Russia Considers Rocket to Deflect Asteroid Apophis 2029

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 12:03 AM
hmm Apophis?

According to Nasa apophis just dropped the probability of hitting earth... and it wasnt 2029 it was 2036...

The only one that comes close to it, is 2009 YG "due" to 2033-2099... still at green level - 1 in torino scale.

What is this "rocket to change apophis trajectory" since its fine?

I dont know... I'm just doing some research... did I get anything wrong?

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 01:45 AM

Originally posted by JIMC5499
So what happens if instead of deflecting this asteroid away from the Earth, they deflect it towards the Earth?

Was my first thought, depending on it's size and how much damage it would do, it could be convenient for their rocket mission to fail

Hmmm Vere would you like it to land Mr.Putin?

[edit on 31-12-2009 by FirstRonin]

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 02:01 AM
Very interesting, I wonder what option they will eventually use...

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 02:12 AM
The way i see it is , almost every 2 or 3 weeks someone wins the lotto against something like 2-3 million to one odds,,,so even half those odds is very troubling to me....Thank god the russians are trying to do something.........
its really funny because the first 30 or so years of my life i believed they were my worst enemies....then i met many russian peoples and found out they dont want war now in my old age i realize that its just politicians and corporations that want war.....So thanks to Mother Russia for this guesture.....However if u try invade my country i still kick ur ass

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 03:37 AM
I have this bad feeling that all this will do is cause the asteroid to hit the earth.

Thankfully its small size will make it susceptible to new American systems like General Atomic's Blitzer railgun air defense artillery.

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 05:54 AM
It would be the equivalent of trying to stop a car with a Paintball Gun. You'd make a bit of mess, but as for mass displacement occuring, there wouldnt be any.

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 08:13 AM

Originally posted by ShiftTrio
this is coming from Pravda though..

So a grain of salt is needed here, Take some facts, and jumble them together and you get a Pravda story. And I think we all know Pravda has some doosies

Oh OK, WEll heres the BBC version of the story then.
Has anybody thought that this could just be a practice run ? The likelyhood is that we will have to deal with a large asteriod at some point so why not perfect the technology and the technuiqes we will need to pull off a deflection on a smaller object? Of course funding would never be given for a project that MAY be used to save the earth at an undetermined point in the future. However if you tell people that you need funding to possibly save the earth (Or a part of it) in their lifetime funding is assured.

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 08:30 AM
reply to post by Doc Velocity

Really? Because I posted a very credible source that very much states you are underestimating the power of an 800-foot wide asteroid. For starters, in order to determine how much damage would be done, one would have to know how much iron said asteroid contains. An 800-foot wide asteroid with a solid iron core is going to produce a heck of a lot more damage.

Are you so certain that you know what this asteroid is comprised of? Perhaps you should share it with NASA and such -- since THEY don't even know.

It's one thing to avoid a doom and gloom scenario -- especially since the chances of this thing impacting the Earth without Russian assistance is highly unlikely (1 in 250,000 chance according to NASA) -- it's another to simply say Oh, well -- 800-foot foot plummeting to Earth -- good surfin' weather!

The best chance for this thing to impact Earth is if Russia DOES mess around with it. I should think that they would practice deflecting asteroids that are much smaller and KNOWN to not contain any iron first.

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 08:56 AM
reply to post by TypeSH2001

Thankyou typeSH2001

I am familiar with the 2 books, 'The bible code I / II"

and the more recent ATS thread where this was expanded by rabbi's

recently using a new algorithm. It's clear that the torah/ talmud is

a primer for a higher mathematical language/message since hebrew

is a mathematical language, despite my limited 'yiddish' aleph-beth-gimmel


I would add something here that many may find amusing, or at leat interesting:

Doesn't it seem obvious that in order to write a prophetic text about any

society, one needs knowledge about future events, and that our 'ET'

visitors through history seem to travel from point A to B in a fashion

most consistent with time distortion engines? Such that our 'god on the mount'

appearing in a rush of wind and thunder giving us our commandments and

'word of god' may have simply imparted a matrix of code to be unwound

in the end of days by the predictable development of computers?

All too obvious, but the future has a way of eluding the best predictions

of sophisticated time travelers - chaotic drift induced errors pop up.

"You will not know the date or the time" seems the most accurate, but

we all hope our worldline diverges from maximum catastrophe - Apophis

being case in point. If you read a bit more about the history of this

near earth asteroid you will find some controversy over nasa's calculations

over the years. 1 in 37 or 1 in 250,000? that's a LOT of standard deviation.

