cryptocom writes "Space.com is reporting that two scientists at NASA are proposing using a 20-ton spacecraft to pull asteroids off a possible collision course with Earth, using the spacecraft's own gravity as an attractor. This idea would not only be cheaper, but have a much higher chance of success, due to not having to actually land on the asteroid's surface."Ads_xl=0;Ads_yl=0;Ads_xp='';Ads_yp='';Ads_xp1='';Ads_yp1='';Ads_par='';Ads_cnturl='';Ads_prf='page=article';Ads_channels='RON_P6_IMU';Ads_wrd='space,tech';Ads_kid=0;Ads_bid=0;Ads_sec=0; Using Gravity To Tow Asteroids Log in/Create an Account | Top | 438 comments (Spill at 50!) | Index Only | Search Discussion Display Options Threshold: -1: 438 comments 0: 435 comments 1: 368 comments 2: 241 comments 3: 49 comments 4: 25 comments 5: 19 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way. (1) | 2 The mother of all asteroid deflection devices (Score:5, Insightful) by nizo (81281) * on Wednesday November 09, @04:24PM (#13992329) (Last Journal: Wednesday November 09, @02:42PM) Assuming:2000 lbs in a ton20 ton spacecraft$10,000/pound to get to geosynchronous transfer orbit$400,000,000 just to launch this thing into a geosynchronous transfer orbit (not counting construction costs). I assume the fuel to move it isn't included in the 20 ton estimate either (since it will burn off on the way) so that would need to be lifted as well. I wonder if a huge nuke would be cheaper and easier to construct and launch? Then again, with the current U.S. national debt at over 8 trillion (with which we could pay for the launch costs of 20,000 of these things) maybe the launch costs aren't unreasonable. [ Reply to This that's what i was thinking (Score:4, Interesting) by conJunk (779958) on Wednesday November 09, @04:26PM (#13992349) Right on. While it's really an elegant solution, highly cool, I imagine there is an asteroid-size pile of kinks to work out before this becomes reality though.Launching the craft. How much fuel would it take to get escape velocity on something this massive? Probably not a small amount.The crew. The time the crew would be away from earth would be how long? 10 years? 20 years? Managing and provisioning crews for such a long amount of time is probably among the major challenges facing the extension of our space travel abilities.Coming home. What happens when a ship this large is re-entering Earth's atmosphere? That sucker will have a lot of force coming down.Would it work? How do you test something like this before sinking billions into the final product and subsequent launch? what if it didn't work? What kind of contingency plans could we have?Shelf life. So we make a ginormous space tractor. Maybe we don't face an asteroid threat for 15,000 years. That's a lot of upkeep.who pays for it? This would turn into what, a trillion USD project? Who's footing that bill? What kind of bickering will we get in to breaking up those kinds of costs among dozens of nations?All in all, I think it's a brilliant solution that just may not be feasable, but it's nice to see creative people are thinking about it. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:that's what i was thinking by jabelar (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:32PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Wog (Score:3) Wednesday November 09, @05:34PMRe:that's what i was thinking by mstromb (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @06:04PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Impy the Impiuos Imp (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:11PMRe:that's what i was thinking by hamilton76 (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:12PMRe:that's what i was thinking by CardiganKiller (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:09PMRe:that's what i was thinking by peculiarmethod (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:33PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Rei (Score:3) Wednesday November 09, @04:43PMRe:that's what i was thinking by jx100 (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @04:52PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Rei (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:23PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:36PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Rei (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:20PMRe:that's what i was thinking by drinkypoo (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:24PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Impy the Impiuos Imp (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:15PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Rei (Score:3) Wednesday November 09, @08:09PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Rei (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @08:12PM Re:that's what i was thinking (Score:5, Insightful) by Rei (128717) on Wednesday November 09, @04:33PM (#13992442) (http://www.cursor.org/) Crew? Not a chance. There is absolutely no reason to send crew on a mission like this. It would just complicate a mission that computer controls could already do more than well enough, and send the price through the roof. We're already doing completely automated asteroid *landings* (harder than it sounds, because they have very irregular gravity fields). There's no way that the 20 tonnes includes a human payload and all of the associated baggage.No humans, no coming home. Also, they mention 20 years prep time - i.e., they're not planning to build it until a threat is discovered, and the couple billion dollar cost would be amortized over that time to perhaps 100 mil per year, split around the world's space agencies. I'm sure that's more than enough time and low enough cost. Also, a 200 meter asteroid is hardly a worldwide cataclysmic event if it hits; it's like a single large nuclear weapon hitting a random place on the planet, if you can trust the impact calculator [arizona.edu]. [ Reply to This | ParentHumans perhaps.... by isotope23 (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:47PM Re:Humans perhaps.... (Score:5, Insightful) by Rei (128717) on Wednesday November 09, @05:18PM (#13992902) (http://www.cursor.org/) I often refer people to look at unmanned Mars missions, and determine how many of the huge number of failed Mars missions could have been saved by people. The answer is almost none. Most were booster failures, calculation errors (which humans couldn't have noticed until it was too