Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

NASA Visualizes Asteroid Grab Mission

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the dash-and-grab dept.

NASA 73

fergus07 writes "NASA has released new concept images and animations outlining one version of its plan to capture an asteroid with an unmanned craft. The scenario presented for a possible mission around the year 2025 involves literally bagging an asteroid in a huge inflatable cylinder and returning it to lunar orbit for astronauts to study."

cancel ×

73 comments

Wars will ruin this plan (1)

For a Free Internet (1594621) | about a year ago | (#44676125)

Capitalism breeds endless war and is a threat to the survival of humankind. COMMUNISM is the solution!

Re:Wars will ruin this plan (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676199)

Obviously we must start a war with asteroids!

Funding will be cut (5, Insightful)

SpaceMonkies (2868125) | about a year ago | (#44676153)

Just like has happened over and over and over again, as soon as the next president gets into office the funding will be cut and the program cancelled. The Moon missions were a fluke of timing and circumstances, and nothing so grand is likely to be repeated anytime soon. Space is now becoming the playground of capitalism rather than the purvey of the government, and I think NASA is going to become an obscure part of the space race within a few decades.

Check out the new Slashdot iPad app [apple.com]

Re:Funding will be cut (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676315)

Unless they prove that the asteroid has oil.

Re:Funding will be cut (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676603)

well if that is the case, we could also prove religion in hokum, and maybe enter a new era of enlightenment ..

Re:Funding will be cut (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about a year ago | (#44676703)

Well, why shouldn't it be cut? The space program is a playtoy for whites and Asians. Americans have different priorities, such as getting enough food to eat every day. Let the capitalists waste their money in space, if they can find a way to make a profit, grand. But leave the government out of it.

Re:Funding will be cut (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44679073)

Americans have different priorities, such as getting enough food to eat every day.

Anyone who can't get enough food to eat in today's America doesn't know where to look, despite your claim that it is "Americans' priority."

Re:Funding will be cut (1)

Raenex (947668) | about a year ago | (#44678263)

Put your app whoring into a proper signature.

Re:Funding will be cut (1)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about a year ago | (#44679527)

The President doesn't control NASA's funding. Congress does. Congress controls funding for everything.

Re:Funding will be cut (3, Insightful)

jafac (1449) | about a year ago | (#44680461)

Apollo was Von Braun's pet project.

Von Braun was dreaming about going to the moon, and colonizing space, when he was building V-2's for Hitler. In his mind - - he was conning Hitler into giving him the necessary R&D funds for science, by letting Hitler kill people with them. Hitler caught on, and tried to have him arrested. When he came to the US, it was pretty much the same deal. Von Braun built a bunch of ballistic missiles for the US (including redstone and atlas), and in the 50's, early thermonuclear weapons were actually pretty huge, and there were ideas about placing strategic weapons on-orbit (until the UN banned the idea) - so while the US and the Soviets were playing "who can build the biggest bomb" - the moon race was also about "who can put the most weapons into orbit" - to extort and threaten the rest of the world with nuclear annihilation.

Then came Apollo, and the test-ban, and the acceptance of the reality that smaller nukes were probably the most practical in warfare anyway. And Congress decided to stop funding Von Braun's pet science projects. He also did try, very hard, (in the form of actual Disney-produced propaganda films) - to get the American public on board with the whole idea of space colonization. But in the end, most Americans didn't really give a crap, and just wanted to be able to wave a big American dick around, so they wouldn't have to hide under their beds from the commie invasion anymore. As soon as it became clear that the Soviets weren't going to be competing on that front anymore (the 1980's) - congress's funding got tighter and tighter.

It got even worse when we started COOPERATING with Russia (ISS). A lot of people in congress wanted to kill that right-quick. The only reason any funding kept flowing, was with the shuttle, it was easy to funnel cash to ATK (Thiokol, the contractors who build the SRB's. - and ALSO make the Minuteman. . . ) When the Shuttle ended, that made the justification very difficult.

Von Braun was a special case, and a very strong driving force. One of those greatly underrated and unknown geniuses. (Not gonna talk about ethics). He pulled of miracles, and got us to the moon.

I think that Elon Musk is doing some fantastic stuff right now - and he's kind of "out there" as far as being a visionary. So who knows? I think that he understands that space exploration is about much more than next quarter's profits. And that's a huge part of the thinking that is required to actually DO this. Very few people actually understand this.

