Slashdot Mirror


Huge Meteor Blazes Across Sky Over Russia; Hundreds Injured

New submitter dovf writes "The Bad Astronomer analyzes incoming reports about the apparent meteoric fireball over Russia: 'Apparently, at about 09:30 local time, a very big meteor burned up over Chelyabinsk, a city in Russia just east of the Ural mountains, and about 1500 kilometers east of Moscow. The fireball was incredibly bright, rivaling the Sun! There was a pretty big sonic boom from the fireball, which set off car alarms and shattered windows. I'm seeing some reports of many people injured (by shattered glass blown out by the shock wave). I'm also seeing reports that some pieces have fallen to the ground, but again as I write this those are unconfirmed." This is the best summary I've found so far, and links to lots of videos and images. He also clarifies something I've been wondering about: 'This is almost certainly unrelated to the asteroid 2012 DA14 that will pass on Friday.'"

89 of 409 comments (clear)

  1. Almost? by willcutaflip · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Could that have just been a smaller chunk that broke off of the DA14? I mean that is tomorrow. Sounds possible to me.

    1. Re:Almost? by Megane · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not likely. DA14 is a few hours away and moving very fast... which means that it's still very far away.

      I think the most interesting part of this incident is that there are reports a missile was sent up to intercept it, and hit it. I'm still not convinced that it wasn't just the meteor breaking up like so many of them do, but it would be amusing if that somehow made the ground damage worse.

      And in Soviet Russia, dashcam watch meteor hit YOU!

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    2. Re:Almost? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 5, Interesting

      According to some sources, the directions of the Russian meteor and DA14 are different, making the two events unlikely to be related.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    3. Re:Almost? by Hardhead_7 · · Score: 4, Informative

      According to TFA , DA14 is approaching from Earth's South while the videos so far make it look like this one is coming from the East, so they're on completely different orbits.

    4. Re:Almost? by gl4ss · · Score: 3, Informative

      The fact that we don't know about the huge Russian meteor ahead of the news report is scary.

      well it wasn really _huge_ now though was it? the sonic boom did the damage to most people(shattering glasses etc).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    5. Re:Almost? by AchilleTalon · · Score: 2

      Haven't you RTFA? It is pretty well explained why it is very unlikely to be related to DA14.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
    6. Re:Almost? by cffrost · · Score: 4, Informative

      >TFA

      link?

      Yep, just click it.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    7. Re:Almost? by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 2

      Is it just me or does Siberia seem to attract large meteors? :)

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    8. Re:Almost? by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 5, Funny

      Its ok its just the real Iranian monkey coming home :)

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    9. Re:Almost? by Barsteward · · Score: 2

      Nah, its God retribution for those gays and people enjoying sex outside marriage although its not precision bombing so there is a lot of collateral victims (as usual - maybe God should invest in laser sights)

      --
      "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
    10. Re:Almost? by azalin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well how's a interceptor missile supposed to know the difference and why should it even care? A fast moving, unidentified object enters your airspace, why shouldn't you try to shoot it down, even automatically?
      A large scale response needs to be done through humans and should require several safety features. But a single automated air defense missile? Does it move faster than an airplane? Has it been announced? Then shoot it down.

    11. Re:Almost? by Cerberus7 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Siberia is big. It has more gravity. *runs!*

      --
      I don't know about you, but my servers run on the power of cotton candy and happy thoughts. -Anonymous Coward
    12. Re:Almost? by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not necessarily. Imagine a basketball in front of you. That is the Earth. Now draw an imaginary line from your nose to the left side of the basketball. Your line is going east to west. Now draw another line to the right of the basketball. Your line is now going west to east. Same point of origin. Same basic direction of movement. Different perceived trajectory for those living on the basketball.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    13. Re:Almost? by fatphil · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It sounds possible only because you were too lazy to read the BadAstronomer's write-up, the first link in the summary. It's millions of miles away from the asteroid, on a different orbit, and apparently coming from a different direction.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    14. Re:Almost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      An interceptor moving at 25 mph can hit a target moving at 250,000 mph.... IF the angle is right.

      So, being in front of the target can make up for slower interceptor speed, and relative speed is not as important as early detection.

      I could have intercepted this with a thrown rock... If I had known long enough in advance.

    15. Re:Almost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I can't believe I'm having to explain this, but "TFA" is "The Fucking Article." The link you're looking for is already in the summary.

