It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ManFromEurope
Depends..
If you have a structural solid body coming in, it might take the impact of some big ol' thrusters (send years in front) without breaking into a scatterbomb of hot rocks.
Originally posted by ManFromEurope
Otherwise, in case of an ice-meteor, you have to find a way to heat one chosen place on its surface, so even if it rotates, the matter spewn away by the heating would generate a thrust into a desired (and planned) direction. Don't use explosives, otherwise you will get millions of bombs.
What is the problem with those ice/rock-bombs? Well, if enough of them are entering earths athmosphere, they might bring the athmospheres temperature itself to really life-threatening heights.
Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13
You wouldn't use a shuttle that's for sure, especially one the size of the x-37b...its about a quarter the size of NASA's shuttle.
edit on 23/4/12 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Vasa Croe
Don't know about the scenario you are posing as I believe these were originally tested to find heat sources though I am sure it could be calibrated for other mission specific targets. Either way though...that is some really cool tech.
Originally posted by Wertdagf
If the universe is electrical in nature...
You could create some sort of electrical resistance that could interact with solar winds or plasmatic pockets it flies through and alter its course. Altering an objects charge would be easier than all this rocket explosive stuff.
Originally posted by Mkoll
Why not land some of those gently on the body you are trying to keep from hitting the Earth and nudge it enough so that it misses. The more time you have to do this the more effective that technique will be.
Originally posted by Erno86
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13
I believe, that in the future---the most effective means for corraling a rogue asteroid intent on planetary impact---would be to invent and build a strong tractor beam generator for a mobile starship.
edit on 23-4-2012 by Erno86 because: added two words
Originally posted by rickymouse
It will take a lot of force to break something out of an orbit. If it is just a rock traveling through space it is different but something in orbit seems to have a tie to the orbital plane.
Originally posted by Mkoll
Why not land some of those gently on the body you are trying to keep from hitting the Earth and nudge it enough so that it misses. The more time you have to do this the more effective that technique will be.
Originally posted by justwokeup
Yes. Thats the answer. If you want to survive asteroids the answer is not weaponry. Its in seeing the object early which requires a systematic observation system and in being able to get to it quickly to nudge it out of the way.
We don't have to stop it, or destroy it, we just have to nudge it enough so that it misses. The earlier you get to it the less you have to affect it to generate a miss.
You don't even necessarily have to touch it
Originally posted by Ophiuchus 13
Originally posted by Erno86
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13
I believe, that in the future---the most effective means for corraling a rogue asteroid intent on planetary impact---would be to invent and build a strong tractor beam generator for a mobile starship.
edit on 23-4-2012 by Erno86 because: added two words
I like this idea as well it will allow for non impacts of the smaller materials after the celestial object has been destroyed. I wonder how much energy would it take to build such a beam? Somewhat like the i.c.b.m planes made today with the laser noses to strike down nuclear warheads heading for any land masses just use the same concept but on mobil starships, good call.