Re:Funding will be cut (1)

Lotana (842533) | about a year ago | (#44681677)

I agree! Judging by history, we need to wait till the president makes a promise, then kill him before he changes his/her mind. The next president will hopefully contin...

Ah crap! There are SWAT vehicles pulling up. Read the whole thread you illeterate NSA bastar..... NO CARRIER

They won't pull it off (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676159)

The deed will be caught on surveillance cameras.

You gotta be kidding me. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676173)

2025 ! You gotta be kidding me. How many years did it take for us to land a guy on the moon for cry'n out loud ! If it is really going to take us 8 years to put a bag around an asteroid we are soooo screwed if one of these "Mass Extinction Event's" wanders in our direction!

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (2)

somersault (912633) | about a year ago | (#44676297)

2025 - 2013 = ?

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676387)

8?

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676443)

>2025 - 2013 = ?

Oops.

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676449)

That's the reason I'm writing as AC always. I can pretend other time that I finish 2'rd grade.

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44677019)

2025 - 2013 = ?

Profit!!!!!

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676327)

"How many years did it take for us to land a guy"

Well since we became intelligent enougth to have the technology for that... billions of years.

Can you wait more 12 years?

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (2)

P-niiice (1703362) | about a year ago | (#44676373)

Back then we actually gave a damn about the country and had national pride at accomplishing a goal. Plus, American productivity was actually more than a field of wheat to be harvested by our corporate masters...unlike today. We'll never have that kind of drive again. Our only drive is profit nowadays.

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about a year ago | (#44676389)

Back then you were scared to death of communists, and those same communists were launching people (and possibly nuclear weapons) into space.

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676563)

Back then you were scared to death of communists, and those same communists were launching people (and possibly nuclear weapons) into space.

We were also afraid of our own people becoming communists. So much so that we increased the standard of living, had social mobility and a large middle class, and we worked hard to convince everybody that they were better off with capitalism than communism. Well, we don't have to worry about that anymore, so fuck the masses as long as profits are made.

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about a year ago | (#44676689)

It's like they were plotting to overthrow our government and replace it with one just like theirs or something. Nah, crazy talk! It's not like they explicitly stated it repeatedly or anything.

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (2)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about a year ago | (#44677457)

I didn't say the fear was unjustified (you guys DID invade them with the explicit purpose of putting down their revolution, so their paranoia wasn't unjustified either).

A couple hundred million space faring, nuke building, half-the-world-controlling communists just seem to be a more credible threat, and better motivation to do impressive things than a few thousand religious nutjobs in a desert half the world away with AK-47s you gave them.

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about a year ago | (#44677665)

How is it whenever the topic changes to the Soviet Union, two wrongs make a right?

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about a year ago | (#44680571)

You're just determined to be offended, hey? I don't even understand where you got that from. Made it up?

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about a year ago | (#44678081)

Back then you were scared to death of communists, and those same communists were launching people (and possibly nuclear weapons) into space.

Yesssss, well, guess what the communists are doing now? China has a space program, they've shot satellites with missiles, and done asteroid fly-bys. Chelyabinsk was 20 to 30 times Hiroshima, it just didn't strike ground. You mistake me, this is perfect opportunity for the pansy ass scientists to grow some balls and use the social science for the advancement of the human race -- It'll be used to its detriment otherwise.

Here, I'll draft a bit of the speech:

If we don't capture and control the asteroids we lose space superiority. We lose Earth. We lose AMERICA! Whomever conquers the asteroid belt wins a near infinite supply of weapons as powerful as nuclear weapons, and far more dangerous. You see, a nuclear blast poisons the land and sea and air, but an asteroid grants that level of destruction while leaving the land free of radiation, ready to colonize...

The American Tax Payer has put Trillions into the war effort, in the name of fighting the nebulous terrorist threat. This Space Threat is immensely more dangerous. While a terrorist may topple a pair of sky scrapers killing tens of thousands of lives, a single asteroid strike to New York can Kill MILLIONS. And, unlike our bluff with the first Nuclear Bombs, there really is a rock for every city in America. No assembly required.

The American people will NOT sit still and wait for this very real and immense threat to our country, nay, Our Planet, to grow unchecked. NASA's budget operates on par with the budget for our troop's air conditioning. No Longer! It would be a DISGRACE for America to have all our military might rendered futile by a Few Space Rocks!

