Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

Terraformer · 2008-05-27 14:13:51

Please, point out a post where I have been arguing that Ceres is a perfect place to live and that Mars is useless. I have never said that. I have said that certain places are easier and better to colonise than Mars, and that I'd like to live on Ceres. Your Marsheadism is clouding your reading of my posts. It's mildly amusing.

The Moon is more resource poor than C-Type asteroids, and, if the correct one can be found, and due to probabilities will be, require less delta-v.

Rune · 2008-05-27 17:00:16

Why not Phobos and Deimos? That would settle the debate between you two, and they have a delta-v lower than that of the moon. May even be possible partial aerobraking from the nearby Mars, to drop fuel requirements. A hell of a transit time, though.

Rune. Salomonic decisions.

Commodore · 2008-05-27 20:51:04

The challenge of colonizing an asteroid is the same as mining one. If you can properly anchor yourself to the surface enough to manipulate it, you can either poke at it and collect the pieces that fall off, or build maglev hab that spins around fast enough to provide gravity.

Phobos and Deimos are perfect places to test this, because anything they lack is a short trip from Mars.

cIclops · 2008-05-28 02:11:42

It wouldn't be a "colony" but more like an outpost. Just about everything except base metals, glasses, and Oxygen would have to be imported, and a solar-powered base that isn't near the poles would require a huge amount of energy storage and related excess production. And managing the day/night cycle indoors, buried under regolith to hide from radiation and small space rocks... what a lovely way to live. .

A lunar colony will be able to make its own oxygen and food, recycle its air and water, and produce all its own power. That's not a bad start. A colony doesn't have to be self sustaining, almost no village, town, city or even country produces everything it consumes. As to living underground, people are quite used to living inside structures, good design can make underground facilities very comfortable. The surface will be close and easily accessible. If such a colony becomes established better solutions will be found. Its greatest exports will be tourism, science and perhaps low gravity medical treatment. A lunar colony will prove the viability of off-world settlement for Mars.

SpaceNut · 2008-05-28 06:19:08

With so many NEO's out there that could strike earth we have one more group that is exploring the heavens. Scanning sky for 'killers'

The students of American Fork High school are just one of only three that is participating in the NASA's worldwide Killer Asteroid Project.

According to the European Space Agency, there are an estimated 1.1 million to 1.9 million total asteroids.
More than 180,000 orbit the Sun in patterns predictable enough to be numbered, according to NASA.

But these are the resources that once man does make the steps away will need to harness for survival. As such they become
Strategic Hydrocarbon Inspace Terminal

This is where we come back to funding and how companies on Earth indicate that the unseen resources which are put on the ledger as companies here on Earth use the implied value of unextracted resources of oil, coal or gas fields and mines on their balance sheets so that they can obtain financing against said resources.

So what are the resources that we can list if we have the means to get them?

cIclops · 2008-05-28 07:22:53

The Million Mile Mission - 1 July 2008 (sic)

... Like the Mars Underground, a larger group of enthusiasts who for the past 20-plus years have been pushing for a voyage to Mars, the asteroid agitators are trying to build support for a mission. The two groups are far from mutually exclusive: Plenty of Mars Undergrounders share the desire to see Constellation, NASA’s human exploration program, send astronauts rock-hopping first.
The operational lessons learned from such an expedition would be crucial. “There’s no way a Mars program could take shape without a crewed mission to an asteroid,” says Jones. Aerospace engineer Robert Zubrin, who, as head of the international advocacy group the Mars Society, is one of the leading proponents of an expedition to the Red Planet, likes the logic of a shakedown flight to an asteroid. “I think it’s a valuable idea. It would help validate the Constellation hardware within a meaningful time frame,” he says. “Basically, it takes us farther out into space, and that’s good. Sort of like Columbus getting out there and saying, ‘There aren’t dragons out here after all.’ ”
Constellation’s primary destinations are the moon and Mars, but the asteroid hopefuls are lobbying to insert a third stop in the itinerary. For the record, NASA has no plans to send astronauts to a near-Earth object, and agency officials describe it as highly improbable given current budgets.
The Asteroid Underground is unfazed. According to Jones, “When you talk to an audience of taxpayers, they see the stepping stones: moon, asteroid, Mars.” ...

What about the cramped nature of a six-month voyage inside Orion, with a habitable volume only one-fifth that of the space shuttle? Lu shrugs it off. “If I knew I was going out to an asteroid and back, I’d live in something half that size. You ask around the Astronaut Office who wants to go. You’ll have a line out the door.”

