ODSTs are real

Sierra Space unveiled its Ghost spacecraft, a re entry vehicle that could drop supplies anywhere in the world in 90 minutes.

https://www.sierraspace.com/newsroom/press-releases/sierra-space-ghost-enters-flight-test-enabling-global-payload-delivery-in-90-minutes/

https://x.com/sierraspaceco/status/1777351531609616588?s=61&t=KByqJkc6ImJWsDMvQlNeRg

?si=HY5eLrk0Z2wUItiA

The idea is you could drop supplies to the warfighter anywhere at a moments notice.

How viable is a system like this? Is it worth it to have a constellation of these things constantly in orbit?

Could you make an orbital bombardment constellation out of this? With launch costs getting cheaper, there are so many possibilities for something like this.

>The ability to deliver critical supplies within 90 minutes to any location on Earth is a game-changing technology that could potentially turn the tide of a conflict. With this new technology, the warfighter on the ground could order pre-staged supplies that are waiting in an on-orbit inventory, or positioned with rapid launch capability, and deploy them down to Earth within 100 yards of where they are needed.

>Sierra Space performed a series of three drop tests on February 1 at Space Florida’s storied Launch and Landing Facility (LLF) in Florida, one of the longest runways in the world and where most of NASA’s space shuttle orbiters ended their missions. With the support of the Florida-based company Operator Solutions, three test articles were dropped from a Sikorsky S-76 helicopter to ensure stable flight for the hardware at subsonic speeds. Sierra Space will scale-up to hypersonic in upcoming tests.

>The entire testing campaign came together in 90 days as part of Sierra Space’s Axelerator incubator charter.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >On-orbit time of five years, vehicles are outfitted with pre-determined supplies (a survival kit, inflatable boat, rations, weaponry, etc.) pre-staged on orbit

    >On call-up, the system re-orients and begins re-entry/targeting cycle; the de-orbit motor slows the vehicle to 7,000 meters per second

    >Gravity then captures the vehicle and it begins to re-enter Earth’s atmosphere with the thermal protection shield withstanding temperatures up to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit

    >Once through atmosphere, the shield is then discarded leaving just the requested payload and a parafoil

    >At the right altitude, the parafoil is released and it steers the payload to the required area within 100 meters

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      this seems like a god-awful way to do things.
      how much of your equipment is space hardened?
      being in low Earth orbit is an absolute bastard. Atomic oxygen, radiation, temperature cycling, extreme vacuum, etc. How much of the military's equipment is actually engineered for that (almost none)and what is so valuable and time critical that this is worth it for(nothing)?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Lmao they harden the spacecraft storing them instead, idiot

        What are some other applications? I think these things carrying drones would be cool.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        The US government budgeted $26.5B this year for the *just* the Army's 18-24hr global deployment capability aka 82nd Airborne Division. The power to immediately intervene (and negate a Fait Accompli gambit) anywhere in the world isn't quite priceless to an interventionist world power, but it's up there with the Intercontinental Bomber or Manhattan project, especially when the cost can be amortized over decades not years via incremental projects like this.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          There's no way this is either cheaper or faster than the current US policy to preposition assets in Panama, Sicily, the Philippines, Kuwait, Cameroon, etc.

          >18 to 24 hours
          I'm aware of how impressive that is but even that implies something is taking a fricking lot longer than the "physically in transit" part because there are very few places on earth outside of Siberia and Mongolia that aren't currently within a two hour flight of a US military base

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >MREs irradiated for 5 years
      >Delivered piping hot to your door
      Steve is going to love these.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >On-orbit time of five years
      Does that mean you have to launch a new supply ship after 5 years? Will lower orbit be littered with never used guns and MREs in a couple decades?

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    i see that im lining up to punch whatever soldier dares step out

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Helldivers becoming credible OMG

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Seems like just a grift taking space entrepreneur grant money. Maybe they hope a big player will take interest in the tech and buy them out. Interesting example of the lifecycle of trying to make real money out of a college-level toy.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Sierra space is one of the largest of the new space companies, they are already contracted to build a space station with blue origin, a space plane called dreamchaser and a constellation of hypersonic tracking missiles

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >space-croc
        It is actually cool what they're doing, I've been casually following Sierra for a few years. X-37 just wins the aesthetic contest

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Them partnering with blue origin makes a lot of sense given blues goal of an AWS in space

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I can think of humanitarian and military uses. But only if the price to launch it is relatively low and you can reliably get supplies close to people that need it

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    All of this just for some Call of Duty Care Package stuff? I thought they would be dropping tanks, IFVs, SPGs, etc..

