do best. Now they doing it to the SLS project, they also did it to the F-35 project. Private companies have a better time with the design of things because there are fewer cooks stirring the pot. Anyway, Starship is a shuttle too, and its not a true SSTO either. Boosters is the efficient way to launch shuttles, but the refurbishing and servicing is what makes or breaks a system.
@@stratometal The Space Shuttle was a joint project of NASA and the Air Force. It was latter requirements which made for a complex and expensive vehicle.
Sierra Nevada Corporation is working on low cost winged vehicle. The unmanned version is scheduled to launch in 2023.
Very interesting video with so much information about X37
This was a great video, you know too much. Stay safe
First strike weapons are incredibly destabilizing as they mess with mutually assured destruction. That’s why the Soviets were freaking out at Reagan’s proposed Star Wars missile defense system because it could’ve enabled a successful preemptive strike
Defence being a significant word in that statement not attack
@@dave_h_8742 Having a way to defend allows you to attack.
Purely defensive weapons are a myth because they still improve your offensive capabilities.
@@tylerhayslett9073 Star Wars was a (planned) defense system. If it would work; you cannot get hit by the enemy. So what stops you from attacking first with other stuff?
Like hitler who built a wall between Germany and France+Luxemburg+Belgium before attacking Poland.
Looking back, it was pretty clear that the various proposed methods, "brilliant pebbles'" nuclear-pumped lasers, EMP, just could not succeed. This was at once appreciated by the Soviet leadership and ignored. Because, one possible response to Star Wars was, "Go ahead. Waste your money. Countermeasures (decoys, ablative surfaces, MARV) are fantastically cheaper." That's not the attitude they took. Why, I have no idea. In the era of MIRV, even the survival of a few missiles could devastate your society. A few dozen with MIRV could destroy it utterly. America never had a prospect of reducing a second-strike to that degree.
America is the only one out of the 3 superpowers that don’t have nukes that go like Mach 8- nukes that can’t be hit with the iron dome defense system. They’re to fast and can’t be shot down while America’s nukes are slow enough to be disabled before hitting but with almost 2500 warheads in our arsenal I don’t think shooting down a few will change their outcome. It only takes about 200 nukes to destroy every inch of land on earth and make it unlivable, America has over 2k. If the world goes into nuclear meltdown mode Americans won’t see it coming while Russians and Chinese will have to watch as a unstoppable blanket of nukes falls from the sky.
Almost certainly not a weapons platform. If you think 'Of course it's a nuclear bomber in space' just ask yourself why the US or anyone would need one of those. ICBM's already travel through space to get to their targets, and can be launched from anywhere, land sea or even air. This is an intelligence gathering platform of some sort. Ivy Bells in space.
Just a guess.
Also, a secret space bomber is useless as a deterrent, so some sort of intelligence platform makes more sense.
This thing could drop nukes with zero zero zero notice.... I'll repeat... zero notice until bomb go boom.
@@williamh.gatesiii8183 hypersonic missle you have about 3-5 minutes to come up with a technology to stop it and that’s if it is launched from the other side of the earth lol
@buffalo wt you know ICBMs go like Mach 16, right? They've always been hypersonic.
@@jadedandbitter Aww... I wasn't gunna say it, but no. They really don't seem to comprehend that...
The scientist who created the V1 rockets had this to say about them: "It worked perfectly. It just landed on the wrong planet." He had created them originally to explore space. But the government had other ideas.
Bullshit, V1 weren't rockets.
Here is one of my fav stories on the X-37. It has an FTL drive. And that's why it keeps popping in and out of radar not just orbit changes.
Dude, the X-37 being a nuclear space bomber would just be an ICBM with extra steps. Sure, it could be used for such a thing, but it just sounds impractical.
The difference that they covered in this video is that it can change its orbit quickly and without immediate detection, allowing the warheads to skip their boost and midcourse phase and go straight to terminal phase, which makes a nuclear attack significantly more difficult to detect than a traditional icbm launch (much harder to detect a small warhead falling straight down than a large icbm booster firing), and allows as little as 5-8 minutes to respond before impact as opposed to the typical 30 minutes for an icbm.
