Is there any one or any time we can't already nuke with an ICBM? Not sure I really see what extra capability would be added by putting nukes on a space plane.
Various treaties prohibit having weapons in orbit, but X-37B provides the capability without actively having to have such a system deployed.
Why would the US military specifically need it I'm not sure, but having the option is probably a good thing for them.
A better objection is that a single one is not going to make a difference, and having a big fleet ready to launch is going to raise eyebrows.
This might simply be about having the capability on stand by even if there are currently few scenarios were it would realistically be usable.
But not "at the point of hostilities", as GP put it.
"States shall not place nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies or station them in outer space in any other manner;"
I assume the problem with subs is prompt communication. Also they are more of a retaliatory strike weapon thank first strike capability.
All the legs have trade-offs, which is why you want more than one:
Silos are immobile.
Bombers are slow, limited-range and vulnerable.
Submarines have to hide and thus are difficult to keep in touch with reliably. They’re also damn complicated and may have systemic vulnerabilities we don’t fully understand.
A long-orbit, large-payload space plane brings some interesting new trade-offs to the strategic nuclear game, though who knows if that’s actually how it might be used.
I mean, it’s an argument to be had, but the advantages of a dominant multi-modal nuclear arsenal go beyond binary assurance of mutual destruction in total war—today.
You’re the Chinese premiere in 2030 or 2040 choosing whether to try to match US strategic capability. How many chips that requires in the pot for a call makes a difference in that calculation.
If that's its job then it is in breach of the Outer Space Treaty. No weapons of mass destruction in space.
Anyway this is all incredibly speculative. Nobody knows the real strategic purposes of this thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_USAF_Bomb_Wings_and_Wi...
The US bombed some Houthi launch sites within the last couple of months. Israel bombed Beirut this last week.
But mobile launchers aren't. Russia and China use those, but we don't.
> presumably obsoleting strategic bombers
We'd have to have hundreds of warheads in orbit at all times to obsolete strategic bombers.
If the x-37b is to be used for carrying (or deploying) orbital nukes, then at least for now it has to be a very few nukes. Re-entry vehicles are visible because they glow white hot as they re-enter, so while surprising (because there is no boost phase to detect, and because the detectable flight time will be less than half that of an ICBM) they will not provide enough plausible deniability to be worth using at all. This is why I doubt the x-37b is being used to carry nukes.