late), failures in critical hardware, even explosive depressurization of pressurized parts (and you better believe that you have a lot more pressurized area with people!). Only two in which the computer was shut down but recoverable could realistically have been saved by humans. On the other hand, one of the missions which was salvaged likely would have killed any human crew onboard; a solar panel used for aerobraking at Mars was damaged, and they had to make it take many months longer to get into Mars orbit. This would have been fatal to the crew (unless they were equipped to do spacewalks and metal repairs, which raises the price and complexity even further).Adding humans will around 20x your cost. So, take your pick: 20 completely different designs, or one manned mission with a significant chance of failure, for the same price. It's a pretty simple call; there's a reason why almost all probes that we launch are unmanned. The manned space program gets funding. The unmanned space program does the research. [ Reply to This | Parent Re:Humans perhaps.... (Score:5, Insightful) by isotope23 (210590) on Wednesday November 09, @05:30PM (#13993018) (http://newlibertarian.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Monday July 18, @02:23PM) Yeah but don't you think there will be a boatload of people screamingabout an unmanned mission if the fate of the world hangs in the balance?From a political point of view I can't see anyone supporting a robot probemission to save the earth. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Humans perhaps.... by agrippa_cash (Score:3) Wednesday November 09, @06:30PMRe:Humans perhaps.... by Meetch (Score:3) Wednesday November 09, @07:41PMRe:Humans perhaps.... by YA_Python_dev (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @08:13PMRe:Humans perhaps.... by Rei (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:11PMRe:Humans perhaps.... by Lord Ender (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @09:43PMRe:Humans perhaps.... by snuf23 (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @09:44PM2 replies beneath your current threshold.Re:Humans perhaps.... by robertjw (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:55PMRe:Humans perhaps.... by Rei (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:08PMRe:Humans perhaps.... by ChrisA90278 (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @06:14PMRe:Humans perhaps.... by nizo (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:30PMRe:Humans perhaps.... by liquidpele (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:49PMMass produce rovers. by crovira (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:58PMRe:Humans perhaps.... by Impy the Impiuos Imp (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:24PMRe:Humans perhaps.... by Rei (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @08:14PMRe:that's what i was thinking by NelsonM (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @04:54PMRe:that's what i was thinking by ENOENT (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:03PMRe:that's what i was thinking by letxa2000 (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:24PMRe:that's what i was thinking by stlhawkeye (Score:3) Wednesday November 09, @06:02PMRe:that's what i was thinking by neuro.slug (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:09PMSlashdot title should read by Propaganda13 (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @06:17PMOh come now.... by carlmenezes (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @07:11PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Impy the Impiuos Imp (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:20PMRe:that's what i was thinking by MaskedSlacker (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:32PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Rei (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @07:43PMRe:that's what i was thinking by MaskedSlacker (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:52PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Rei (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @08:22PMRe:that's what i was thinking by MaskedSlacker (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @09:03PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Bad D.N.A. (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @09:11PMRe:that's what i was thinking by NitsujTPU (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @09:24PMMaybe somebody should RTFA? by RabidMoose (Score:1) Thursday November 10, @12:18AMRe:that's what i was thinking by Desert Raven (Score:3) Wednesday November 09, @04:36PMRe:that's what i was thinking by conJunk (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:42PMRe:that's what i was thinking by BlogPope (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:16PMRe:that's what i was thinking by liquidpele (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:43PMRe:that's what i was thinking by rufty_tufty (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:29PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Eccles (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @08:04PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Hrvat (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @04:38PMRe:that's what i was thinking by mtaht (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @04:39PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:that's what i was thinking by MindStalker (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:39PMRe:that's what i was thinking by dakirw (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @08:39PMSalvage one had the right idea by ankarbass (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:40PMRe:that's what i was thinking by AviLazar (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:00PMMods on crack? by StarKruzr (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:17PMRe:that's what i was thinking by Jerry Coffin (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:10PMGood use for Project Orion by CustomDesigned (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:31PM Re:that's what i was thinking (Score:5, Informative) by SteveAyre (209812) <sa146.cs@york@ac@uk> on Wednesday November 09, @06:52PM (#13993707) Launching the craft. How much fuel would it take to get escape velocity on something this massive? Probably not a small amount.20 ton spaceship. That's actually smaller than the Space Shuttle.I can't remember the source now, but the Shuttle can lift about a 30ton payload. The boosters themselves can lift far more but of course have to carry the Shuttle too (which is something like 120tons).The Saturn V rocket [wikipedia.org] was capable of lifting 118 tonnes (with the 3 stage versions).The Shuttle Derived Launch Vehicle [wikipedia.org] will have a capacity of 125 tonnes.All seem plenty to lift a 20ton spaceship if it's the only thing being launched. Even with a Shuttle it should be doable, or we can have another up there waiting to deploy it or use the ISS team.Since we're able to use existing launchers to get the spaceship into orbit, it shouldn't cost any more to launch than any existing mission. All your left with is the pricetag for building it and giving it enough fuel to reach the asteroid.The crew. The time the crew would be away from earth would be how long? 10 years? 