@@Cyrus_Bickell it can’t change orbits quickly, just not possible for the X-37. It can do it, but it would take a long time. The “Russian” saying this is biased as he is a defense contractor and wants to create an image of a hypothetical foreign threat to justify funding of his own programs.
@@jonathanpfeffer3716 It has been proven that it can make at-least a 10 degree inclination change in a single while remaining in orbit - if it commits to a de-orbit post maneuver it can manage a change of 27 degrees and then when sub orbital it is like any other plane
@@jonathanpfeffer3716 That may be true, and I understand he has a financial interest in playing up the threat of these planes, but idk how can you know for sure what this plane is actually capable of?
@@Cyrus_Bickell The numbers on comparable platforms and the limited amount of current numbers is what I’m getting that info from. I don’t know the specifics of course, but just looking at the design and the intended purpose of it I am quite confident that it would not be capable of it.
Just from the get go, though, it wouldn’t make sense for it to be a nuclear strike craft. Even if it were capable of putting a nuclear weapon in a low enough orbit fast enough, that would just be a single nuclear weapon, and if it struck any target it would trigger a full scale nuclear retaliation anyways, just like a normal ICBM would. Not to mention how it would violate a litany of treaties just by existing, and be an absolute diplomatic nightmare.
love these longer videos!
They are really interesting
If sometime is traveling too fast anything can penetrate it.
Hypersonic warfare items is therefore unstable and unsafe.
2:46 the larger shuttle is the background with the X-37 landing, looks epic
This is pretty much guaranteed to be a flexible surveillance asset. It's useless as a first strike weapon.
The Russians think everything is a weapon, as do the Chinese for whom even eating utensils are weapons.
The most effective way for the X37's to be used to enhance weapons capabilities in space is to NOT be the weapon, but to install, maintain and remove those weapons. Tungsten 'Rods From God' are probably the most lethal of said potentials as it combines stealth with absolute destruction, no radiation and no surface blast to attract the attention of low Earth orbit satellites.
when dozens of experts in the field you're theorizing about say X,
and you (a layman) claims it's OBVIOUSLY Y....
you will find yourself wrong 99.99999999999999999999999% of the time.
and every single one of you guys thinks you are:
A: not a layman & somehow possess knowledge experts gathered over 10 years.
B: part of the .0000000000000000000000000000000001%
C: both.
and you're always super confident.
shall i bring up that graph of "how much you know vs confidence" ? XD
Officially these are called Orbital Reconnaissance Global Air to Surface Missiles (or “ORGASMs” for short).
I give you plus five points just for the complexity of that backronym. 👍
I'm still a little confused by that last statement. The United States and Britain did not hold up their end of the bargain for the Bucharest accord or whatever it was called? I'm pretty sure neither of them are the ones that invaded Ukraine and claimed a huge portion of its military infrastructure as their own.
Dudes 100% pro-russia. He even tries to play it off in the beginning of the video. RUZZIAN NAZI CONFIRMED.
That’s exactly why I’m here. What am I missing here? I’m sure that maybe the US and UK haven’t protected Ukraine’s boundaries, but not including Russia in that? I too am confused by that statement.
@@JuraiEmperor it's sarcasm
I would think it would make more since for the X37b to make either a one orbit or a parabala trajectory for any kind of weapon system. This was the intent with the X 20 Dyna-Soar Space vehicle.
This was great video with mysterious vibes with greatly interesting informative content. Thank you
@K e y l a 🇭🇲 ...
It's the first generation space fighter for United States Space Force.
😂 that would be funny.
Space Force.
You would love watching "for all mankind" Series lol
@buffalo wt I guess it doesn't have to fight if it just sends 6 nukes to where ever. Or destroy satellites in different orbits.
@buffalo wt as opposed to what
'Rocket scientists just don't like to die!' I love this dude lol.
They launch often just 20 min from my house. Kinda cool seeing lots of rocket launches all the time. (Vandenberg)
Love your work. All ways amazing. Keep it up!
