Should Canada Spearhaed an Effort to Launch Enough Simple Mass Into Orbit to Deter A Major Impact, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times


reply posted on 14-11-2009 @ 11:34 AM by Tomis_Nexis
Rather have Canada then the US, they couldn't even stop three commercial airliners from causing hell, never mind tracking an asteroid.

I have listed a few of Canada's accomplishments below since AccessDenied is blind to it:

National Research Council Canada's engineer George Klein invented the Storable Tubular Extendable Member (or STEM, for short). It has been used on most of the early and current manned and unmanned space missions.

National Research Council Canada's Dominion Radio Astrophysical Observatory is designing and building a highly specialized supercomputer to upgrade and improve the world's largest radio telescope that is located in the USA.

National Research Council Canada's scientists invented and developed the Canadarm and the Space Vision System that is has been used on NASA space shuttle missions and the International Space Station

Canadian engineer Eugene Maynard, working for NASA in the USA, is considered to be the person at NASA most responsible for the design of the lunar module. The lunar module was the spacecraft that landed astronauts on the moon for all Apollo missions. It is also the spacecraft that allowed the Apollo 13 crew to remain alive and return safely after the explosion that forced them to cancel a landing on the moon.

Canadian research engineer Jim Chamberlin worked for Avro and was assigned to NASA in the USA. He became head of engineering for Project Mercury, the first American manned spacecraft. He not only helped build Mercury capsules, he also helped solve problems encountered during space flights. He was responsible for selecting the moon orbit approach for the Apollo missions rather than the expected direct flight from earth approach. He also helped to solve problems with the Apollo command and service modules.

...to name a few.



[edit on 14-11-2009 by Tomis_Nexis]


reply posted on 14-11-2009 @ 11:43 AM by star in a jar
reply to post by one4all
right now the world as a whole needs something to come together over.


False flag alien 'threat' coming in 6...5...4...3...2...1...

I don't think it's possible to stop a major threat asteroid, meteor, or comet from striking Earth at the moment.

I think they suggest that deflection is better than destruction since some asteroids are held together by their own gravity and if you were to blow up one it would clump back together again.

I think at the moment we'd just have to take the damage or hope the extraterrestrials will do it for us

There's no way to stop nature... at the moment.


reply posted on 14-11-2009 @ 11:52 AM by K-Raz
I think ion engines could be a possibility.

Small spacecraft landing on the surface powered by nuclear batteries. Then use the thrusters to slowly change it's path. It would take time though, and in a worst case scenario, time would not be on our side. In that scenario, we would need brute force.

www.spaceweather.com... Tracks a lot of asteroids, and even provide an applet to track them with, and data to find them in a telescope - quite nifty actually, and a great source for space related info.

I really don't think launching a lot of mass and putting it in orbit is feasible at the moment. The sad thing is that we need a pretty devastating strike before anyone starts looking into this


reply posted on 14-11-2009 @ 11:58 AM by K-Raz
reply to post by one4all



Hmm, the math can actually be done using layman's terms.

The less time we have, the more energy we would need to deflect it's path. The hard parth of the math is predicting where it would go afterwards.

We can get the size and speed from telescope, and the weight by using best guess of composition. From there on it's pretty simple Newtonian high-school physics, with kinetic energy thrown in.


reply posted on 14-11-2009 @ 12:36 PM by K-Raz
reply to post by one4all



I repeat myself. Launching that much mass is not feasible.

Nukes are not redundant or unreliable, sadly, it's the best we got at the moment.
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^



Nano Drones Flying in Formation
  Posted 8 days ago with 15 member flags
FPS RUSSIA
  Posted 13 days ago with 7 member flags
Spinel Thin Transparent Ceramic Armor defeats Barrett .50 Cal BMG
  Posted 12 days ago with 6 member flags
Self-steering Bullet Researched
  Posted 9 days ago with 5 member flags
Shockrounds take out three of your five senses.
  Posted 1 days ago with 5 member flags
Defective Ammunition Warning
  Posted 1 days ago with 5 member flags