GW Johnson · 2011-12-05 22:16:04

Actually, any practical system capable of a flight to an NEO is capable of going to Mars. You just add landers. It's not so much the delta-vee and flight times, it;'s actually crew survival that drives what you do. If you fly weightless, you have to fly fast: one year max is demo'd on the various space stations over the last few decades, and we do not know that Mar's 0.38 gee is enough to be therapeutic. Otherwise, go 9 months one-way, several months there, and about 9 months home, and provide just about 1 gee by spinning the ship end-over-end. There's no way anyone will stay sane cooped up in any capsule; we'll need a Skylab-like module to live in. The bigger, the better. Think orbital rendezvous and assembly here, and orbital rendezvous (like the Apollo missions) at Mars. You'd better start thinking nuclear thermal rockets, maybe even gas core. You might also start thinking about the real point of going there: is it flag-and-footprints like Apollo, or is it real exploration to find out what exactly is there, and where exactly is it?

GW Johnson

SpaceNut · 2019-05-01 21:51:24

Much like the date of the last post its going to be a little bit as A giant asteroid named after a god of death will whiz by Earth in 10 years

A giant asteroid named after a god of death will whiz by Earth in 10 years. According to the latest data from NASA, the Earth has a long-distance date with a 1,100-foot-wide asteroid in 2029. There's no need to freak out, though. Apophis will miss the Earth by a healthy margin of 19,000 miles. Still, its size and relatively close distance to Earth means its flyby will be a special moment for astronomers and other scientists.

Thats about where earth satelites are in geo orbit would be...

SpaceNut · 2019-05-05 20:20:46

Current calculations show that Apophis still has a small chance of impacting Earth, albeit many decades later,

SpaceNut · 2020-03-09 20:15:47

https://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Benn … x_999.html

Mars_B4_Moon · 2021-06-11 20:06:43

Nasa asteroid simulation ends in unavoidable disaster for Earth
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-styl … source=twi

Asteroid described as 'Near Earth' just shot by our planet closer than the Moon
https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/ … eroids-evg

“The Line Is Getting Fuzzier” – Asteroids and Comets May Be More Similar Than We Think
https://scitechdaily.com/the-line-is-ge … -we-think/

SpaceNut · 2021-06-11 20:47:54

Sample returns have been happening but man trips are a long ways away.... They would seem the place to go to but we need better engines and fuels to make such trips possible even in the area of earth...

Mars_B4_Moon · 2021-09-10 04:31:02

ESO captures best images yet of peculiar "dog-bone" asteroid
https://www.spacedaily.com/reports/ESO_ … d_999.html

Mars_B4_Moon · 2021-11-05 16:45:35

NASA to deflect asteroid in test of 'planetary defense'

https://phys.org/news/2021-11-nasa-defl … fense.html

GW Johnson · 2021-11-06 09:12:37

I predict they will not get the deflection they think they will get. They will get more breakup than they want.

The "most common type" is the Type C carbonaceous chondrite material, with considerable void volume and very little in the way of binding forces between the particles. These are loose rubble piles. The small ones like this are dry of any ices to bind them together.

GW

tahanson43206 · 2021-11-06 10:02:10

For GW Johnson re #90

I haven't read this ** particular ** article, but hope to do so this weekend.

In other reading, I have learned that computer modeling of pulverizing an approaching object and dispersing the contents in all directions has a much more desirable outcome than had been known previously.

If a rubble pile is headed toward Earth, and if it is dispersed vigorously in time, the particles will spread out in every direction, so that only a few intersect the Earth at any one time.

Again, I'll try to read this specific article, to compare it's contents with the previous articles.

(th)

GW Johnson · 2021-11-07 10:14:25

I don't know about any recent studies on pulverization effects. All I know is if you break it up, you convert a bullet strike into a shotgun blast. The debris fan angle cannot be that large, because the debris velocities with respect to center of mass are far lower than the original body velocity with respect to the sun.

What that tells you is two-fold: (1) if you break the thing up far enough from the Earth, then most of the debris has time to fan out past the size of the Earth, so that the striking mass is greatly reduced. (2) if you break it up too close, the debris does not have time to fan out, and the whole mass still strikes the Earth, just all over one hemisphere instead of a single location.

So what's worse, a thousand kiloton-scale atomic bombs going off all over one hemisphere, or a megaton-scale explosion at one single location? Since our infrastructure and assets are widely spread, I think the shotgun blast is worse than the single bullet strike.