Think of it more as a spy satellite that is able to rapidly change paths, making it extremely hard for targeted countries to counter/conceal sensitive areas in time.
Also has high survivability in the case of war.
I just like to imagine that there's atleast one satellite that has a nuke inside it. highly unlikely that it will launch it from there but maybe they make the satellite crash and activate it. Cool conspiracy theory tho
You can’t do that in space
Speaking of spying, something funny I thought of during this video is when he mentioned the US spying on a chinese space station. I thought, it's possible that the US would want to see how all their stolen technology is doing in CCP hands lol
@@nicolascataldo69420 Our space station tech is not secret. We openly publish it in hopes that others cooperate, not to mention the Russians built half of it.
Great video...
An orbital weapons platform isn't practical. It would take several orbits to get it in the general vicinity of a target, if you're lucky. And, it takes 90 minutes to orbit.
A sub orbital ballistic missile only has to go half an orbit or less(45 minutes or less), and can be shot directly towards the target.
So make multiple platforms
It was just demonstrated that the space shuttle was a Russian idea, used as a medium to get space, for multiple nuclear projectiles at once..
The space age started years ago... literally. People have been thinking and refining this tech already
No one but you thought of the death star with a mega ray that needed the exact trajectory and orbital axis to pick point it's target on point.
@@thedude9461 You realize how much energy and time it would take to de-orbit a warhead into even a couple hundred miles of a city or military installation? If you were willing to waste a LOT of fuel on inclination changes, maybe hours, otherwise days. And then you still need a sizable rocket engine to deorbit the entry vehicle. And then your entry vehicle has be significantly sturdier than an ICBM reentry vehicle, because it's moving at orbital velocities instead of suborbital.
Orbital nuclear weapons are very dumb and impractical. ICBMs are MUCH cheaper, faster, and more reliable.
long NWYT videos makes my day so much better.
True, and at the same time they give interesting info
Russia has long made a tradition of calling every piece of American equipment a “new nuclear deliver platform”. It helps justify their own proliferation.
*the Air Force gives its personnel paper airplanes to combat boredom*
Russia: New nuclear delivery platform!!!!!!
Bro they made mortars with nuclear warheads, it's not senseless to think it could be used
The Russian military has a capabilty and technology gap with NATO - and proliferation (especially tactical nukes) are used to try plug the gap as best they can.
Unfortunately history of USA have worst examples of full destruction of third-party countries with all population only for political cause-the tonnes bombardment of Laos and Cambodia states near Vietnam war, which was ignored by any UN and historians. Viewing on current Ukraine conflict demands, where are reparations and compensations still from USA?
thank you Bill Clinton
It's primary use is as an anti-satellite weapon. However a small warhead could be placed inside and launched from the bay without the cumbersome need for the large boosters. Launch, guide, and let gravity do a lot of the work. So it can be a very nice orbital nuclear platform/bomber.
Excellent idea
Bucharest memorandum
this doc was never ratified by parliaments, so it never "entered service". And moreover. Memorandum (contrary to a treaty) is a class of multination agreement, that fixes intents but imposes no constraints or obligations/guarantees. In that particular doc - 3 nations stated intent to defend Ukraine
I think it's a multi roll platform that can operate in space . That cargo bay can hold and deploy a satellite or it can be a satellite that can change it's own orbit and altitude . It can fly back down if repairs are needed . With an opening cargo bay it could hold weapons and deploy them or the whole plane could become a vertical down or cruise missile and also hold other Intel gathering equipment . It can also retrieve broken satellites and return them for repairs to Earth . It could possibly retrieve low orbit space junk .
It could also pluck an enemies satellite and bring it home for analysis . Due to the cost and time involved in launching one I doubt it's actually a viable weapons platform unless it's the last ditch stand kind of weapon in space but as an Intel gatherer it looks interesting .
i've seen this space craft in one of those military ads
Hydrazine is most likely used in the positioning boosters in the nose and side. Doubt it's used for the main propulsion.
I love orbital bombardment by kinetic weapons, it's such a clean satisfying weapon system, no propellants (except for hasty deorbitting), no explosives or nuclear warheads or fancy stuff, you're literally just throwing a giant dense needle so fast that it can penetrate even the toughest bunkers, and thanks to modern technology it's quite likely to hit.
