Space drones for cosmic impact protections. Is it possible?

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 08:00 PM
link   
Would it be violating some potential cosmic law (weaponizing space) to refurbish existing Fighter jets/planes & drones for space travel with rail guns/missiles





as well as fusion lasers
lasers.llnl.gov...
www.livescience.com...





Which would be sent into space as drones that can be controlled & monitored from EA*RTH to detect and eliminate any cosmic disturbances that may impact EA*RTH space.

These drones would stay in a set and adjustable areas in the SOL system and would only return back to EA*RTH space for refueling/reloading and repair.

This way any potential threats that may be from Asteroids or Comets (uninhabited) stressing uninhabited
detected in deep space can be dealt with w/o potential fallout from debris hitting EA*RTH...

Is it possible to perform such a global effort and if so what is stopping this from being implemented?

LOVE LIGHT ETERNIA*******
NAMASTE
edit on 11/10/13 by Ophiuchus 13 because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13
 


A bit off-topic... But, what is it with some of you guys and spelling Earth as "EA*RTH?" WTF is that all about. I tried a search but no joy.
I've seen it a few times but only on ATS. What's up with that?

On-topic: There are agreements re: limits on weaponization of the Moon and space in general but it seems they are oftentimes ignored. I'm sure an international group wishing to put armed drones in space to protect Earth (the one I know, not your EA*RTH or whatever) would meet minimal resistance. An individual country (or that country's space org) may have a bit more of an issue depending on the level of trust.
The issue I see is why would you post these drones in set areas like you say when it seems it would make more sense to locate the dangerous objects FIRST through observation - something we have some difficulty doing now - and then send a drone or whatever to intercept. Seems more cost-effective that way, no?



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 08:14 PM
link   
It would be like playing



but in real life...



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 08:19 PM
link   

35Foxtrot
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13
 


A bit off-topic... But, what is it with some of you guys and spelling Earth as "EA*RTH?" WTF is that all about. I tried a search but no joy.
I've seen it a few times but only on ATS. What's up with that?


1 spells EA*RTH the way it is in respects to LORD ENKI or EA who cam here from the STARS*


35Foxtrot

The issue I see is why would you post these drones in set areas like you say when it seems it would make more sense to locate the dangerous objects FIRST through observation - something we have some difficulty doing now - and then send a drone or whatever to intercept. Seems more cost-effective that way, no?


They could be scattered thorough out the SOL system 35Foxtrot all the way out to Pluto... With cams and other observation techs and can monitor incoming threats far out. This is why they would have to be drones to allow FASTER advanced engines that may harm a living human inside them.



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 08:29 PM
link   


1 spells EA*RTH the way it is in respects to LORD ENKI or EA who cam here from the STARS*



OK.....




They could be scattered thorough out the SOL system 35Foxtrot all the way out to Pluto... With cams and other observation techs and can monitor incoming threats far out. This is why they would have to be drones to allow FASTER advanced engines that may harm a living human inside them.



Yeah. That was kinda my point. One drone -or a couple- parked near Earth or on Earth(any object posing a danger to Earth will have Earth as an endpoint. Thus, Earth would be a decent starting point for any object/vessel heading out to stop said dangerous object) would be MUCH more cost-effective than parking a butt-load of them all over the solar system - many along paths that would undoubtedly place them outside of any possible intercept course.
edit on 10/11/13 by 35Foxtrot because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 08:34 PM
link   

35Foxtrot

Yeah. That was kinda my point. One drone -or a couple- parked near Earth or on Earth(any object posing a danger to Earth will have Earth as an endpoint. Thus, Earth would be a decent starting point for any object/vessel heading out to stop said dangerous object) would be MUCH more cost-effective than parking a butt-load of them all over the solar system - many along paths that would undoubtedly place them outside of any possible intercept course.
edit on 10/11/13 by 35Foxtrot because: (no reason given)


Near EA*RTH can potentially cause FALLOUT process... Hence catch them far out which allows debris path TIME to move out of the way of EA*RTHs path. Close to EA*RTH or based from or near EA*RTH space does not allow time especially of larger target in question...