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Obviously no one is going to put MREs and an inflatable boat into orbit for 5 years waiting to be needed somewhere outdoors in an unpopulated area within the space of an hour. If it isn’t a grift just to get grant money and sell the tech then it’s a business strategy to build a portfolio and just be "in" an emerging market.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >All of this just for some Call of Duty Care Package stuff? I thought they would be dropping tanks, IFVs, SPGs, etc..
      the care package stuff is just the cover. everyone knows its for orbital bombardment weapons. most countries wont stand a chance against mach 20 bombs coming from space.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        the reentry vehicles being tested here are clearly designed to decelerate as much as possible

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        you can get a nuke anywhere on earth much faster than 90 minutes, this doesn't make sense as a bomb. Anyone would also be able to track these well in advance, and orbital inclination changes are very Dv intensive, so you can't really hide where you plan to drop it eventually. There's really no point in doing this compared to an ICBM. No, this only makes sense to send care packages.

        >On-orbit time of five years
        Does that mean you have to launch a new supply ship after 5 years? Will lower orbit be littered with never used guns and MREs in a couple decades?

        It means that because these things would be in a low orbit, drag would still be a factor and they'd need to use propellant to accelerate back up to speed periodically. This is something all satellites in low earth orbit have to do, even the ISS. When you run out of fuel to perform these maneuvers, you eventually slow down enough that you hit the dense part of the atmosphere and burn up.

        https://i.imgur.com/ZjA6VXC.jpg

        Sierra Space unveiled its Ghost spacecraft, a re entry vehicle that could drop supplies anywhere in the world in 90 minutes.

        https://www.sierraspace.com/newsroom/press-releases/sierra-space-ghost-enters-flight-test-enabling-global-payload-delivery-in-90-minutes/

        https://x.com/sierraspaceco/status/1777351531609616588?s=61&t=KByqJkc6ImJWsDMvQlNeRg

        ?si=HY5eLrk0Z2wUItiA

        The idea is you could drop supplies to the warfighter anywhere at a moments notice.

        How viable is a system like this? Is it worth it to have a constellation of these things constantly in orbit?

        Could you make an orbital bombardment constellation out of this? With launch costs getting cheaper, there are so many possibilities for something like this.

        >The ability to deliver critical supplies within 90 minutes to any location on Earth is a game-changing technology that could potentially turn the tide of a conflict. With this new technology, the warfighter on the ground could order pre-staged supplies that are waiting in an on-orbit inventory, or positioned with rapid launch capability, and deploy them down to Earth within 100 yards of where they are needed.

        >Sierra Space performed a series of three drop tests on February 1 at Space Florida’s storied Launch and Landing Facility (LLF) in Florida, one of the longest runways in the world and where most of NASA’s space shuttle orbiters ended their missions. With the support of the Florida-based company Operator Solutions, three test articles were dropped from a Sikorsky S-76 helicopter to ensure stable flight for the hardware at subsonic speeds. Sierra Space will scale-up to hypersonic in upcoming tests.

        >The entire testing campaign came together in 90 days as part of Sierra Space’s Axelerator incubator charter.

        >Is it worth it to have a constellation of these things constantly in orbit?
        The word constellation here is key. You can't just send a few, you need to have a lot of these to cover every possible latitude, and semi major axis if you really want to stick to the "anywhere in 90 minute" goal. Orbital inclination change maneuvers are really expensive, so really you need to position the things on the right inclination from the get go, that means you need a lot of them. And you can forget about changing your semi major axis, so even if you have a package on the right inclination, unless you want to wait for the earth to rotate until the target zone is under the path of the package (could take 12 hours at worst), then again you need to multiply the number of sats.
        So yeah, you need a shit ton of those or it's not even worth having them.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I think they'll be dropping drones or guided bombs. Literally being able to take out anyone anywhere on earth in 90 mins.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The bigger and heavier your payload is, the harder it is to bring it back down in a controlled manner. It quickly becomes uneconomical as you get larger and larger payloads.

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Useless as soon as space turns from a parking lot to the next battlefield. I guess there might be a sliver of 30 years where these make sense in some capacity.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      > I guess there might be a sliver of 30 years where these make sense in some capacity.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        30 years is no time at all. It's probably just enough time for half of a full order to be deployed before they become obsolete as satelitte based weapons swamp LEO and target them.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    At what point does a nuclear weapon become one?
    Treaties against nukes in space would forbid a backpack nuke but man portable nukes like the T4 and W45 are in separate pieces and designed to be transported as such.