Except kinetic bombardment from orbit is utterly impractical. Orbital and kinetic bombardment are mutually exclusive…
@@allangibson2408 why is it impractical to have an orbital based one? Just leave them in orbit until needed?
@@kemble9900 Because a kinetic impactor needs to DE-orbit first. It’s a gross waste of energy.
It would actually be more efficient to fire a kinetic energy weapon from Mars than Earth orbit…
You overestimate modern technology, There's a reason why Crew Dragon and other capsules land in the ocean or otherwise huge flat areas of land. Compensating for minute atmospheric changes on the way back to earth is very difficult. Even with the guided capsules, the possible landing zone is absolutely huge. We can't even measure some of these atmospheric changes without physically sampling the area (why we launch weather balloons, to test before rocket launches the high altitude atmospheric conditions)
Completely unguided is out of the question. You could miss the entire country with that sort of margin of error using a completely unguided system.
@@allangibson2408 I am aware of the impracticality and I do not care
21:53 What part of the bargain was the US and United Kingdom supposed to keep in that treaty? What did they fail to keep? Did Ukraine destroy their nuclear arsenal? Did Russia keep to their end of the bargain?
Did Russia keep to their end of the bargain? Did Russia invade Ukraine? Putin says "No. Russia did not invade Ukraine. merely little peace keeping mission."
@@StevenSiew2 haha thank you for finishing lol. He brought that up on the video but never responded to my questions. Putin bad
@@johnnyc5655 we need to keep asking!
You. can look all of it up easily
@@Joesolo13 understood. Putin bad.
Small correction at 21:53 - perhaps I’m mishearing, but it sounds like you refer to the “Bucharest Memorandum”. The document fitting the subsequent description you provide would be the “Budapest Memorandum”.
Unfortunately, no document fits the subsequent description. Russia is the only one who violated the Budapest Memorandum.
No,it is not a nuclear bomber,but it is a evacuation vehicle to the Moon in the event of the destruction of the Earth.
The Moon can host at least 1 million people in its craters and has waters in caverns to sustain seafood and fishes in good habitat..
Mr Nesley J Louis
Regarding the comments at the end about Ukraine, I believe the treaty only specifies the obligation of defending Ukraine in the event of nuclear warfare rather than defense in general. While the current conflicts in Ukraine involve a nuclear power (Russia), nuclear weapons have not been used and therefore the treaty does not obligate defensive intervention.
you're basicly saying that us the US and the UK didn't hold our end of the bargain because Ukrain wants to join NATO?
"The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. "
it sounds to me like it's Russia not living up the the memorandum , you're trying to say invading a country is to protect is sovereignty?
your analysis also had major holes in that you said the Buran was copied by the Americans failing to mention the Buran was a copy of the space shuttle, biased much.... sheesh
Agreed. The Budapest MoSA was signed by the US, UK and Russia and, like you said, all nukes in Ukraine are to be returned to Russia. In return, Russia will respect Ukraine's newly defined borders. The video makes a huge blunder in saying that the weapons were to be destroyed, and assuming UK and US agreed to destroy their stock too (but also Russia hasn't destroyed their stock and they've upheld their end?). Very naive blunder in the video. Disappointing.
The primary mission the shuttle was designed for was to retrieve KH-9 ‘big bird’ satellites from orbit so they could be refuels and refurbished (they would parachute a limited number of film capsules back to earth). Compare the cargo bay dimensions. That mission was over before the shuttle ever launched.
They likely practiced repairing/refuelling several KH-11 ‘little bird’ satellites in orbit (including the Hubble) but it was a colossal waste of resources and money getting the shuttle launched compared to more dedicated platforms.
The X-37 seems to be the next logical step. Add the manoeuvring capabilities of the shuttle to the actual surveillance platform, and have it land itself for refurbishment and refuelling.
The X-37 could be a orbital bombardment system if we chose to make it one. Alas I think it's a recoverable/upgradeable spy satellite.