We Americans have never balked at a fertile frontier in fear. We have the technology. We have the man power. We have the Intelligence. We have the Integrity. In 2015 the United States of America will become the First Nation of Earth to capture an Asteroid. By 2018 we will have pushed the frontier of human space exploration further than even any other nation has plans to do in decades. We will have several Asteroids in Lunar Orbit granting the means to defend our Great Nation from any threat on Earth, and for the first time in Human History, Mankind will have made a commitment to Fight off Extinction Itself directly with a Rogue Asteroid Deflection program.

As the American People have done time and again, we will pull together do what think impossible, for the good of Mankind. We can no longer ignore our Duty to our Beloved Planet, the only cradle of life in the known Universe. As President Kennedy said before I say again with every bit as much resolve, "We do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard".

Damned "moral" pussies, you would rather be practical and wait... Just like the Dinosaurs did. You'd call it "unethical" to sway the mind of the public into NOT letting Extinction win. You foolish humans disgust me.

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about a year ago | (#44685447)

I was hoping the US would take things a little more seriously when the Chinese started putting people in orbit, but the overwhelming attitude seems to be "yawn, we've been doing that for fifty years." Maybe it'll happen when they land on the moon. Hopefully we don't have to wait until they get to Mars.

You seem to be well in the grip of xenophobic hatred though. Vote some funding to those "pansy ass scientists" hey?

But because of an American (1)

Errol backfiring (1280012) | about a year ago | (#44684643)

, and those same communists were launching people into space

It was because of an American remark. At least, that was what my space technology teacher told. There was a conference about space travel, which was up to then purely theoretical, at which an American guy told his Russian colleague that they were working on a space program (which was not true at that moment). This remark started the space race.

Re:But because of an American (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about a year ago | (#44685505)

Quite possible. Rivalry that involves decade long engineering projects is more about what you think the other guy is going to do next rather than what he's actually doing now. Which is why terrorists aren't quite the impetus communists were. "Al-Quaida is building a Mars rocket!" is a joke. "The Soviets are going to put nukes on the moon!" was a crisis.

Re:You gotta be kidding me. (1, Informative)

WillgasM (1646719) | about a year ago | (#44676883)

Um...that's when the asteroid will be passing close enough. I don't care how motivated we are, I don't think we can ask the asteroid to hurry up and get here.

Very dangerous (0)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about a year ago | (#44676175)

It has taken billions of years for the Earth to clear its orbit, and all remaining are in relatively safe orbits. Changing an orbit can have devastating consequences if they get it wrong.

Re:Very dangerous (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676201)

Wise old saying, "Don't fuck with what's not broken".

Re:Very dangerous (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about a year ago | (#44676227)

No, it won't. This is not a large asteroid. If they succeeded in vectoring it directly into the Earth, it would make a pretty light as it burned up in the atmosphere. It wouldn't even reach the ground.

Re:Very dangerous (4, Insightful)

Giant Electronic Bra (1229876) | about a year ago | (#44676299)

You wouldn't want to be anywhere near where it hit, but agreed, the overall effect would be small and chances are it would hit a remote region where no significant damage would result.

My guess would be that the whole thing would be done on the basis of 'zero risk'. At NO point would the asteroid even transiently pass through a configuration where it would impact at all. This isn't as hard as it might sound either. Surely there is SOME orbit within the Earth/Moon system that can be achieved under that criteria. Once you are in ANY Earth/Moon orbit transitioning to other orbits safely should be relatively easy. Notice that the NASA blurb shows the asteroid in a counter-rotating distant Lunar orbit, one which would be pretty safe presumably. As long as you have a Constellation configuration with 10 or so days of transit time capability it really doesn't much matter exactly what the orbit is, you can get there.

So, I would STRONGLY suggest that this whole program is being proposed in a safe manner where impact is simply not possible. The 'tractor' capturing spacecraft could fail at any point and wherever the asteroid went would be OK.

That being said, it is true that statistically speaking any random orbit probably is more likely to lead to an impact than whatever orbit any random object is currently in. However NEOs are ALREADY generally in transient pseudo-stable orbits, so it probably doesn't make much difference. Obviously if you start pushing main-belt asteroids around its a bit different. Still, bad orbits are a very small subset of all orbits.