Trajectory prediction of hard to see 800 feet long complex objects in the outer

solar system by our primitive space faring civilization is not an exact science.

I don't believe Nasa's numbers, they are a human run organization in a

politically motivated atmosphere and prone to error. Only time will tell.

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 08:59 AM
reply to post by lpowell0627

Great arguments pro and con for doing anything with this PHA.

Pro: gives us experience deflecting rocks, and clearly we will need this in the future. Start small.

Con: screwing this up russian style may take out a small country, and destabilize world politics at worst.

Doing nothing: the most likely outcome. Russian roulette i guess when it comes to asteroids....

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 09:04 AM
reply to post by MikeboydUS

I hope General Atomics has railgun phalanxes set up at strategic points

all across the US, but i find it hard to believe this could take out iron ore

fragments hurtling in at mach 25 at the last minute after a botched russian

rocket intercept; isn't this an air defence gun?

Cool tech though, too bad not enough will ever be place.

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 09:10 AM
reply to post by FraternitasSaturni

No, you got it all right.

That date discrepancy - a range - shows the inherent error in all calculations

to date.

This object has an undefined composition, very likely has some complex

chaotic tumble in 3d space, and may or may not pass through this 'gravity

keyhole' in space that will shape its trajectory. It's all 'best guessing'

and I was hoping this crazy russian initiative would give much needed

publicity to our lack of funding for NEO (near earth object) cataloging

and real world research into defence/ deflection techniques.

At Kennedy Space Center this past weekend, the lecturing astronaut

sadly stated "this current administration is completely silent on funding

for space." Did you know our current annual NASA budget is only around

18 billion? Compare that with 160 billion bailout of AIG, or 200 billion/yr

spent to demolish Iraq! Unspent TARP money of 18 billion would completely

revitalize our space program, before China militarizes spacE!

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 11:44 AM
You don't just blow up asteroids.
First of all there should be a totally new way of mechanism with calculating orbital mechanics vs thee equipment that must be used and also the know how on how you design that equipment.
We don't have this yet.
Also maybe some new specialized science involved which we don't have either.
Apart from the composition of the space body that will be involved in the process which might be from a catalog of a plethora of different random types also the equipment has to match these specifications in order to work.
Safest solution is to deflect the asteroid primarily sending it for recycle towards the sun where you have the biggest chances its path will be absorbed than the greater planets of our system which have a narrower absorption footprint for things you send towards them and neither the empty void as a target would be quid because again you risk the chances of the body coming back some later time. Possible targets should be just send towards the sun for "recycling" and then you have less to worry about it in the future.

The methods that might be used must be the simplest and more efficient. Even for this we don't have the materials yet, neither the science. Also this venture is something that is very hard to simulate on the earth surface in order for research to be done, or some very clever new method/s firstly must be introduced.
Everything should be involving methods to attach high power explosives on the surface off the body in order for a timely manner to be acquired to change its course.
These could be technology of ultra hard material that will bury itself on the surface in calculated points and then exploding, acting as thrusters. An ultra hard canister with enough exploding material that will be forcing the exploding substance the opposite way of the body surface that is is attached to. Problem is you don't know how much this mechanism will be successful against so many types of different compositions found on asteroids. It would also involve heavier devices than what we used to send out there today and we don't have such robust materials ready as it is now. This method would require little micromanagement for delivering our mechanism to the body surface, thus less things to be automated and less things that could go wrong mid flight.
Another method would be a device that is shooting holes inside the asteroid and then shooting explosive material inside them that can be remotely or timely activated. Thus creating some thruster elements on the surface of the asteroid. Same as the first method we don't have the technology yet to realize this solution, also it would require lots of calculations and micromanagement and human intervention while in operation near the body. Also much research in the explosive substances department would be needed. Explosives that change their substance or qualities for every mission parameter. If the mechanism has to be orbiting the asteroid continuously there is also the factor of precision that has to be accounted.

Science and mechanics are not there yet, but all this could be a useful exercise on what protective mechanisms you could come up with to protect large artificial structures in space, or space colonies on planetary bodies that lack enough atmosphere such as the moon from asteroid impacts.