    16. Re:Almost? by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 4, Funny

      Now draw a line from the ceiling. That's the trajectory of DA14. South-to-North.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    17. Re:Almost? by dywolf · · Score: 2

      nah. most missiles dont reach 10k. about the only ones that would are the ballistic missiles, and that's because they need to get to space (or nearly so). typical missles are mach 4-5. For ex, Patriot is mach 5, which is only around 3800 mph.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    18. Re:Almost? by LoverOfJoy · · Score: 5, Funny

      The enemy's gate is down.

    19. Re:Almost? by ackthpt · · Score: 2

      Most likely just one of those tiny little things, the ones which we can't detect until they are nearly upon us.

      Space is better armed and far sneakier than we'll ever be.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    20. Re:Almost? by LoRdTAW · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No air defense missile is that fast. 10,000 MPH is mach 13, faster than any aircraft not including spacecraft such as rockets and the space shuttle (they need escape velocities of over 25,000 MPH/40,000 kph). The fastest SAM's (Surface to Air Missiles) are the Russian S-300 with a speed of nearly mach 6 while the US built MIM-104 Patriot has a speed of around mach 5. They are plenty fast to shoot down most any aircraft made today.

      Another thing to think about is this: The speed of the meteor was so fast that by the time any radar would have picked it up, it would have already hit the earth before a radar operator could even summon his commander to have a look. There is no way they could have scrambled SAM's for launch, the entry and impact happened in seconds.

    21. Re:Almost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can understand "earth's south", but I am struggling with "earth's east"

    22. Re:Almost? by goodmanj · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well how's a interceptor missile supposed to know the difference?

      Velocity. An ICBM arrives at about 5-7 km/s. An asteroid arrives at a *minimum* of 11 km/s.

      why should it even care?

      Lots of reasons. Among them: asteroids as big as an ICBM enter Earth's atmosphere several times a year. If you tried to shoot them all down, you'd run out of missiles and money pretty quick. Also, if there's a miscommunication between someone's space program and someone's missile defense program, you end up killing a lot of astronauts.

      In practice, any radar that can detect an incoming ICBM comes with enough computer power to instantaneously compute an orbital trajectory for it, and see immediately whether it's an asteroid, a spacecraft, or a suborbital missile.

    23. Re:Almost? by asylumx · · Score: 5, Funny

      The link you're looking for is already in the summary.

      [Citation Needed]

    24. Re:Almost? by mapkinase · · Score: 2

      The submission has 6 links none of them have any reference to TFA.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    25. Re:Almost? by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 4, Funny

      Russia: so bad even the universe throws rocks at it.

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    26. Re:Almost? by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 2

      The problem is that anti-missile-missiles are designed to stop the missile's payload from detonating - there's still going to be a rain of hot metal shrapnel, but it's no longer going to have a functioning warhead, so shooting a missile down helps. A meteor on the other hand doesn't have a warhead, all of its destructive energy is in the form of kinetic energy, and there's virtually nothing you can do about this unless you hit it with something very big/fast like a large hypersonic object, then you simply have a bigger bang (most of the damage in this case was simply acoustic energy) and more debris raining down over a larger area.

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    27. Re:Almost? by greenfruitsalad · · Score: 2

      Christians would sue for copyright infringement.

    28. Re:Almost? by goodmanj · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's Earth's escape velocity. If you fall into Earth's gravity well from outside, you'll be going at least that fast when you hit the Earth.

    29. Re:Almost? by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 2

      (Simply steps in path of car)

      Ha! I guess I showed yo-

    30. Re:Almost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Where did you get Mach 13? That is impossibly slow for a meteor. Meteor speeds range from 11 km/s to 72 km/s (retrograde impacts). That is Mach 32 to Mach 211. Not even a railgun could touch a meteor.

  2. Wow by GregC63 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Awesome video, a lot of freaked out people over there! The flash of light and the shock wave had a bunch of folks crapping their pants. Also reports of about 500 being injured.

    1. Re:Wow by azalin · · Score: 2

      So in case it would have been bigger and we noticed it let's say a few weeks/a month/a year ahead of impact. Could we have done anything? Do we have any plans for such events?

    2. Re:Wow by Megane · · Score: 5, Informative

      Dashcams are apparently because their courts are such that they need that kind of evidence if someone hits them.