Consider also: if you solve the detection problem (and we most definitely HAVE NOT), then you have years of warning time with asteroids, so that disruption reduces strike mass. But you only have weeks to days with comets, which guarantees the shotgun blast effect, even if you succeed in reaching the thing at all (and currently WE CANNOT).

Without an adequate detection capability, you also have at most days, and often NEGATIVE days warning time with asteroids.

How do you detect reliably? Two things must come together: (1) you look outward from the sun in the infrared, where these things are brightest, and (2) you must look outward from a vantage point that is well inward of Earth from the sun, so that you can see the ones approaching the day side of Earth from a sunward direction.

Your detection satellites need to orbit the sun, somewhere between the orbits of Mercury and Venus.

So where are they? B612 Foundation proposed some IR detection satellites near Venus, but never got any funds to do anything.

Guess why most of the remaining near-miss asteroids are detected AFTER the near miss! They are coming at the day side of Earth from a sunward direction. There have been quite a lot of these. THAT is where the main near-term risk really is!

GW

Last edited by GW Johnson (2021-11-07 10:23:17)

tahanson43206 · 2021-11-07 11:14:30

For GW Johnson re #90 and #92

It is helpful to have a measurable prediction to evaluate after the test results come in.

SearchTerm:Prediction by GW Johnson about impact of test article on small asteroid orbiting another.

NASA is predicting 1% reduction of orbital velocity of the small asteroid around the larger one.

GW Johnson is predicting less than 1% reduction of velocity, and disturbance of the rubble pile instead.

NASA will definitely provide the exact facts for orbital velocity.

It is possible the companion sensor package travelling separately will provide data on the disruption of the rubble pile.

The prediction of GW Johnson ** will ** be evaluated, along with that of NASA and the probe team.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2021-11-07 11:25:12

The reappearance of this topic provides an opportunity for repetition of a concept published previously in this forum.

There is no need to deflect an approaching object. The entire object can be harvested by a fleet of spacecraft, each of which collects a metric ton of material.

There is no need to be in a hurry. The sponsors/funders of the individual harvesting craft are in possession of the material collected, and they can return it to an Earth centered orbit in whatever time scale makes sense. Solar sailing is quite feasible for operations over this time scale.

The points made by GW Johnson recently in this topic, about the need for improved detection of interesting objects, should lead to funding for detection equipment. The motivation of defense is the only motivation currently in effect. Motivation to harvest valuable material ** should ** greatly exceed fear as a source of funding.

Humans have so much to be afraid of, both on Earth, and in the Solar System, that very little energy is available to work on threats from the Solar System.

On the ** other ** hand, greed has no known limits. I would bet on greed over fear, any day.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2021-11-07 13:49:42

Caliban's cocoon comes to mind with basalt bag / thread.

The real issue is export / import the material to where it can be used

GW Johnson · 2021-11-09 16:04:29

I have never seen anyone explain a process by which rocky mineral granules and something-close-to-charcoal can be turned into usable materials (except simple fill) without the expenditure of enormous amounts of energy to melt it, and process it "somehow" in that molten state. Those are your C-type (carbonaceous chondrites). Only the very large ones (miles in diameter) have any volatiles left inside them. You DO NOT bag those.

The S-types ("stony") have less charcoal and some metal in them. You still have to melt, refine, and process such. Far less numerous than C-types.

The metallic ones are rare indeed, and seem to be chunks of iron-nickel alloy. Probably polluted with some other crap, too. You still have to melt these and process the melt to reduce the nickel to get stainless steel, or eliminate the nickel entirely to get plain steels. You can get the carbon from the C-types, but you have to coke it to pure carbon, or it won't work in your steels. That's hot-gas heating in a reduced-oxygen atmosphere to near 2000 F. Or higher. You do that in a blast furnace.

And you want to try that hanging around in a vacuum and zero-gee, trying to control those already-difficult processes, and apply those enormous energies, to that kind of rubble? That's going to be so energy-consumptive and expensive that it might actually be cheaper to ship the desired materials up from Earth!

Better to bag small pieces up, and bring them to some facility somewhere to do the processing. You ain't doing this in some small space probe vehicle. Your facility will look like a real steel plant, and the smallest equipment item in it will be about the size of a Bessemer converter. It might be out in space somewhere, but it will be huge, massive, and it will require the best part of an entire Earthly power plant's power. Those products will never be cheap, even if the result becomes cheaper than shipping up from Earth.

If Musk is successful with his Starship/Superheavy, shipping up is about to get a whole lot cheaper.

GW

Last edited by GW Johnson (2021-11-09 16:13:25)

tahanson43206 · 2021-11-10 06:39:03

For GW Johnson ... re post #96 and numerous others with a similar practical nature ...

