Originally posted by wetwarez
Not quite. Even with a nuclear warhead, striking an asteroid could very well break it up into smaller pieces, spreading the distruction over a much larger area.

That's why I said more than one warhead.

Have a rocket luanch maybe 20 or so warheads, make em spread and hit the asteroid at different points. They'd blast the crap out of it!

Originally posted by Crakeur
1. why should NASA foot the bill to save the world? Shouldn't every nation kick in?

To justify their funding, and raise public support for it.

And to not let the Russians destroy it first and take all the glory....the #1 reason I am sure.

As others have stated before using any method we have currently available to us to try to deflect or eliminate this has a much higher chance of actually causing it to hit us then leaving it alone does at the moment.

We really have no way to tell the asteroids makeup , density, spin, or true geometry close enough to predict what will happen if we just started shooting things at it. For some objects (even this small) hitting them with nukes would be like throwing a rock at a brick house. You might make some dust but the house will still stand. For others detonating away from the object it will just absorb the blast wave like a sponge.

Deep-impact and other missions like it are lending clues to those questions but as of yet they still remain questions.

Also with a 400meter object damage likely would not be restricted to a city area even if it did hit land. A object of that size would cause catastrophic regional damage and would cause smaller yet noticeable enviromental (weather, light, etc) problems over a majority of the globe. If it hit water massive Tsunami's would affect all coastal areas around that body of water. (I.E. Atlantic would be Western Europe, Greenland, Eastern North and South America, Westeran Africa etc..)

Tunguska was estimated to be a 50meter object that exploded just before impact. It leveled 2,000 square kilometers.

IMO We need to get off this rock. There is no question that we will face a extinction event in our (humanities not ourselves personally) future. Whether it is manmade, earth based, or from space it will come. The longer we wait the more probable it becomes that it will happen soon.

Originally posted by Manincloak
That's why I said more than one warhead.

Have a rocket luanch maybe 20 or so warheads, make em spread and hit the asteroid at different points. They'd blast the crap out of it!

Okay! So now you've gone from the effectiveness of a fly hitting a freight train to knock it off the tracks to a SWARM of flies hitting a freaight train to knock it off the tracks!

For those of you who want to launch a bunch of nuclear warheads at the asteroid I think you need to go back and take a Physics class. The majority of damage in a nuclear explosion is caused by the the acceleration of gasses (read atmosphere) by the detonation. While the movie Armaggedon was 99.99% fiction they did have one part right. The scene where the scientist talks about setting off a firecracker in his open palm versus setting it off in his closed fist is dead on. A nuclear warhead would be a waste of time and resources. What would possibly work would be the placing and firing of several large solid rocket boosters to alter the asteroid's course. How big I don't know but I do know the further away that it is done the smaller the boosters can be. One thing that needs to be considered is that if you do anything on this orbit without knowing the forces acting upon the asteroid during it's whole orbit might make things worse. It is better to wait and then act.

Well then just get an anti-matter missile....

I'm sure that by 2029, the government would have a couple.

Originally posted by Jeremiah25
Whilst I agree that taking action at this stage would be unnecessary, I would be extremely surprised if NASA did not end up actually going through with this deflection, if for no other reason than to restore some sense of public confidence in NASA and to demonstrate one of the more immediate practical applications of NASA technology and know-how.

After the Columbia tragedy, public confidence in NASA was at an all-time low. The recent launch of the Discovery buoyed public faith in NASA somewhat, although there seemed to be more publicity over what could have gone wrong than there was pride in the mission itself.

Imagine the positive publicity NASA would generate if they were able to successfully divert a comet from a course that may result in a possible collision with Earth. Even if such a collision were a distant, remote possibility, a successful mission would doubtless result in a swell of public approval for NASA. Given this, I am confident that a deflection mission will go ahead, regardless of the actual threat posed by Apophis.

Even beyond that, it would be good practical experience in such a mission.

Why not take this as an opertunity for a practice mission... That way, all of the wrinkles can get ironed out, and glitches/problems solved.