      The fact that they occasionally catch cool videos of other things going on is a bonus. For instance, the crew-only Aeroflot flight back in December that overshot the runway and ran over the fence into a highway. The guy with the camera had to swerve to dodge a passenger seat that bounced in front of him.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    3. Re:Wow by ACS+Solver · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Or military jets using a highway as a runway.

    4. Re:Wow by Razgorov+Prikazka · · Score: 3, Funny

      >> The flash of light and the shock wave had a bunch of folks crapping their pants

      Pfff... the flash and shock wave is the least of their concerns...

      Check out the CHEMTRAIL that mofo leaves behind!!!!

      This MUST be the work of a 'three-letter-agency', no other explanation will explain that kind of chemtrail. It is even bigger that the ones made by regular flying objects. I would love to elaborate on that, but I have to answer the door... ...that's peculiar... two men in black suits ringing at my door...

      --
      rm -rf --no-preserve-root / ...and let /dev/null sort them out...
    5. Re:Wow by Luckyo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually dashcams are a requirement of insurance companies to insure a car.

    6. Re:Wow by Dave+Whiteside · · Score: 2
      --
      who where what when now?
  3. On injuries and damage by ACS+Solver · · Score: 5, Informative

    As of right now, English-language sources seem to be a bit behind on the injury/damage reports.

    The current reports from the city government say that 725 people have received medical attention, with 31 being hospitalized. Infrastructural damage amounts to problems in the centralized building heating system, and blown out windows in about 3000 apartment buildings, 34 hospitals and clinics, and 361 schools/daycares. I should note that, this being Russia, blown out windows are a serious matter because they render the buildings cold, especially coupled with heating system problems. Gas supply has been turned off in parts of the city as a precaution.

    Overall, though, there appears to be no serious damage - though emergency repairs and lots of new windows are needed.

    1. Re:On injuries and damage by BlackPignouf · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Overall, though, there appears to be no serious damage - though emergency repairs and lots of new windows are needed.

      No serious damage? Yeah, what could possibly go wrong in a city with 1M people, that has no gas supply and frozen hospitals?
      Minimum temperatures are -4F/-20C at night right now, and maximum aren't much higher.

    2. Re:On injuries and damage by ACS+Solver · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For all the problems of the Russian government, the emergency services are well-prepared, given the not uncommon occurence of various emergencies. The city has its own glass factory even, and they'd be able to replace most of the windows within a couple of days. Emergency repairs should restore much of the heating quickly, and very importantly, the hospitals are not being overwhelmed - the amount of people who need hospitalization is fairly low. The authorities apparently intend to fix windows today where it's most critical.

      Just to be clear, it is of course a serious situation, but by no serious damage I mean there is nothing like a need to evacuate hundreds of people to other cities for medical treatment, there are no deaths fortunately, and there are no buildings that have fully collapsed.

    3. Re:On injuries and damage by gl4ss · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Overall, though, there appears to be no serious damage - though emergency repairs and lots of new windows are needed.

      No serious damage? Yeah, what could possibly go wrong in a city with 1M people, that has no gas supply and frozen hospitals?
      Minimum temperatures are -4F/-20C at night right now, and maximum aren't much higher.

      hate to be a dick about this, but they're russians, so they can handle the state failing for couple of days.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    4. Re:On injuries and damage by SMoynihan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'd guess that most of the direct injuries happened when people ran to their windows to watch the flare and contrail. Looking at the videos, the sonic boom happened at least 27 seconds later: right when people would be clustered in front of the glass.

      It is similar to Tsunamis, where a lot of the fatalities happen to people who chase the receding sea...

    5. Re:On injuries and damage by azalin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Until a few of years ago the collapse of central heating in winter was rather commonplace. All the broken windows are a new feature, but I'd say Russians are very good at improvising and will cope with the situation.

    6. Re:On injuries and damage by Luckyo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Update on lenta.ru 30 minutes ago:
      http://lenta.ru/news/2013/02/15/muchmore/

      According to RIA novosti news agency:
      950 people wounded to some degree. Of these:
      524 needed medical assistance
      34 adults and 12 children hospitalized
      2 people had to be put in intensive care

      Most damage apparently came from shards of shattered glass wounding people.

      Other set of figures is from federal government and that one specifies:
      571 wounded to some degree
      758 asked for medical assistance

      It's also stated that they already found remains of one of the pieces in a local lake where meteorite punched through the ice and left shards on the site.

