XPost: sci.military.naval, soc.history.war.misc, alt.war.world-war-three
XPost: alt.astronomy, alt.economics

from https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/03/firm-wins-space-force-funding-to-provide-an-aircraft-carrier-in-orbit/

Firm wins Space Force funding to provide an “aircraft carrier” in orbit Taking tactically responsive space to the next level. Literally

Eric Berger – Mar 26, 2025 5:56 AM | 40

A rendering of Gravitics' orbital carrier vehicle. Credit: Gravitics

In recent years the US military has made much of a concept known as
tactically responsive launch. This essentially means that if there is
some rapidly developing threat in space—say an adversary takes out a key national defense satellite—the military would like the capability to
rapidly fuel a satellite on Earth, mate it to a rocket, and launch it
into space.

The US Space Force first demonstrated this tactically responsive
capability with a launch on Firefly's Alpha rocket in 2023. As part of
this "Victus Nox" test flight, a satellite was encapsulated into a
payload fairing and mated to the rocket and completed all final launch preparations within 27 hours.

But what if there were an even faster way to respond? That's the vision
behind a new, $60 million federal award to a new space company named
Gravitics for a concept called an orbital carrier.

"In many ways it's kind of like what an aircraft carrier does," said Jon
Goff, director of advanced concepts for the Seattle-based company.


Shielding satellites
In interviews about the concept with Ars, company officials were fairly
vague about specific details of what orbital carriers will be able to
do. A news release published on Wednesday morning, highlighting the
Strategic Funding Increase, or STRATFI grant from the United States
Space Force, also lacks specifics. The Space Force would prefer to keep
the vehicle's operational capabilities under wraps.

But in general, the idea is to provide an unpressurized module in which
one or more satellites can be pre-positioned in orbit.

Ars Video
How The Callisto Protocol's Team Designed Its Terrifying, Immersive Audio

Such a module would isolate the satellites from the space environment,
sparing their batteries and sensitive electronics from harsh thermal
cycles every 90 minutes, and provide some shielding from radiation. In
addition the orbital carrier would obfuscate the satellites inside from observation by other nations or hostile actors in space. Then, when a
satellite is needed, it can be deployed into multiple orbits by the carrier.



A demonstration mission is possible as early as 2026, although Gravitics
and the Space Force have shared no specific timeline.

Habitats for humans, too
Gravitics was founded in 2021 to build large structures in space for
habitation or other purposes, and its name reflects a long-term desire
to provide artificial gravity.

The company's initial product is a module with a 4-meter diameter that
can provide power and pressurized volume. It is already working with
Axiom Space to support its operations and could work with other space
station companies. With the new federal award, the company is now moving
into national defense applications as well.

"The vision is space superiority," said Colin Doughan, chief executive
officer of Gravitics. "We think that vision is very compatible with both
a Department of Defense product line as well as a commercial one.
Orbital carriers, in their broadest sense, are really based off of the
same vehicle. One is in an unpressurized state to be able to provide
these mobility capabilities to the DOD, and one is in a pressurized
state to be able to provide logistics services, station expansion
options, power supplementation for station operations."

Gravitics is also doing preliminary work on a larger module 7.6 meters
in diameter, known as "StarMax." This has included pressure testing. A
single StarMax module would have a pressurized volume of 400 cubic
meters, which is about 40 percent the size of the entire International
Space Station.

Such a vehicle would, in theory, be large enough to deploy TIE Fighters.
That's a joke—we think.

Photo of Eric Berger
Eric Berger Senior Space Editor
Eric Berger is the senior space editor at Ars Technica, covering
everything from astronomy to private space to NASA policy, and author of
two books: Liftoff, about the rise of SpaceX; and Reentry, on the
development of the Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon. A certified
meteorologist, Eric lives in Houston.
40 Comments

comments include


pokrface Senior Technology Editor
24y
21,210
Ars Staff
Stripping funding from NOAA and NASA and NIH and NSF and CDC, so a bunch
of angry racist boomers can have unlimited cost-plus contracts to play Moonraker. Fantastically fucking stupid.

Today at 8:58 AM
daleq Seniorius Lurkius

Subscriptor++
Fat, slow, juicy target in space.
What could go wrong?

Today at 9:04 AM
wicker_man Ars Tribunus Militum

I'm waiting for "battlecruiser operational" announcement.

With the rapid progress of development and increasing weaponisation for
space, this is probably within 10 years from now?

YetAnotherBoris Ars Praefectus
7y
4,296
So now, instead of shooting down one satellite at a time, an adversary
could just blow up an "orbital carrier" with a whole bunch of satellites inside. Yes, sounds like that should work pretty well.

Today at 9:06 AM
mikew03 Seniorius Lurkius

Forget TIE fighters, we need some vipers for our new Battlestar.

DistinctivelyCanuck Ars Scholae Palatinae
4y
2,245
Subscriptor
Perhaps I am missing the point:
Its not like you can hide something in orbit: so the "carrier" is as
equally easy to take out as whatever its 'hiding'
And something like a KH-series bird or one of the radar imaging birds in
the legacy architectures are massive: so its not as if you could put one
of those inside this hypothetical carrier.

And between SpaceX and 'starshield' or simply a 'transporter' type
launch, or 'responsive launch' via whomever is signed up for it, means
you keep the satellites in question on earth "safe" until you launch
them at the exact moment you want, which then controls the final orbital
path & timing, and means you could, hypothetically, replace within hours whatever was 'taken out'

So, obviously I am missing some aspect that this carrier supposedly
helps with?

Edit: one point I didn't address: its not as if the multi-billion dollar massive secret squirrel satellites have a bunch of spares sitting in a warehouse that you can launch quickly and responsively either...

YetAnotherBoris Ars Praefectus
7y
4,296
wickerbill said:
Good thing that our enemies would never think to take out the carrier satellite. What a ridiculous waste of money.
Hey, maybe the concept of an "orbital carrier" will extend to "orbital
carrier group"? Replete with orbital submarines and orbital missile
destroyers, natch... To defend the carrier, you know.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)