Seeing the Buran on the back of AN225 made me sad... This behemoth of the skies is gone for ever...
I would suspect it could, and should, be used to practice physically removing large pieces of space debris, and demonstrating the concept of reducing space debris in that manner. A miniscule percentage, but it'd be something.🤔
Major kudos for showing the F-16 whose EPU is also powered by Hydrazine when talking about that "Liquid Cancer".
God... could you imagine an all out war today? Just wow. If it were REAL hard core war we would see such insane tech come out of the woodwork. In another universe...
No you wouldn't see any of that tech. As most of us would be dead within a day probably.
@@dakluitgaming yeah we humans have evolve for thousands of years getting more and more dangerous and destructive
If the Russians think the X-37 is a nuclear bomber it's because they'd deploy it as one.
We are talking about a country that is developing a nuclear-powered cruise missile (a concept that the US abandoned as recklessly provocative in the late 1960s), and a megaton-yield nuclear torpedo whose only use is targeting coastal cities and ports 🤷♂️
*100 megaton - loony country.
"a concept that the US abandoned as recklessly provocative in the late 1960s" - you realise this literally means the US already considered this in depth, correct? And only abandoned because of it's lack of practicality, which would not happen to a more practical weapons delivery system. Like a nuclear-armed space plane.
I assume by "nuclear-powered" you are referring to propulsion, but just to be clear the US has had nuclear payload cruise missiles. e.g. AGM-86b and AGM-129.
The Soviets were convinced that STS was a nuclear bomber, and that is why they rushed Buran (which as noted in the video, definitely was seen as a military asset).
Possibly this is because the STS did have military applications (launching spy satellites, for example). Or possibly because the design of STS was so bonkers that the official story (that STS could bring rapid reusability and cost-savings over big dumb rockets) was never credible outside of the imaginations of 1980 NASA bureaucrats.
Let us never wonder what motivates countries to develop weapons that might be capable of deterring the US.
Surviving 700 days in space it probably also has systems that run on nuclear power internally which also explains the hazmats
It's cool and has been flying for sometime.. observing
In regards to Novikov, I would take what he says with a grain of salt. His target market are those in friction with NATO. He specializes in selling air defense. He wants his target audiences to think it's a dangerous weapon so they buy his product which defends against dangerous weapons of NATO.
The same goes for USA/Nato industries, so in the end, it doesn't really matter because both sides will be developing weapons
Lots of love ❤️ from India
You can place any cargo that fits within that space. So they can always say that it is used for research, until the moment they decide to use it to carry nuclear weapons or any other system for military use.
I think x37a,b,c are prefect platforms, and project thor type weapon systems are a great to have, because they are quick and can do alot of damage without using Nuclear weapons.
The tungsten rod would be closer to a moab bomb not a small nuclear bomb. And that would be a normal rod, but the cargo bay of the x-37 is small so a smaller rod could fit.
I don’t know much about the rods but I tend to agree. They’d probably be more for precision strikes in places with good anti missile defenses
Won't it just disintegrate as it enters the atmosphere
@@RohanSingh-zc4bm Although there is a chance, I’m sure the space force has done research proving it won’t
@@RohanSingh-zc4bm Nah. Tungsten is very resilient to wear and tear. it will certainly heat up a lot, but as long as the rod is reasonably large most of it will hit the ground incredibly hard.
Its weight must be immense!
It can also be a highly maneuverable orbital observation platform, serving other needs, at the same time. Probably it is ALL of the things that it is suspected of being.
How long has it been up there? 🤔
"Operational concept development" is military jargon for "We made it just to see what we can do with it, we don't even have a real goal yet."
I thought that parking nuclear weapons in orbit was forbiden since the starfish prime explosion?
not if you're the US. Do as I say not as I do.....'merica
thats why its a space plane and not a satellite. A satellite in a stable orbit counts as placing a weapon installation in space. A space plane that will only be there for a few years is technically classified as ground based. Same reason ICBMs are ok. They are only in space when they are actively in use.