    7. Re:On injuries and damage by Endlisnis · · Score: 2

      3000 apartment buildings need new windows, and you think they can be replaced in "a couple of days"? If each building has 100 windows, then it's 300,000 windows to replace. I don't know how you think windows get replaced, or manufactured, but it takes about 1 man-hour to replace a small window (maybe 20 minutes if you don't care about damaging the walls or cleaning up the old window). 300,000 windows = 300,000 man-hours of work. To accomplish that in 2 days would require over 6,000 people to be working on it for 48 continuous hours. And that's not even taking the manufacturing of the windows into account. This will take months to completely replace the windows.

  4. Meteors are the universes way to ask... by azalin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... hows your space program going.

    1. Re:Meteors are the universes way to ask... by Twinbee · · Score: 2

      ...and my big brother's coming soon.

      --
      Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    2. Re:Meteors are the universes way to ask... by Grave · · Score: 2

      Uh.. what?

      Sure it's a difficult problem, but we need to work on it. We're still taking baby steps, but humanity does need to wake the fuck up and start getting serious about colonizing other planets. If the universe's plethora of flying debris doesn't wipe us out, and if we manage to not kill each other off in a horrible war, and we prevent global climate change from rendering the planet unlivable, we're still faced with an eventual exhaustion of resources at our current rate of growth.

      Just because something is hard and complex does not mean we shouldn't be working towards solving it.

  5. It begins, the horrible Asteroid B-movie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And another one will smash in to another country somewhere, and another, and another, then Paris gets wiped off the face of the Earth.

    Damn you Hollywoooooood!

  6. Space Jump by Jedi+Holocron · · Score: 5, Funny

    Pfffft.

    That was Putin skydiving from space.

    Shirtless, because he's Putin.

  7. Alternative videos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://www.standartnews.com/videos/watch/meteorit_padna_i_rani_desetki_v_rusiya-276.html
    Here's a link with video from more places. (Best i've found so far)

    1. Re:Alternative videos by Maow · · Score: 2

      http://www.standartnews.com/videos/watch/meteorit_padna_i_rani_desetki_v_rusiya-276.html
      Here's a link with video from more places. (Best i've found so far)

      Here's another good aggregation:

      http://say26.com/meteorite-in-russia-all-videos-in-one-place.

      I like the apparent "crater" in an ice covered lake. It's a hole punched through the ice. I'm hoping that someone will be able to recover a significant part or parts of the thing from the lake bottom eventually.

  8. In other news by zrbyte · · Score: 5, Funny

    Zombies spotted in Chelyabinsk

  9. The result of funding cuts for observatories by tp1024 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The meteorite was several times larger than the last (and first ever) predicted impact in 2008.

    It is trivially possible these days, to do several complete surveys of the sky each day and ensure that such asteroids are discovered several days ahead of time. Computers allow us do evaluate the data more or less in real time. The problem is: You need funding for the telescopes around the world and staff to run them.

    While all the observatories would do, is to give warning to people in the area to stay indoors and away from windows - or leave the area alltogether if the rock is a bit larger - that's still better than "oups" and a couple videos from dashboard cameras. It would also provide a viable basis for sending up a rocket with a few tons of mass to break up an asteroid into harmless chunks. Possibly a combination of high and low density materials, like concrete and lead, to achieve a good distribution of the momentum through the whole asteroid.

    I'm not kidding. A single ton mass in a head-on collision with 10-15km/s has as much kinetic energy as 15-30 tons of high explosives. Which should be enough to break up a 30m asteroid into very small chunks (this one in russia was probably around 10m), although some preparation is certainly in order.

    1. Re:The result of funding cuts for observatories by Sockatume · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not sure how it follows from discovering a solitary asteroid with a twenty hour lead time that we can "trivially" perform a sky sweep with enough comprehensiveness and detail to give a "several days" lead time. Yes, we could do it, but it's not at all obvious that it would be easy.

      Turning a single impactor with a known trajectory into an unknown number of impactors of unknown size and unknown trajectory does not strike me as a great response to detecting such an object either.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    2. Re:The result of funding cuts for observatories by tom17 · · Score: 2

      The problem with this is that the world is so litigation happy right now, that when a meteorite 'slips through the net' and kills one person, the workers at the observatories might get sued into oblivion.