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Ophiuchus 13

35Foxtrot

Yeah. That was kinda my point. One drone -or a couple- parked near Earth or on Earth(any object posing a danger to Earth will have Earth as an endpoint. Thus, Earth would be a decent starting point for any object/vessel heading out to stop said dangerous object) would be MUCH more cost-effective than parking a butt-load of them all over the solar system - many along paths that would undoubtedly place them outside of any possible intercept course.
edit on 10/11/13 by 35Foxtrot because: (no reason given)


Near EA*RTH can potentially cause FALLOUT process... Hence catch them far out which allows debris path TIME to move out of the way of EA*RTHs path. Close to EA*RTH or based from or near EA*RTH space does not allow time especially of larger target in question...



The limiting factor is our ability to DETECT the objects in the first place. The little bit of extra time it might take if you start the drone from near-earth as opposed to some other locale is not going to make enough difference in debris trajectory.
You still need to detect the object far away from Earth. Assuming we could do that (which is by no means a safe assumption), starting from near the Earth or some random deep space location isn't going to likely make any difference in where the debris field goes. You're talking about blasting the object. Therefore, the little bits are going to continue on toward Earth no matter what (the objects was already headed at Earth or else it wouldn't be tagged "dangerous").
Sure, you'd have longer to wait before it hit ASSUMING your random placement of drones resulted in it being any closer to the approach path than if you started out from Earth. You could not place enough drones in the solar system to guarantee that you'd get any benefit.
Now, maybe you're talking about nudging the objects (but your rail guns would not be best for that really)... Even in that case, starting from near Earth or one of your random spots in the solar system would likely not make a real difference on how much you could nudge the object using current technology.
I think maybe you're not realizing how big space really is. If you do realize the scale you're talking about and still think you can place enough of these drones out there to make a difference, I think you're really missing my point about cost-effectiveness. I doubt there are enough resources in this solar system to pay for the number of drones you'd need. I still maintain that a couple around Earth would be just as mission effective (taking into account the aforementioned limitations on your plan) and MUCH more cost-effective in that we'd actually be able to pay for them.



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by 35Foxtrot
 


Fusion explosion/IGNITION from laser far out would knock them out of path of EA*RTH would it not? If that doesn't work use rail defense. Far out don't want the fusion process to interact with anything near EA*RTH...

Your points make sense, still a circular like laser array within another within another making three spinning lasers in one aimed @ the asteroid/comet cause fusion explosion seems like it could change the movement and material strength then send rail component to finish depleted debris chunks left. To add an advance sonic device could then deteriorate the remaining pieces into dust...

cost not considered hence global effort for free...
edit on 11/10/13 by Ophiuchus 13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Ophiuchus 13
reply to post by 35Foxtrot
 


Fusion explosion from laser far out would knock them out of path of EA*RTH would it not? If that doesn't work use rail defense. Far out don't want the fusion process to interact with anything near EA*RTH...

Your points make sense, still a circular like laser array within another within another making three spinning lasers in one aimed @ the asteroid/comet cause fusion explosion seems like it could change the movement and material strength then send rail component to finish depleted debris chunks left. To add an advance sonic device could then deteriorate the remaining pieces into dust...

cost not considered hence global effort for free...
edit on 11/10/13 by Ophiuchus 13 because: (no reason given)


You'll have to consider the cost since I don't believe there are enough resources in the whole of this solar system to produce your drones in sufficient numbers to make any significant difference or any improvement over my suggestion to position a few near Earth.
Anyway, it's clear you disagree. I feel you're wrong. Life's funny that way sometimes.

Good luck with your infinite drones and fusion lasers ("three spinning lasers in one" or whatever) and "sonic" device (you might want to consider that any "sonic" device would be useless in space, however) and "rail component."



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by 35Foxtrot
 


It is the LEARNING process that counts most to 1, thank you for taking time to add to the thread OP 35Foxtrot...

NAMASTE*******



posted on Nov, 11 2013 @ 04:31 AM
link   
I think a plausible way to go about this is to create drones that go out and find asteroids or meteors that have the necessary metal to build more drones and such. Eventually it could replicate and create more and more drones especially if they do so in the asteroid belt. Of course, this isn't something we can do anytime soon, but it's a more realistic scenario if we want to build a self-repairing and automatic defense grid around our galaxy.

Presently we thank Jupiter for sucking up asteroids that could potentially hit us. It took a day off to date uranus and the dinosaurs died because of it
Pluto was born out of this though, but it was too stupid to be called a planet.





new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join