Slashdot Mirror


Assessing Asteroid Threat

Makarand writes "According to a proposal submitted to the European Space Agency a fleet of five mini-probes should be sent each targeting an asteroid considered potentially dangerous. The mission objective will be to learn more about dangerous near earth objects so that we can plan how best to respond when under threat. Once in space, the probes would use ion propulsion engines that provide thrust by shooting out a stream of electrically charged particles. Power for the ion engines would be provided by ultra-lightweight solar arrays. Each probe will carry instrumentation to learn about the physical and chemical make-up of the target. The mission would cost around $150 mil which is quite low according to space mission standards."

16 of 202 comments (clear)

  1. Anyone else run into this problem? by HarveyBirdman · · Score: 4, Funny

    After watching the news or reading a paper, I find myself rooting for the asteroids.

    --
    --- Ban humanity.
    1. Re:Anyone else run into this problem? by blue+trane · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If there was only a way technology could be used to solve big picture problems. Too often it solves the immediate needs at the expense of long term planning.

      I think this is due more to human short-sightedness and greed than a problem with the technology itself.

  2. hey! by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought I fixed this problem years ago with my Atari!

    --
    "I only speak the truth"
    Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
  3. optimistic fools! by new+death+barbie · · Score: 5, Funny

    Only an optimist wuld believe that the U.N would commit to a path of aggression, until all diplomatic options had been exhausted. The asteroids must be convinced to disarm themselves.

    --

    It's supposed to be completely automatic, but actually you have to press this button.

    1. Re:optimistic fools! by pe1rxq · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, just let Mr. Laden say that muslims should strike back with terrorist attacks if the asteroids are harmed. According to Mr Powell that is enough evidence to send the entire US army to 'disarm' the asteroids.

      --
      Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
  4. Solution looking for a problem by Gothmolly · · Score: 3, Funny

    Some VC has a Neat Idea, which nobody wants. Is that his fault, no! Who will buy it - Governments, they can print as much money as they need. Of course this was done in Europe, their monopoly-money machines work better than in the US (Russia has no money, monopoly or otherwise).

    Here's how you really get rid of an asteroid:
    Insert used ICBM into Space Shuttle (or equivalent)
    Place ICBM and suitable launch device into LOE.
    Aim ICBM at the place where the asteroid will be when it gets there.
    Press the button that we've wanted to push for so long. Sell tickets, I'm sure the Russians would want to attend - maybe a joint "button pushing" ceremony? Heck, bring the Chinese and N.Koreans in too.
    Watch as ICBM blows up asteroid.
    Profit!
    (Part where it ushers in a new sense of global peace and brotherhood is optional)

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:Solution looking for a problem by pe1rxq · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Of course this was done in Europe, their monopoly-money machines work better than in the US (Russia has no money, monopoly or otherwise).

      You on the other hand have been watching to many american films... It is practicly impossible to do anything with an ICBM (or a whole bunch of them) against an asteroid.

      A new sense of global panic and anarchy is much more likely.....

      Jeroen

      --
      Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
    2. Re:Solution looking for a problem by jafac · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, I think an ICBM would just about do the trick too, take off the warhead, and your payload becomes the third stage, get the third stage out of LEO using about half it's fuel (very rough assumption, expecially since we also would have had to fit it with appropriate guidance and maneuvering systems), land the 3rd stage ass-end-up on the asteroid, and fire the remaining fuel.

      ICBM doesn't necessarily mean "nuke".

      FYI - Mercury's Redstone, Gemini's Titan, etc. were formerly Ballistic Missiles - adapted for use in manned spaceflight - FYI.2; Titans are still one of the premier spacelauch vehicles in use today, and many are actual decomissioned ICBMs. (they're pretty useless as ICBMs compared to Minuteman or Peacekeeper, because Titans are liquid fueled) - but even so, I think a Peacekeeper would make an excellent asteroid-shover in a pinch, but I'm not sure exactly how much of the third stage would be left for asteroid-shoving if one just removed the warheads and fitted it with guidance/maneuver equipment. Maybe with some strap-ons?

      Now, we all KNOW that an ION engine would be better for this application, because you get your energy from solar radiation (or nuclear power), instead of burning your propellant and oxidizer, plus, you get to apply thrust over a much longer period of time, with much finer control. But on the other hand, we've had exactly ONE successful use of ION engines. It's a worthy wheel to reinvent, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't get something rolling more quickly than development of an ION-based asteroid-shover would take. Then do ION-based technology later. In any case, we definately have adequate technology to get such a device positioned. Much of it sitting unused, waiting around for armageddon. If an asteroid strikes our world and ends all life because we were saving our launch capability (idle ICBMs) for a massive nuclear strike, we'll even be jilted of that.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  5. Spongy Asteroids by Ella+the+Cat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Here in the UK there was a TV documentary (probably BBC2 Horizon, not sure) about asteroid impacts, how to deal with them and so on. I for one thought it was much like Arthur C Clarke's Hammer of God - find it early, deliver an impulse, deflect it a teeny weeny bit, and it misses by a few miles. Nope. The asteroid could be very porous, it just absorbs the blast, or requires an impossibly big bang to be sure it deflects. So sending probes to gather facts about asteroid composition is a good and useful practical thing over and above the scientific justification.

  6. A gamble for 10 billion... by little1973 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That is the raw translation of a hungarian novel written in the early 80's.

    It takes place in the near future when the Earth population is 10 billion. An asteroid threatens Earth, but so big nothing can be done just one thing. By calculating the trajectory of the asteriod the engineers notice that it nearly collide another, but smaller asteroid.

    So, they send up a spaceship with full of explosives and ram it into the small asteroid in order to give it a push which is sufficient to make it collide with the big one.

    Billiard on the cosmic scale. And it was written well before the public became aware of the asteriod threat.

    --
    Government cannot make man richer, but it can make him poorer. - Ludwig von Mises
  7. Different types of object? by spakka · · Score: 5, Funny

    Each Simone spacecraft will have instruments designed to examine the physical and chemical make-up of its target asteroid. It is hoped the missions will help scientists predict the risk posed by asteroids and develop effective strategies for dealing with different types of object.

    What properties, other than mass and trajectory, are of interest? It's not like they're going to find harmless ones made out of rubber or whatever.

  8. Simon says by QEDog · · Score: 4, Funny
    "The asteroid mission has been named Simone (Smallsat Intercept Missions to Objects Near Earth)."

    Pretty smart using Simon to stop the asteroid... "Simon says jump on one foot. Simon says don't hit the Earth..."

    Next on /. how to save Earth from an Alien attack using the Hockey-Pockey

    --
    "There is no teacher but the enemy."-Mazer Rackham
  9. what characteristics? by fermion · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The article is quite short on details of exactly what threat characteristics we are to catalog. My understanding is that the two most important characteristics that threaten us is that the object has mass and will likely collide with earth. Both of these can be estimated quite well in enough without a mission to the object. Any characteristics beyond that, be it shape or chemical composition, does not seem to be so critical.

    Now, one might argue that if we knew things like chemical make up or density or the like we might know how to destroy the object or perhaps could change it's trajectory with engines or a tractor beam or something. However, this implies that we know the object exists with enough advance notice to do something. To plan a research encounter, that might be a year. To plan a destructive encounter, I think that might be a month. I seem to remember that the in the last near miss, we did not detect the object until after it had passed.

    Which is to say that we need better detection technology coupled with serious research of how to change trajectory. I do not believe converting a single projectile into hundred of projectiles is a reasonable solution. And of course, if we don't know the object is coming, there is nothing we can do

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  10. Re:One has to question by Memetic · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Why Jupiter, who's size compared to Earth is immense, has not had a large asteroid annihalate it yet? (ok, maybe it has, i don't know)"

    It has been hit, very spectacularly, had it been Earth that was hit I doubt we would be discussing this.

    See:
    Comet Shoemaker-Levy Collision with Jupiter

  11. A lot of negativism by panurge · · Score: 5, Interesting
    A lot of the arguments so far seem to be of the "why give up smoking, I might fall under a bus" variety. From the same people that continue to buy SUVs?

    Considering the amount of money spent on practising for war every year - "defense", the proposal to the EU is peanuts. It is a proposal to start investigating the possibilities of a very real threat. I seem to recall the Siberian meteor impact as estimated as equivalent to about a 30MT H-bomb, and we were very lucky it hit where it did. It also seems that satellite photography is identifying more and more impact sites on the Earth. When I was a kid very few of these were recognised, and it seems reasonable to me that if we are learning that the frequency of such hits is much higher than expected, we should start to do something.
    It's also worth remembering that the big impact on Jupiter occurred only a few years ago, and that very visible impact may well have concentrated people's minds. As telescopes get better, astronomers are realising there is far more debris out there than anybody knew- the old idea of 9 tidy planets and an asteroid belt has turned into a solar system full of all kinds of junk, moonlets, comet formation belts- the Solar System seems to be more like Mexico City than Singapore, if you see what I mean.
    A billion dollars sound like a lot, but how much is the ABM system going to cost?

    Dealing with a hard rock or a dirty snowball could need very different approaches (gentle push versus big bang?). Just because a multi-mile wide asteroid could be undeflectable and fatal, doesn;t mean that the real threat might come from a thing 100M across - obviously deflectable with the right technology, but nuking it could result in thousands of destructive small impacts.

    To sum up this ramble:

    • Destructive meteor impacts do occur on Earth
    • Some of them are potentially preventable
    • The cost of research is probably going to be far less than the US is going to spend developing nuclear warheads this year
    • The cost of stopping a small asteroid could be a lot less than the estimated budget for stopping Saddam Hussein
    • All in all, it looks far from a waste of EU money.
    Thank you for reading this far.
    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
  12. Composition matters by Firethorn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For several reasons. The primary, of course, is so we know what methods will work best for moving the asteroid's orbit enough so it doesn't hit. Secondly, knowing it's composition will allow us to better estimate it's effect. A mostly silicon (sand-ball) asteroid will have different impact characteristics than a lead/iron 'bullet'.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right