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    While I can conceive of situations where that'd be useful, you'd have to make a VERY good operational justification for the expense of calling one of those things down. Like, "Mister President I know we have like 20 of these things in total, but I need one NOW in Syria because XYZ, even if the price is approximately 30 million a unit"

    The thing is though, we deploy so far and so many that I can't really see 90 minutes being that much better than idk, just having the air force do a para-drop or finding out some sorta rocket delivered mechanism from the ground. Like when the USPS seriously considered mail-via-rocket for next-day or even same-day mail delivery from California to NYC.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It would be useful in an area that has contested air space, where the loss of pilot and plane is a very real possibility.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        So you got guys your stuck
        >where conventional supplies can't reach them
        >in a situation where they critically need something "within 90 minutes", so soon it can't be arranged more subtly or by alternative methods
        >this life-or-death something needs to be non-perishable enough to store for months or years in space
        >and be extremely valuable to bother supplying it in this rather low-volume way (even assuming upscaling of the pod)
        Sounds like a solution looking for an extremely screwed-up problem-of-a-situation. Something that could be solved with good planning. I doubt a loose canister of rifles or ammo or MRE's or medical supplies are worth the effort or a magic bullet to an issue urgent enough demanding this shit.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Ok but now imagine it’s not a random squad of infantry but saboteurs inside a country you don’t like

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            This.
            Being able to call in a resupply anywhere at any time means you don't have to bring anything with you.
            Think of all the wacky glowie shit you could do if you didn't have to worry about the question of
            >How do we get guns/explosives/EW shit to the area/people we want them

            Sure everyone will see that something dropped out of orbit, but it's a hell of a lot harder to stop than a helicopter, and way quicker than building a smuggling network.
            >A deep cover spy with no suspicious items to give him away just found out that some important asset had a scheduling error and a side will be unguarded for the night
            Drop a C4 kit and tell them to get the hell out before morning.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          When was the last time we had good planners?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's not really for places where the Air Force can easily reach. These are designed to be deployed into the orbit of planets that are not Earth.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I can't see any situation where you can deploy this on a planet that is not Earth and couldn't just drop an orbital bomb on the problem or would need to contest the orbital space against a peer space threat.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      these will likely become much cheaper and justifyable to use once starship comes online.
      imagine about 50.000 of these in orbit.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      90 minutes can make or break, the primary reason ICBM are solids is because your enemy isn't going to give you an hour to fuel your missiles

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        this is why people proposing that starship be used as an ICBM are moronic, it wouldn't even be good as a first strike option since nukes would already be getting launched back at it the moment it starts fueling up.
        you're also not hiding this thing underground.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        this is why people proposing that starship be used as an ICBM are moronic, it wouldn't even be good as a first strike option since nukes would already be getting launched back at it the moment it starts fueling up.
        you're also not hiding this thing underground.

        in context of the original post, 90 minutes is not referring to nuclear strike but to orbital supply drop

        and yes,

        While I can conceive of situations where that'd be useful, you'd have to make a VERY good operational justification for the expense of calling one of those things down. Like, "Mister President I know we have like 20 of these things in total, but I need one NOW in Syria because XYZ, even if the price is approximately 30 million a unit"

        The thing is though, we deploy so far and so many that I can't really see 90 minutes being that much better than idk, just having the air force do a para-drop or finding out some sorta rocket delivered mechanism from the ground. Like when the USPS seriously considered mail-via-rocket for next-day or even same-day mail delivery from California to NYC.

        puts it in a nutshell; there is no foreseeably justified situation where you'd do this instead of laying on a C-5 paradrop; if the airspace is contested then the orbital supply drop isn't likely to be solving anything anyway

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what is being proposed. Rather than being fired like a freight ICBM these cargo pods are to be launched into orbit where they will circle the Earth for long periods of time waiting to be commanded to deorbit.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            No, I understand perfectly well.
            >Rather than being fired like a freight ICBM these cargo pods are to be launched into orbit where they will circle the Earth for long periods of time waiting to be commanded to deorbit.
            Think about it, that's basically an ICBM with a travel time of up to 5 years.

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    sweet liberty

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Finally, my aliexpress orders are gonna be here on time.