20 years? Managing and provisioning crews for such a long amount of time is probably among the major challenges facing the extension of our space travel abilities.Coming home. What happens when a ship this large is re-entering Earth's atmosphere? That sucker will have a lot of force coming down.Due to the distance it would have to travel a robotic mission remote controlled from Earth would make the most sense. Just in case anything breaks which isn't workaroundable/fixable it would probably make sense to send more than one.In this case it'd be best to leave it out there - without enough fuel to return it'd be cheaper and without a crew to bring home there's no real reason to.Shelf life. So we make a ginormous space tractor. Maybe we don't face an asteroid threat for 15,000 years. That's a lot of upkeep.The launchers are already around, and it wouldn't take long to build a ship which is essentially a remote controlled engine with a lot of metal attached.Assuming that we'd know of the threat in enough time to send this to the asteroid, as long as we still have the launchers to get it into space in the first place it shouldn't be unreasonable that we can build them as we need them.If we don't have that kind of timescale then we're probably in trouble even if we could send it straight away. Since the launchers seem capable of lifting more than 20 tonnes though, we could just build a 40 tonne version and half the time we'd need (disclaimer: not linear, i think it'd be more like 3/4?). [ Reply to This | ParentRe:that's what i was thinking by hurfy (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @08:35PMRe:that's what i was thinking by jim_v2000 (Score:3) Wednesday November 09, @07:52PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. Re:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices (Score:5, Funny) by lightyear4 (852813) on Wednesday November 09, @04:28PM (#13992367) (http://www.fugitivethought.com/steve/blog.php) I don't think you should place a price upon the value of saving civilization. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by CyricZ (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:29PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by svkal (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:07PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by FidelCatsro (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:27PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Impy the Impiuos Imp (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:35PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Rei (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:30PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Impy the Impiuos Imp (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:31PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by myowntrueself (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @09:34PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by richdun (Score:3) Wednesday November 09, @04:30PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by MilenCent (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @08:24PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by ozydingo (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:36PM Re:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices (Score:5, Insightful) by tji (74570) on Wednesday November 09, @04:43PM (#13992567) (http://www.weaselworkz.com) > I don't think you should place a price upon the value of saving civilization.That's silly.. The goal is "saving civilization". There are many ways to accomplish this goal, a perfectly valid input into the decision process is "how much does this method cost". [ Reply to This | ParentRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by macklin01 (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:55PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by nizo (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:36PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by iamlucky13 (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @08:10PMOf course by Jeff Molby (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:11PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by misleb (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:03PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by e2ka (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:11PMDumb ideas... by Cunjo (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:36PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by fm6 (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:18PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Impy the Impiuos Imp (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:37PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by idlake (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:35PM3 replies beneath your current threshold. Re:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices (Score:5, Funny) by Gulthek (12570) on Wednesday November 09, @04:28PM (#13992370) (http://www.stephenball.net/ | Last Journal: Thursday April 25, @09:03PM) Maybe to stop a huge asteroid from impacting on the Earth's surface the cost would be quite reasonable.I.e. I don't think that world leaders would look at the figures and go "Hrmmmmm...when you say extinct...how extinct?" [ Reply to This | Parent Re:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices (Score:4, Funny) by AnonymousKev (754127) on Wednesday November 09, @05:28PM (#13993006) > I.e. I don't think that world leaders would look at the figures and go "Hrmmmmm...when you say extinct...how extinct?"You've obviously never been in a scheduling meeting with management. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Chapter80 (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:45PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Chapter80 (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:58PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by KylePflug (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:17PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Impy the Impiuos Imp (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:39PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by iamlucky13 (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @08:26PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @04:28PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by B3ryllium (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:47PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by tradiuz (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @04:31PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by ozydingo (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @04:41PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by stfvon007 (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:26PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Tatarize (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:44PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by kzarling (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:16PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by nizo (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:39PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by HarvardAce (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:48PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Tatarize (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:54PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Impy the Impiuos Imp (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:42PMor just pick some boulders on the target asteroid by njchick (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:23PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by B3ryllium (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:50PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by daniil (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:31PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Up out of the well? by FlyingOrca (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:32PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Daveznet (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:32PM Re:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices (Score:5, Insightful) by stienman (51024) <<adavis> <at> <ubasics.com>> on Wednesday November 09, @04:48PM (#13992603) (http://www.ubasics.com/adam | Last Journal: Wednesday August 06, @01:01PM) You cannot put a price on human life! Nonsense. In fact, there's a whole work force [soa.org] employed to do exactly that. -Adam [ Reply to This | ParentRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Mr. Slippery (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @06:04PMbah by toiletmonster (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:29PMIt sure pissed people off when you by Ogemaniac (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @07:24PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by trurl7 (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:53PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Impy the Impiuos Imp (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:44PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by trurl7 (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:08PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by mtaht (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:34PM Re:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices (Score:5, Funny) by GryMor (88799) on Wednesday November 09, @05:14PM (#13992870) 'Hoovering' isn't going to work, suction is just the difference between a high presure area and a low presure area. In order to 'hoover' in this environment you would need to have a zone inside the space craft with a presure lower than the presure outside the spacecraft. The presure outside the spacecraft is aproximately 0, so, good luck with creating an area of negative pressure (which would require a negative number of atoms, a negative absolute temperature or a negative volume...) [ Reply to This | ParentRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by mtaht (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:38PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by mtaht (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:49PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by 0xABADC0DA (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:37PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Mahou (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @04:38PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by geomon (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:43PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Mahou (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:52PMSpace Junk by arrrrg (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @04:40PMRe:Space Junk by cyclopropene (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:21PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by slashdotnickname (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:43PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by adavies42 (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:44PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by vertinox (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:50PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Wog (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:32PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by nihilogos (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:51PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by xikzantric (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:53PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by JesseL (Score:3) Wednesday November 09, @04:55PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by modecx (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:29PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by hwyengr (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:32PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by