      Likewise, if they call a city-wide evacuation and it plops into a nearby forest/lake instead, the businesses will be suing them for lost revenue.

      These early warning systems (like the earthquake ones) can only be feasible if there is a litigation safety net over the institutions in question.

    3. Re:The result of funding cuts for observatories by Hans+Lehmann · · Score: 2

      It would also provide a viable basis for sending up a rocket with a few tons of mass to break up an asteroid into.... That would like firing a gun into the sky, hoping to hit a bullet that was also fired into the sky moments before someone else a mile away, except much harder. At the distance at which you would need to intercept these projectiles they give off no heat, so you can't even use heat seeking space rockets (which don't exist anyway). Real life isn't a Bruce Willis movie.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    4. Re:The result of funding cuts for observatories by azalin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A few years ago I would have said "only in America", but then Italy dragged geologists to court for not predicting an earthquake.

    5. Re:The result of funding cuts for observatories by DeadCatX2 · · Score: 2

      No. They predicted a >0% chance of an earthquake but told people it was a 0% chance, resulting in people who were already preparing for an earthquake to stop their preparations.

      http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/23/world/europe/italy-quake-scientists-guilty

      The experts determined that it was "unlikely" but not impossible that a major quake would take place, despite concern among the city's residents over recent seismic activity.

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/23/italian-scientist-earthquake-condemns-court

      But [Claudio] Eva insisted neither he nor his colleagues had given any reassurances in their brief, 40-minute meeting. "We always maintained it was not possible to predict or exclude an earthquake," he said.

      Now who do I believe, some guy named Rary on the Internet, or Jethro Mullen from CNN and Tom Kington from the Guardian?

      --
      :(){ :|:& };:
  10. Missle Strike by Westwood0720 · · Score: 2

    I wonder how many stared at that thing and were waiting for the giant mushroom cloud to appear. Like Sarah Connor at the playground.

  11. The vapour trail was visible from Meteosat-10 by dcowart · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/eumetsat/8474853633/

    "An image from the SEVIRI instrument aboard our Meteosat-10 geostationary satellite. The vapour trail left by the meteor that was seen near Chelyabinsk in Russia on 15th February 2013 is visible in the centre of the image."

    --
    www.rdex.net
  12. Re:Intercepted by Russian air defence forces? by Sockatume · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think you'd have a better chance of trying to swat down a fighter plane with a magazine.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  13. Re:Video of impact site by NeoTron · · Score: 2

    Buuuuullshit, AC , that's a video of The Door To Hell, near a village in Turkmanistan called Derweze

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Door_to_Hell

  14. Re:What about the crash site? by ACS+Solver · · Score: 5, Informative

    The apparent crash site (or maybe one of several, not clear if there were several sizeable fragments) is in a nearby lake, creating a 6 meter hole in ice. Picture at a news site. The site is under control of Russian authorities and a scientific group is due to arrive tomorrow to study the meteorite.

  15. Re:Intercepted by Russian air defence forces? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Funny

    Some not so credible newspapers report unconfirmed military sources stating that Russian air defence shot down this bad boy.

    No, it was Putin who busted it into smithereens with one blow from his mighty fist.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  16. Re:Unrelated to 2012 DA14? by Eraesr · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, meteors hitting the earth's atmosphere is a very common event. It happens almost every night. The only difference is that this time the meteor was large enough to be visible and have this result. The big 45m piece of asteroid passing by isn't that uncommon either, it's just passing by relatively close compared to other asteroids.
    In short: we're not talking about two uncommon events (certainly not "very rare"). You're falling for the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy here.

  17. Typical cover... by erroneus · · Score: 2

    If I learned anything from watching Stargate SG-1, it's that everything that happens in space is explained as "a meteor."

  18. Obvious joke by dkleinsc · · Score: 2

    In Soviet Russia, asteroids play YOU!

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  19. ballistics by v1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Meteors and ICMBs (Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles) both travel on "ballistic" trajectories. I.E. when they're coming down, they don't change speed or course under their own power. This makes it very easy (relatively, for people that do it for a living) to track their point of origin. This would clearly be coming from space, not from another continent.