Placing nuclear weapons in orbit was prohibited by the UN Outer Space Treaty of 1967, long after Starfish Prime.
www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/introouterspacetreaty.html
@@Darthybuddy It’s in orbit therefore it is banned from carrying nuclear weapons…
It can at least travel 5 miles per second in space ?
Let me correct that, It has to go approximately 5miles per second in space otherwise It will fall down or run away
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know they're making materials that can only be made in 🚀 space
Might have to join the discord.
18:20 not deployed for spying, but it’s still capable of it
I could call the x-37 as “the military descendent of NASA’s Space Shuttle”
This is the Cancelled X-20 DYNA SOUR sans pilot. But from what I understand a crewman or two can be placed in a habitat for launch. T0 where? The Manned Orbital Lab.
Russia's Credibility about ANYTHING ceased to exist about a fortnight* after this video hit.
*fortnight is an aerospace unit of measure, look it up.
my guess is it has a camera on it. The camera is actually looking for UAP craft. It could also have science experiments on board testing longevity of equipment in space.
"I'm gonna go get the papers, get the papers."
The Russians thought the space shuttle was a weapons platform. They built Buran to counter it
Russian's think everything is a secret plot to destroy them. Hence, Ukraine.
I wonder if it could drop large telephone pole sized Tungsten rods from space. I have been hearing about the Rods from God project for quite a while.
X-37 can certainly be dual use. It can use some space to conduct experiments, and the rest for nukes. But I'm skeptical, because the point of nukes is deterrence. Deterrence doesn't work if you keep the nukes a secret.
Yeah exactly. Plus if I were sending nukes into space, I would leave them there. I would not wanting the nukes returning to my military base flying 10fold the speed of sound in a vehicle tested like 10 times.
Russia: Develops rockets and orbital maneuvers for hypersonic ballistic strikes that the U.S. cannot defend against.
Murica: Develops methods to drop warheads from orbital vehicles traveling at 8km/s that Russia cannot defend against.
Here we go again...
Like these longer videos
Same
I think it's a recon vessel, but maybe it has anti-sat capabilities, or else, it can evade anti-sat missiles. I think it's reusability makes it ideal for rapid modifications of whatever it's carrying in its payload bay. And, it's not impossible larger variants of the X-37 have ground or sea strike capabilities. The USA may not have an edge in "hypersonic' atmospheric weapons against China and Russia, but it does have the most superior vehicles operating at the ultimate high-ground, and any weapon dropped from high orbit would naturally be hypersonic even if its a gravity driven dumb-bomb. The USA has several multiple purpose designs in its vehicle inventory, and you essentially can't tell what it's capable of doing until it actually does it on mission, because you don't know what it's kit/loadout is.
I believe it's an anti satellite platform with possibly a nuclear strike capability as it's secondary function(or vice versa)
If it were a nuclear bomber, they never would’ve let SpaceX launch it
You know that for a fact? You must work for SpaceX…
Nope not true
Man, talk about getting the “conspiracy theory” cogs moving.
the term "conspiracy theory" is politically motivated term to disuade the public from pursuing cover ups and classified info that the government doesn't want you to know.
This bothers me because Jewish space laser could be very real
21:52 It is the Budapest Memorandum, not the Bucharest Memorandum
I think it made to bring samples back to earth from Mars or something similar. Hauling instruments in space is one job need to done somehow too.
EDIT: This is what happens when you comment on a video 5 minutes after it's published and the video is 22 minutes long, you type things like my original comment, below. Of course, the X-37 can do all kinds of other stuff that comes up in this video, and probably even things the public is not equipped to even perceive. But on the subject of Russia's "heavy aircraft cruiser" easily accessing the Turkish strait, that would require that the cruiser be able to float.
They wouldn't need to drop nukes. The X-37 could probably drop something heavy enough, provided it captures that something in space, with the destructive force of a nuke, without radiation. This is sometimes called "rods from God"
Yes, but somebody hasn't finished watching the video 😉
@@NotWhatYouThink A bad habit of mine. Excellent content.
@@NotWhatYouThink 😅 That was hilarious.
You watch too much G.I Joe
@@antoniohagopian213 Not sure I follow.