If the Russians have started to think about deflecting asteroids then this is telling me one thing. They have plans for space colonies or bigger stations that they currently operate. Probably large complexes, Which would need protection in the future. So then maybe they're planing a continuous presence out there, so they might first be thinking on how to protect them. By selecting Apophis as the target and then requiring the joint cooperation of other parties that means they can cut the initial costs of their research. A very clever decision that might also benefit everyone involved since the know how that would be acquired would be beneficial.
It doesn't mean that this asteroid is going to hit earth, b ut lots of asteroids could and will be potential hazards for our man made future space structures.
At least there is someone that is thinking of planing about setting foot permanently in to space and seeking out solutions. First you eliminate the dangers, then you actually make the project.

What exactly is NASA doing at that department of serious human presence on outer space, despite the jokes of inflatable habitats and their non existent non realized Martian surface stations yet?

[edit on 31-12-2009 by spacebot]

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 12:58 PM
NASA is a military and corporate themed entity. Any advances they make will be used to that end, with the final idea that this would naturally precipitate the movement of people eventually.

posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 02:06 PM
I guess the thing to do is make a giant railgun....right?

posted on Jan, 1 2010 @ 08:54 AM

Originally posted by ziggy1706
Fascinating! wow.. makes me think of the movie Armaggeddon with bruce willis! Only they landed on the asteroid, and drilled and planted a nuclear warhead* As the NASA person said in hte movie...imagine a firecracker in your hand, light it what happens, poof nothing. Now, wrap your hand around the same firecracker and light it, yuor wife is gunna cant remember the rest he said...but it deos make sense* Blowing up an asteroid within, so the energy created by explosion ripps n tears itsway through its center out, halfing it. Of course, that too could make more you might have 2 halves comijng at us, or many smaller peices raining down on us at 20,000 MPH.

Old newtons laws come into play. The explosion adds momentum in all directions so some pieces will sent even faster to Earth! The only sure way of avoiding a collision is to add some momentum at 90% to the direction so that the asteroid swerves past Earth. The earlier this is done the less energy needed and thus the easier it will be.

posted on Jan, 1 2010 @ 09:50 AM
reply to post by endisnighe

I like this discussion about thermonukes in space vs. ground based detonations.

The atmospheric blast waves and heat energy are pronounced on the ground.

The EMP (and with it, auroral) effects are pronounced in the outer atmosphere near space,

more EMP apparently than many solar storms (assuming C class).

Also, transient radiation belts are produced, apparently with as high

as 60 rads/day emission, that may damage satellites.

Some discussion on the amount of energy in thermonuke reactions can

be found here as well (some nerds think a cubic cc of nuke detonation

may not be powerful enough for a toaster oven!):

I'm sure our great minds at Lawrence Livermore have computed all this out

long ago - but it seems some tests produced interesting results (remember

all those famous UFO photos taken by USGS members across the world

during the 1959 Geophysical year? How interesting that US nuke

detonations in the upper atmosphere induced new radiation belts in the

southern hemisphere that same year....)

posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 08:53 PM
An important topic like this provides the opportunity to inform all that the discovery of, and warnings about, Apophis occurred years, even decades before "official" discovery.

And, if the board moderators are courageous enough to let you know about and discuss this evidence for yourselves, you'll see that it all leads back to one very much attacked individual who took on a thankless role, became the center of a worldwide controversy but nonetheless accomplished his mission.

The fact that we, earth humanity have basically failed with our own mission to a large degree is unfortunate. So I invite you to read the following:

Within the next couple of days I will be posting an even more comprehensive article on the verifiably, preemptively published, scientific/astronomical information by Billy Meier in copyrighted books.

Please understand that, as I state in the article, you can argue all you want about things like UFOS, etc. but it's pretty futile to try to argue with copyrights...although, should this information remain posted, doubtless some will try.

[edit on 7-1-2010 by Michael812]

[edit on 7-1-2010 by Michael812]

[edit on 7-1-2010 by Michael812]

posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 08:59 PM
I'm still a strong believer that Russia and the USA should work together on this project. Ever since I heard about it I think for the sake of mankind itself, everyone has to get together, settle differences, and look out for everyone.

posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 08:07 PM
reply to post by FraternitasSaturni

i think the most current nasa stat is 1 in 45.

and it did waver between 2029 and 2034. The fact that only

2 observations of the trajectory were used to firm this up worries me -

is this like a weather prediction, where small perturbations in the orbit

early on lead to large deviations in hit probability later in time? absolutely.

they really- don't - know - what - will - happen. bet on that.

<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in