    What interests me the most here is why wasn't this all over the news? We see posts about twice a year talking about the next "near miss" we're going to have. So what happened with this one? Didn't they catch it? Or did they catch it, realize it was going to hit, and decide not to tell anybody? It would be a lot more interesting to find out details on it being known, covered up, and an intercept attempted. (and possibly successfully)

    Continuing on that tangent, hollywood tells us from Independence Day "and turn one dangerous falling object into many?" In other words, blowing it up doesn't immediately lower it's total combined mass, so is it a good idea or a bad idea? I suppose if you start with something massive enough to get through the atmosphere and hit dirt, if you have a chance to blow it up into say a dozen smaller pieces that have a good chance of burning up in the atmosphere, that'd be a good option. Even if you busted it up it up into say four smaller pieces, their surface area to mass ratio goes way up and the four that make it to the ground should have burned off more mass and impact with less energy than the original one would have.

    But rather than trying to play an armchair quarterback, I'm just askin' the questions, I'll leave answering those questions to the "rocket scientists".

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re:ballistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Meteors like this are a lot smaller than the near-misses that end up in the news. Being able to find, track and see where smaller meteors that result in fireballs but don't reach the ground with any significant force (or at all) is much harder. It was done recently for one that fell over Africa, and that was treated as a big deal as it was by far the smallest one tracked and the first tracked before it hit. But that is more the exception than the rule at the moment for rather small ones. Additionally, predicting where it will go once it hits the air is much more difficult than tracking it in space (not impossible... but does result in some large landing ellipses for shallow angle ones with unknown shapes).

    2. Re:ballistics by goodmanj · · Score: 4, Informative

      We see posts about twice a year talking about the next "near miss" we're going to have. So what happened with this one? Didn't they catch it? Or did they catch it, realize it was going to hit, and decide not to tell anybody? It

      We don't spot 'em all. We've got several active asteroid search programs going, which have discovered thousands of near-earth asteroids, but there are many thousands more. One of the triumphs of 21st-century science is that we now know where almost all of the "end of the world" and "destroy a large country" km-sized near-earth asteroids are. But we think we've only found about half of the "annihilate a city" 300-m sized ones, and most of the mere "hydrogen-bomb" 100-m sized ones remain unknown. This meteor was *much* smaller than that -- I'd guess only a couple meters across. There are probably *millions* of those out there, and they're too small to see at all unless they make a close pass of the EArth.

      http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/WISE/multimedia/gallery/neowise/pia14734.html
      http://www.purdue.edu/impactearth/

    3. Re:ballistics by niado · · Score: 2

      What interests me the most here is why wasn't this all over the news? We see posts about twice a year talking about the next "near miss" we're going to have. So what happened with this one? Didn't they catch it? Or did they catch it, realize it was going to hit, and decide not to tell anybody? It would be a lot more interesting to find out details on it being known, covered up, and an intercept attempted. (and possibly successfully)

      Well, this one likely went un-detected a least until it entered atmosphere, since it is really very small (I read an estimate of 10 tons, and the 2012 DA14 asteroid is somewhere around 190,000 metric tons, for comparison).

    4. Re:ballistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yep. My favorite scene in Independence Day was when they got to the asteroid and Denzel Washington killed those two aliens and was all like "Welcome to Mars, man! Would you like to know more?"

    5. Re:ballistics by Sperbels · · Score: 2

      What interests me the most here is why wasn't this all over the news? We see posts about twice a year talking about the next "near miss" we're going to have. So what happened with this one? Didn't they catch it? Or did they catch it, realize it was going to hit, and decide not to tell anybody?

      Because these incidents are fairly common and don't cause any harm. Objects this small are too small to track, and not worth tracking either. This object was probably no bigger than a car. The dangerous ones are as big as mountains...and bigger

      And Jesus...for the last time...there's no conspiracy to hide asteroids on collision courses with the earth. The information regarding asteroid orbits is totally public well before we have gathered enough information to make an assessment on whether they'll hit the earth. NASA does not have a monopoly on this information, nor do they control it. There are thousands of professionals and amateurs all contributing data on asteroid orbits nightly. If a huge asteroid is going to hit us, a lot of people would know. There is absolutely no way to keep that quiet. It certainly wouldn't be worth suppressing knowledge of a car sized asteroid, even if it was headed straight at New York...it is a not a threat.