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Who would be fighting so far from air support and their logistics chain that could make good enough use of this that the expense would be worth it?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Americans, who else? Orbital forces are merely a new link in the readiness chain, the idea being that whatever crisis these guys respond to will have support from USAF + Airborne forces in hours, naval assets in days, and conventional forces in weeks and months to come, if needed. The same national expertise which manifests peacefully as Amazon one-day delivery produces uncivil innovations like this one when leadership switches the goal from Price over to Power.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    this sounds ludicrously stupid, unless this is some sneaky backdoor nuclear orbital strikes.

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    How are you
    1. going to convince troops to remain in orbit on space stations just waiting for the day they get called in to drop somewhere
    2. keep those troops in fighting shape in zero gravity which takes a heavy toll on muscle mass
    3. keep them alive through all the gforces of landing in a pod from orbit
    4. justify the cost of doing this when a helicopter can do the same job
    what exactly is the goal of dropping dudes from orbit? fast response time? dropping like 8 guys in the middle of nowhere with no backup doesn't seem like a great idea

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Wtf are you drivelling about spastic?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        NTA, but are you fricking illiterate?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          OPs entire post is about supply dropping from orbit. Why are you talking about dropping personnel? Seek assistance for your brain damage its depressing.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            The ODSTs referenced by OP's title are Orbital Drop Shock Troops from Halo.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              you're autistic enough to get the reference and ask literal questions about it's implementation but not autistic enough to imagine that a sci-fi fleet/branch of the space force specifically posted to the station in quarterly intervals solves this.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I was just explaining why that other anon is talking about troops.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      flexing on those who have not landed on the moon

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >. justify the cost of doing this when a helicopter can do the same job

      what helicopter can get anywhere in the world in 90 minutes? you dumb frick, is the idea of prestaging supplies in a vantage point like LEO really that fricking foreign to you? you'd spend the money anyway flying them to where you need them, just stick the c**ts in space and shoot em down when you need them.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >what helicopter can get anywhere in the world in 90 minutes?
        from US bases? we have em all over the damn place dude

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Not wanting to be a Shuttle Door Gunner

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Anon, we're talking about supply drops, which is moronic enough.
      Not fricking space marine drop pods.

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    My payload is just 6973 TB of hentai, 143 silicone veganas and 30 gallons of water-based, glycerin-free personal lubricant

    >Nobody in the entire insurgency dared try to fight a man who could do what he did

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    this is like promising download time from the cloud of maximum 9 seconds for the whole file, except you first have to upload it for 5 days

    absolutely moronic

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You know nothing about how prepositioning of materiel works for a modern (read: the US) military.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >prease berieve

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >what is planning

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >How viable is a system like this? Is it worth it to have a constellation of these things constantly in orbit?

    A low orbit nuke (EMP) would have the additional effect of creating a wave of space trash careering into the still functional satellites and whatever else. If an actually capable enemy was experiencing these shits being a problem, it would be among the Sampson Options to go back to good old slower kill chain times.

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >orbital supply drop
    FRICKING BEEN WAITING FOR THIS

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I'm sorry but this looks really fricking dumb.
    Like a hilariously bad implementation of a hilariously bad idea.
    Sending stuff to orbit is super expensive, and getting stuff from space to a particular point on the globe is far from trivial. First you have to make its in the right orbit, or burn delta-V and then wait for the time it to pass over your intended target.

    Seeing that it can't do a 2000ft drop without tumbling all over the place is just the cherry on top.
    Controlled landing in your dreams.
    What's the point of the umbrella thing on the bottom anyway?

    I really hope they are spending their own money.

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No longer will them that there MacDonalds require ye olde block 21 for delivery. America continues to nut-dangle its logistics superiority.

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Ok, but can you put freeze dried dudes in it for instant dump and shooty?

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >I'm sorry but this looks really fricking dumb -t. brownoid 2 minutes before an orbital strike deploys a drone swarm atop of his house plus ripits for the door kickers who just flexcuffed him

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    How well would rations keep if they're getting blasted with cosmic rays and unattenuated light from the sun?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      pretty well. freeze dried rations arent really altered by radiation, not like it matters if the DNA in your freeze dried goyslop is broken appart.

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    90 minutes is the absolute maximum time as that is how long it would take for these cargo pods to make a complete orbit if the call was made right after it passed over the target

    in reality the time would likely be mere minutes, especially once a constellation of these sats was proliferated

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    vv^>

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's very expensive for something we can do anyway with a lot less trouble. Ironically, this would benefit the USA's enemies more than the USA since we've generally had air superiority in every war we've fought with airplanes.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *