posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 08:56 AM
Problem for me watching it was that the Asteroid appeared to be both small and made up of a loose conglomerate of smaller rock's, how well will such
an impact work on a loose conglomerate of smaller rock's?.
Yes there are probably larger rocks in mix.
For such an asteroid to my mind the following would be a far better option, a large net of some kind deployed to snare the loose conglomerate and
instead of impacting the asteroid a rocket using a tow rope style affair and guidance systems to then PULL the asteroid into a different and safer
trajectory.
I am genuinely NOT impressed by this simply ploy to HIT a rock in space and hope for the best.
Now remember the old plan's for nuclear rocket's like the ancient Orion program which used (would have it it had ever been built) pulse detonation of
small nuclear devices in an armoured deflector at the rear of the rocket), that would possibly also be able to use a similar technique of TOWING to
displace the trajectory of even HUGE asteroids but of course the further away the better the results, close asteroids were the towing would not be
sufficient could perhaps benefit from a two stroke mission, first net and tow and then impact to break apart so that even if an impact was unavoidable
if we would break it apart enough the smaller fragments would hopefully all or mostly burn up on a grazing rather than a bull's eye impact
trajectory.
Another idea is to use Space based lasers to create an ablative affect on the surface of an asteroid vaporising part of it's surface and causing it
to act like a thrust that would use the mass of the asteroid as the fuel to push it off into another trajectory.
Impacting it has the potential though to cause more harm than good, it can turn one rock into several and there trajectory's may be unpredictable
until AFTER the main body has been broken apart.
Not the smartest move and a very costly one when by developing the net idea you get to kill two birds with one stone, a method for cleaning up our
dead satellites and space junk and one that can also be applied at longer range to taking out potentially dangerous earth crossing asteroids so
investing in this would have been far more sensible and in the long run cost affective.
You know capture a dangerous asteroid far enough away and even an ionic thruster would be enough to shunt it's orbital trajectory but it is detecting
such dangers far enough away that is the problem so more powerful engines would of course have to be used for closer asteroids depending on the
necessary trajectory change required to render them safe (or to move them into suitable orbits for mining and who can't see that going wrong? and even
worse for WEAPONISING asteroids a definite threat in the long term as nations develop that ability).
edit on 27-9-2022 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)