    6. Re:ballistics by celtic_hackr · · Score: 4, Informative

      You do realize you are speaking of a rock roughly the size of a large van or small delivery truck travelling in space at extreme speeds that once they hit the atmosphere are hypersonic speeds. There aren't any designated travel lanes to look out for in space, and tryin to spot a rock the size of a truck in a 360 degree spherical space of infinite size is a lot harder than finding a sewing needle in a haystack. So, you know it'd be really freaking amazing if they actually did know about this.

      On another note Independence day was about an Alien invasion. I think you might be thinking along the lines of the Armegeddon film and it's ilk. There are many issues with blow it up into littler pieces. But that idea is mostly bad for a rock of any considerable size. This meteorite is estimated to be only a few meters in size, maybe 10 tons. The football field size DA14 headed for a "safe" flyby (I'm still waiting to see if it happens to hits a satellite or two on it's way by), would produce hundreds or maybe thousands of rocks this size. While they would be unlikely to do much "surface" damage, if it passed over any metropolitan area you could probably expecte 10s or 100s of thousands injuries and possibly some fatalities and 10s to 100s of millions in property damage.

      A better course is to shove to a different trajectory. Like a game of billiards. Although, I'm not happy about that idea much either. Too many variables on unwanted side affects.

    7. Re:ballistics by asylumx · · Score: 2

      What interests me the most here is why wasn't this all over the news?

      It is. Seriously, everyone is talking about it. What the hell are you looking at? It's on the front page on every news org's site I can think of.

    8. Re:ballistics by dvice_null · · Score: 2

      > But we think we've only found about half of the "annihilate a city" 300-m sized ones

      Not only that, but e.g. one 400-m sized one might hit the earth in a couple of months, but we don't know for sure whether it will hit or not, because last observation for it was in year 2008. It is very unlikely that it would hit us, but still... we don't know. http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/2008uv99.html

    9. Re:ballistics by isorox · · Score: 2

      What interests me the most here is why wasn't this all over the news? We see posts about twice a year talking about the next "near miss" we're going to have. So what happened with this one? Didn't they catch it? Or did they catch it, realize it was going to hit, and decide not to tell anybody?

      Because these incidents are fairly common and don't cause any harm. Objects this small are too small to track, and not worth tracking either. This object was probably no bigger than a car. The dangerous ones are as big as mountains...and bigger

      Obviously the mountain sized ones (or even swimming pool sized ones) are terrible, but this one wasn't exactly a flash bang - look at Images 3, 4, 6 and 8

    10. Re:ballistics by cusco · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Trillion dollar military "defense" budget, and not a penny of that goes to defending us against something like this. Imagine if this had happened during the Cold War, the first assumption would have been a failed nuclear strike. For that matter, if it had blown up over Kashmir the Pakistani and Indian militaries would probably assume the same thing today.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    11. Re:ballistics by cusco · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Guess you're right. Better that the Pentagon get a trillion dollars to prevent an illiterate goatherd from blowing up a private corporation's oil pipeline in someone else's country than prevent the extinction of all life forms higher than rats. Sorry, my priorities were temporarily out of whack.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  20. Re:It does nothing to those composed of ice. by Salvage · · Score: 2

    There are four types of meteor composition; roughly ice, carbon, stone, iron. These types notably differ in how deep they can get into the atmosphere before they shatter (explode), with shatter altitude varying mostly by size. Iron meteors generally get all the way to the surface intact. And any part that hits the ground counts as a meteorite.

    --
    T. M. Pederson
    "Lies, Damn Lies, and Documentation"
  21. 1000 miles due south by way2trivial · · Score: 5, Interesting

    do the math.. a 1000 miles away (radius) equates 3,141,590 sq miles to track

    for something that occurs in 30 seconds... and has a cross section of a few feet.

    here is a nice 1000 mile circle
    http://reyscars.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/1000-mile-radius-map.jpg

    examine that entire region for a speck about 20-50 feet wide....

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  22. Re:UNLREATED EH? by Sockatume · · Score: 2

    It's not like space is famously chock full of rocks or anything like that.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  23. Re:Will we recognize an alien ship from ... by Sockatume · · Score: 2

    Starship design optimises for minimum mass (mass, material choice), maximum available space (size), and optimum use thereof (shape). With an asteroid you have no control over material, are bounded in size and shape, and the minimum mass is achieved by sculpting out the shape of a conventional starship.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  24. Re:30 years ago? End of world. by Stone+Rhino · · Score: 3, Interesting
    --


    Remember, there were no nuclear weapons before women were allowed to vote.