JesseL (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @09:21PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by drinkypoo (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:20PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by JesseL (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @09:14PMDon't rely on the mother by misleb (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:08PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by P3NIS_CLEAVER (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:09PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Em Adespoton (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:13PMNot unprecidented by pavon (Score:3) Wednesday November 09, @05:19PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by maxwells_deamon (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:28PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by hosecoat (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:38PMHow much is that in terms of bears? by LoverOfJoy (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:38PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by eclectro (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:42PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by pyrrho (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:46PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by bcattwoo (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:46PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by bcattwoo (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:49PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by bcrowell (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:51PM$400,000,000? Goverment Spending.... by rubberbando (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:51PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by dada21 (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:56PMIt doesn't have to be 20 tonnes of Earth by whitehatlurker (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @06:01PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by CuriosityKilledWHAT (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @06:04PMAre you kidding? by cdrguru (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:04PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Nosajjason (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @06:06PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Rorschach1 (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:07PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by bogado (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:15PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Pyromage (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:18PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Pollardito (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @06:35PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by HermanAB (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:37PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Impy the Impiuos Imp (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:01PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by yellowstone (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @07:14PMIs it necessary to launch 20 tons? by Julian Morrison (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @07:15PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by way2trivial (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @07:44PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by mikael (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @07:48PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Junior J. Junior III (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @08:44PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Xyrus (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @08:59PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by stoothman (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @09:42PMI got a better idea by cybermint (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @09:47PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Don Sample (Score:1) Thursday November 10, @12:20AMRe:The mother of all asteroid ATTRACTION devices by HD Webdev (Score:2) Thursday November 10, @12:23AMCompare with current shuttle by tm2b (Score:2) Thursday November 10, @12:28AMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by stecoop (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:30PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Kaenneth (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:47PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by Toxicgonzo (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @04:56PMRe:Bad math? by Psyonic (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:04PMRe:Bad math? by echosilex (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:06PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by bob_herrick (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:48PMRe:The mother of all asteroid deflection devices by chriso11 (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @08:59PM13 replies beneath your current threshold.20 Ton Tractor by geomon (Score:3) Wednesday November 09, @04:24PMRe:20 Ton Tractor by theJML (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:31PM How exciting, sort of (Score:5, Funny) by phpm0nkey (768038) * on Wednesday November 09, @04:25PM (#13992336) (http://www.namefuse.com/) "The kind of spacecraft we've talked about could move an asteroid 650 feet (200 meters) across provided we have decades of advanced warning," Neat... although, if this works, it will totally kill the Hollywood "asteroid catastrophe" genre. The concept of sitting a giant hunk of metal next to an asteroid for 20 years to gradually shift its path doesn't exactly make for fast-paced, high-tension action movie fare. [ Reply to ThisRe:How exciting, sort of by FooAtWFU (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:27PMRe:How exciting, sort of by Mahou (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @04:47PMRe:How exciting, sort of by Joe the Lesser (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:33PMUntil the 20 ton hunk of metal pulls a "Skylab" by StressGuy (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:35PM Advanced warning (Score:5, Insightful) by EmbeddedJanitor (597831) on Wednesday November 09, @04:35PM (#13992466) Considering the number of asteroids etc that only get seen on the way out, asking for decades of warning is perhaps unrealistic. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Advanced warning by Idarubicin (Score:2) Thursday November 10, @12:06AMRe:How exciting, sort of by Toxicgonzo (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:40PMRe:How exciting, sort of by wgaryhas (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:32PMRe:How exciting, sort of by Phwoar (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @08:11PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Nah - all you need is.... by lightyear4 (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:00PMRe:How exciting, sort of by bmalia (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:32PMYou insensitive clod. by hwyengr (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:35PMRe:How exciting, sort of by LoverOfJoy (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:44PMRe:How exciting, sort of by 14erCleaner (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:50PMNo, but what would make a great movie... by eyebits (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:50PMSure it does. by geekoid (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @06:26PMRe:How exciting, sort of by nra1871 (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:07PMThe movie Armageddon by GuyWhoPosts (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @07:30PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.1 reply beneath your current threshold.They only have one small problem to solve by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:26PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.It's all relative by BigDawgES (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @04:27PMRe:It's all relative by Seiruu (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @04:30PM Interesting, but slow (Score:5, Interesting) by Rei (128717) on Wednesday November 09, @04:27PM (#13992363) (http://www.cursor.org/) Interesting proposal, although the rate of towing still seems a concern if it takes a year to tow a 200 meter asteroid the small amount needed to make it miss Earth, with 20 years prep time required. Hopefully there aren't too many asteroids much larger than that which aren't currently tracked, but you never know.If they're concerned about the amount of impulse delivered by a direct nuclear weapon impact, why not a series of projectile impacts (or at-a-distance, low impulse nuclear detonations)? While you'd have to launch more payload into space, the prep time would certainly seem to be far lower. [ Reply to ThisGood cartoon stuff I suppose by tinkerton (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:22PMRe:Good cartoon stuff I suppose by Rei (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:28PMRe:Good cartoon stuff I suppose by delphi125 (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @07:16PMRe:Good cartoon stuff I suppose by Rei (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @07:33PMRe:Good cartoon stuff I suppose by ndinsil (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @11:37PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.What? by voice_of_all_reason (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @04:28PMI'd say so! by pegr (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:29PM It's been awhile since I've taken physics... (Score:5, Interesting) by jkauzlar (596349) * on Wednesday November 09, @04:29PM (#13992381) (http://www.whitehouse.gov/~jkauzlar) but since it seemed strange to me that a 20 ton object could possess any considerable gravitational force I did a quick calculation, with a lot of rounding, to determine the force between the 20-ton object (~18150 kg) and the fourth largest asteroid Hygiea [aas.org] which has a mass of about 9x10^19 kg. My result, for a distance of 1 kilometer between the spacecraft and the asteriod, was 10^8 Newtons of force.So comes the hard part of determining how far out the spacecraft would have to meet the asteriod and glide along beside it so as to veer the asteroid to a safe range of R kilometers from Earth. Any ideas? [ Reply to ThisRe:It's been awhile since I've taken physics... by Xentor (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:41PMRe:It's been awhile since I've taken physics... by jkauzlar (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:03PMRe:It's been awhile since I've taken physics... by Surt (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @05:18PMRe:It's been awhile since I've taken physics... by greginnj (Score:1) Wednesday November 09, @05:51PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:It's been awhile since I've taken physics... by MindStalker (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @04:58PM Re:It's been awhile since I've taken physics... (Score:5, Informative) by twiddlingbits (707452) on Wednesday November 09, @04:59PM (#13992715) Wouldn't that would be 10^8 Newtons of force pulling the spacecraft toward the asteriod? The asteriod is much more massive and would have a gravity well of it's own. Wouldn't that attractice force have to be overcome for 20 yrs, plus a slight acceleration in the direction the asteroid needed to move? The 20 ton spacecraft would have a higher force of gravity on the 'roid than that of the Sun for 20 yrs (or however long the tractor lasts) so it could gradually change to orbit, How do we make things that can stay in space for 20 yrs w/o repair? How do you get that much fuel on-board? Solar Cells are not an option that far from the Sun. A nuclear reactor maybe but they would have all sorts of issues there, even if the "tractor" was not launched from Earth, the fission elements would have to be launched as I don't think you find Uranium just floating in space. And heaven forbid someone mis-calculates and they push it onto a collission course..they it takes another 20 yrs to fix that! This article sure makes a LOT of assumptions and figure on new ideas/technologies we don't have. It is a neat idea but IMHO it belongs under the topic of Science Fiction not in a journal like Nature. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:It's been awhile since I've taken physics... by zippthorne (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @10:06PMRe:It's been awhile since I've taken physics... by twiddlingbits (Score:2) Wednesday November 09, @11:55PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.