Originally posted by American Mad Man


Even beyond that, it would be good practical experience in such a mission.

Why not take this as an opertunity for a practice mission... That way, all of the wrinkles can get ironed out, and glitches/problems solved.

I agree... it would be nice to have a plan in place and make sure it works. I'd rather that than a theory that "might" work....

It seems to me that using explosives to deflect the asteroid is unecessary; using Nikola Tesla's resonator seems much more sensible.

Run computer simulations almost identical to those that would be employed to predict the results of a controlled nuclear demolition, attach a few of the resonators at ideal points around the asteroid, and activate them.

This would eliminate the need for explosives of any kind, and it may even allow for an entirely remote-controlled operation.

Originally posted by alexg
It seems to me that using explosives to deflect the asteroid is unecessary; using Nikola Tesla's resonator seems much more sensible.

Run computer simulations almost identical to those that would be employed to predict the results of a controlled nuclear demolition, attach a few of the resonators at ideal points around the asteroid, and activate them.

This would eliminate the need for explosives of any kind, and it may even allow for an entirely remote-controlled operation.

How interesting that you think HAARP has this kind of capability. You should start a thread on this. This is way more interesting than NASA's silly posturing. They couldn't get close to an asteroid. They're lucky if they can crash-land a moon probe on to the moon.

they will know 7 years ahead during its close pass in 2029 it has to pass between a 600 meter window its like throwing a basket ball trough a hoop
1000 feet away 1 in a 5500 chance.. im not worried.plus by then we will have a chemical "lazer" that would vaporize it...just remember what websit your on
come on guys

If it threads through that keyhole, its orbit could be perturbed, possibly putting it on a collision course with Earth in 2036. But until radar observations of the asteroid are taken in 2013, it will remain unclear where Apophis is headed.

Another chance for Mogget to correct a really dumb statement.....

Apophis will be perturbed by Earth's gravity whether it nails this "keyhole" or not. The correct statement should have been "if it passes through that keyhole, the perturbations will be just right to set the asteroid on a possible collision course with Earth".

What the heck, I hope Congress makes NASA deflect it. Better safe than sorry.

Changing the orbit of a dangerous asteroid before that orbit has been accurately calculated would be insane. They could end up causing the asteroid to impact Earth, when it would have missed us if no action had been taken.

The asteroid was discovered in 2004 and is thought to measure between 320 and 400 metres in diameter. An asteroid of that size could wipe out a large city if it were to collide with Earth.

I really wish that the people that write these articles would get their facts straight. An asteroid with a diameter of 400 metres would do far more than simply wipe out a city. The object that exploded over Tunguska in June 1908 was an estimated 40 metres in diameter. That means it was a tiny fraction of the total mass of Apophis. If the Tunguska object had exploded over London, it would have flattened the entire city. Imagine the devastation that could be caused by an object a thousand times more massive........

Right now, I think it's safe to say such an asteroid can be effectively shot down with a modified rocket (thats rocket, not a ballistic missile) of some sort, carrying a nuclear warhead.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Destroying an asteroid of that size would be an extremely difficult task.

And thats STILL if it passes through that "keyhole", which is the part I don't get. Would someone mind explaning to me what this keyhole is ???

This "keyhole" is nothing more than a small region of space which the asteroid would need to pass through in order to be perturbed onto a trajectory that would allow it to impact Earth in 2036. Think of the "keyhole" as a kind of invisible target area. Apophis has to hit this target during its 2029 close approach to have any chance of slamming into Earth in 2036.


[edit on 1-8-2008 by Mogget]


[edit on 1-8-2008 by Mogget]

they should capure the asteroid and make a little space lab inside! 400 meters is nice enough , they could drill a sphere of 200 m diameter if the structure is strong enough . 100 m of wall would protect better against radiation that International Space Station ! if I would have the cahs I would do that

[edit on 1-8-2008 by sty]

I've just realised that I have responded to posts over three years old !

Originally posted by Mogget
I've just realised that I have responded to posts over three years old !

There is no 'Statute of Limitations' on ignorance