Asteroid pool

[chriscdc]

An interesting article in newscientist.<br /><br />http://www.newscientistspace.com/article/dn9063-taking-out-a-killer-asteroid--with-a-tame-one.html<br /><br />Basically you put a small 40m asteroid in a 1.5million km orbit and use it to hit any incoming asteroid.<br /><br /><br />One idea I had to divert an incoming asteroid would involve using underground nuclear explosions to accelerate large metal plates into a collision course.<br /><br />In one underground test this happened and a several hundred metric ton cap was accelerated to above 11km/s.<br />Of course there are problems of losing mass due to burning up in the atmosphere. These could be counteracted by shaping the 'shells' and covering them in ablative material. Or even using a set of nukes in the lower atmosphere to generate a low pressure colomn.<br />Sahara would be a great place to launch from. The moon would be even better but the engineering difficulties increase and the possibility of using it against earth.

 

[webtaz99]

I wish people would wake up. We need to start a true sky watch and ID the rocks headed our way. Asteroids in Earth-crossing orbits are treasure troves to be pillaged, not threats to be destroyed. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[vogon13]

I am pretty sure the steel cap launched was several hundred pounds or kilograms.<br /><br />Not metric tons.<br /><br />Nukes on the moon are highly dangerous because thay can accelerate lunar surface debris to orbital velocity, a grave danger for any orbiting assets we might have orbiting the moon.<br /><br />Heck, even GEO for the larger blasts.<br /><br />You knock out my Directv and I won't be very happy with you.<br /><br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>

 

[chriscdc]

Yep your right it was only a few hundred pounds. However the test (pascal-B) only had a yield of 300tons. Also The cap was calculated to have been accelerated to 56km/sec. It was also at 150m above the explosion. <br /><br />So it was still an impressive test and no doubt could be refined to be an even more powerful cannon. Considering the thousands of nukes of much higher yields, it would be quite easy to build something that can get through the atmosphere.<br /><br />http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/Plumbob.html<br /><br />Of course launching from the moon has it's own problems but your firing at something that can cause significant damage to the earth so it hardly matters.

 

[spacefire]

I have a cheaper solution:<br /><br />mirrors at Lagrange points which would focus sunlight into a concentrated beam on the asteroid, thus burning material off the surface which generates exhaust and thus an impulse exchange.<br />An asteroid far away only needs a small change in trajectory to miss Earth.<br />A mirror could be orbited stowed and deployed at the right point, maybe with an ion thruster attached to counteract the 'solar sail' effect. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[scottb50]

That's much too simple, you have to have lasers and don't forget the mandatory methane engines, or the Nuclear reactor. For God's sakes man, where are your priorities. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[edawg]

use a 500 mt nuke on the thing or just make a lunar magnetic sled for commercial purpose and use it to launch payloads at any incoming threats? You can make money and protect the earth..

 

[scottb50]

I think I read where a Nuke wouldn't really cause a lot of damage or more proper, a lot of deflection of the asteroids path. If you could alter it's course with 500mt it would burn up in the atmosphere anyway.<br /><br />Odds of an event like Siberia are pretty high if you ask me. New York to Chicago flattened. I would go with mass drivers, might as well exploit the threat as a way of removing it. Harvest the good stuff and use the rest as fuel for solar ion engines, which diverts the asteroid. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[edawg]

i wonder if you can use giant DU rods to split it..?just accelerate to 30kms with a NERVA tug, we built the thing 50yrs and it worked..but we never did it ;(I bet the russkies would sell some of their know how for a commercial market )

 

[quarkstorm]

Your talking about the plumbob test. The metal manhole cover, alright maybe it wasn't a standard manhole cover but anyway, would have burnt up in the atmosphere. But the idea of using the blast of a nuclear shockwave to lift a payload into space is viable. "Nuclear Pulse Propulsion" is my personal nerdy field of interest. The US governement funded serious research between 1957 and 1965 into the idea of using a series of nuclear blasts to lift ships of 4000 tons and above into space in what was known as Project Orion.*<br />The concept involve dropping nukes out the back of the ship and riding the shockwave, contrary to what most people would assume the ship would not be blown to pieces but could survive the blast quite readily. The project was technically feasible, but as the 60's progressed the political will to build such a ship receded. The threat of an imminent asteroid strike is one scenario where I can see there being the political and public will to revitalise the idea. Essentially the technology I there if it were needed.<br /><br />*Project Orion - I'm aware you people have had arguments in the past from a user who went by this name, I should assure you that I am not he though I share his enthusiasm for the project.