The primary driver for interest in asteroids (at present) seems to be defense of the Earth. My argument is that capture of the material with small 1 metric ton capable drones is a good way to deal with a threat, ** and ** once the material is safely under control, then the market value of whatever is collected can be evaluated.

Your closing paragraph comes closest to the vision I've been attempting to develop. It suggests that if a large quantity of material is (very slowly) on it's way to some location, then there is plenty of time to build whatever processing facility is needed.

I predict that a use can be found for ** every ** atom that may be floating around in the Solar System.

Happily, we have a ** very ** large fusion reactor hard at work, wasting vast quantities of energy because humans are presently unable to capture more that a tiny whisper of a sliver of what is produced.

The primary mission (right now) is to put a rubble pile that might be a threat into a controlled state. After that, there is plenty of time to figure out how to achieve the maximum possible benefit from what is collected.

(th)

GW Johnson · 2021-11-14 15:50:47

Well, in practical terms, there are a variety of robotic missions to send to these objects, then men need to go to "fix" what the robots couldn't do.

There are the kinds of science robots that NASA, JAXA, and ESA have been sending, which indirectly aids the defense by getting a better understanding of what these things really are, and there is the one NASA "defense" mission which is the impactor intended to change the orbit of "Didymoon" without destroying it.

Some of the other intellectual property becoming available from Deltion would be oriented toward drilling deep into such bodies to find out what is really there. I have NO IDEA how they planned to resist the drill torque to do that. But they must have had something in mind. We will need to send a lot of robot missions that can actually do that to get the subsurface ground truth. That supports BOTH defense AND mining, BTW.

None of that other science mission stuff or the Didymoon defense mission does anything to support mining, claims otherwise notwithstanding. And I say "a lot of robot missions" that can drill inside, because we have a bunch of bodies to investigate. My contention is that these things are NOT a few distinct types, but a spectrum of variation within a couple of broad categories.

I see no difference at all between C-type asteroids and comets, except in ice content: the smaller asteroids are quite dry, while miles-wide comets from out in the cold reaches have significant ice. They both seem to be mostly stony mineral globs mixed with a lot of charcoal globs, held together by microgravity plus the "cement" of a little bit of ice content, if any.

My contention is made up of testable sub-contentions. We will (eventually) see what is true.

GW

Last edited by GW Johnson (2021-11-14 15:54:07)

GW Johnson · 2021-11-19 11:05:43

And from the Planetary Society’s email newsletter “The Downlink” for 11-19-2021:

From The Planetary Society

Asteroids beware! We’re coming for you. The launch of the world’s first asteroid deflection mission is coming up on Wednesday, Nov. 24, 2021. The Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART) mission will arrive at near-Earth asteroid Didymos in September 2022. The spacecraft won't slow down, intentionally crashing into the asteroid's small moon Dimorphos. The crash should change the time it takes Dimorphos to orbit Didymos, proving that this deflection method, called the kinetic impactor technique, works. You can watch the launch live on our website on Nov. 24. Coverage begins at 12:20 a.m. EST.

My take on it:

Note that they said it would change the period of “Didymoon”. They did NOT say by how much. Because they really do NOT know how much effect this will have, nor do they know whether “Didymoon” will break up instead of changing velocity. Or some of both.

GW

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-05-21 15:51:22

2030s China eyes an asteroid defence system, comet mission

https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/scien … 021-04-24/

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2008-05-27 14:13:51

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#77 2008-05-27 17:00:16

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#78 2008-05-27 20:51:04

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#79 2008-05-28 02:11:42

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#80 2008-05-28 06:19:08

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#81 2008-05-28 07:22:53

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#82 2011-12-05 22:16:04

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#83 2019-05-01 21:51:24

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#84 2019-05-05 20:20:46

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#85 2020-03-09 20:15:47

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#86 2021-06-11 20:06:43

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#87 2021-06-11 20:47:54

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#88 2021-09-10 04:31:02

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#89 2021-11-05 16:45:35

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#90 2021-11-06 09:12:37

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#91 2021-11-06 10:02:10

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#92 2021-11-07 10:14:25

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#93 2021-11-07 11:14:30

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#94 2021-11-07 11:25:12

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#95 2021-11-07 13:49:42

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#96 2021-11-09 16:04:29

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#97 2021-11-10 06:39:03

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#98 2021-11-14 15:50:47

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#99 2021-11-19 11:05:43

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

#100 2022-05-21 15:51:22

Re: Near Earth Object (NEO) missions

Board footer