Re:Very dangerous (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year ago | (#44676685)

you have huge misconception between your ears. such a small asteroid would not reach the ground. it would not cause dangerous shock wave. it is too small. you could be anywhere on the ground and be safe

Re:Very dangerous (1)

Giant Electronic Bra (1229876) | about a year ago | (#44677753)

You can't say that with any certainty at all. It heavily depends on the exact composition, structure, velocity, and angle of entry. It is quite possible for a rock this size to either reach the ground or generate a fireball at an altitude that could cause some significant damage on the ground in a limited area. It is just largely moot, there's virtually no chance such a thing would happen.

Re:Very dangerous (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year ago | (#44693201)

look it up already, 7-10 meter asteroid, target of this experiment, absolutely cannot reach the ground regardless of composition, they burn up.

30 meter range is another matter, but that' is not on the table for this experiment

Re:Very dangerous (1)

Giant Electronic Bra (1229876) | about a year ago | (#44693253)

I saw nothing in the blurb about a specific size. Of course there's not a lot of reason to mess with larger rocks if you don't have to.

Re:Very dangerous (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676773)

What if it hits the ISS?

How big (and/or fast) would an object need to be to cause a problem when impacting the moon? I would think it's much easier to destabilize the moon's orbit than that of the Earth.

Re:Very dangerous (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | about a year ago | (#44677735)

A pea-sized rock (or an errant bolt) travelling retrograde* in the same orbit as the ISS would be a mission-ender. Even one crossing at a very shallow angle would close so fast that by the time anyone spotted it, it would be too late.

Also bear in mind that the impactor that left a mile-wide hole in Arizona was only the size of a Greyhound bus.

The one that killed the dinosaurs was the size of Manhattan and left a crater 127 miles wide.

The object that exploded over Siberia in 1908 flattened 80 million trees and left fist sized fragments of itself over hundreds of square miles.

*at the altitude and speed the ISS orbits, mutual closing speed with a retrograde object of any mass would be around the 34,200mph mark. Or, around the same speed as an asteroid on terminal trajectory. It wouldn't be so much a hole, more an explosive impact.

Re:Very dangerous (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676333)

You're fooling yourself if you think we've cleared our orbit. We're just in a very good state for right now... as far as we know. It's not unthinkable that there is a large space rock with our name on it just a few days away that no one has noticed yet.

Re:Very dangerous (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676515)

No, because the Earth hasn't cleared its orbit of objects this size anyway (looks to be ~8-10m at most). Objects this size do arrive from time to time. For example, this recent arrival [wikipedia.org] was estimated to be 17-20m in size. And that was at a significantly higher closing velocity than this thing probably would be if it arrived from lunar orbit due to some error, and presumably because it is orbiting the Moon and stuck within its gravity well the greatest risk would be that it would impact with the Moon. It's not an issue.

Re:Very dangerous (3, Funny)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | about a year ago | (#44676627)

Agreed, what we see here is an evil plot by NASA to get more funding. They pick up an asteroid from the belt. They have it coming towards Earth, but will deliberately have the towing craft go out of control. Suddenly Bruce Willis is our only chance, and Congress will have to approve emergency spending.

Re:Very dangerous (1)

localman57 (1340533) | about a year ago | (#44677647)

At which point the House will decide that it will only pay for this asteroid-protection plan to save the earth if equivalent cuts are made some place else. Now, the Senate ain't gonna buy that. So the asteroid will just go ahead and hit the earth, but fortunately hit someplace nobody (here) cares about. And, for some fucking incomprehensible reason, fully 90% of these asshats will be reelected the next cycle.

Re:Very dangerous (1)

Derec01 (1668942) | about a year ago | (#44678323)

Bring an asteroid into orbit is very very different from a collision course. As long as it's not experience significant atmospheric drag, the amount of angular momentum with respect to the Earth will make sure that almost any minor deviation from then on will just result in a slingshot or eccentricity because it has to be conserved. It will not suddenly plunge directly down.

Re:Very dangerous (0)

linear a (584575) | about a year ago | (#44679003)

Well, technically, hitting Earth with it would put it into "lunar orbit".

Re:Very dangerous (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44678613)

"It has taken billions of years for the Earth to clear its orbit, and most remaining are in relatively safe orbits."

FTFY.

And it only takes one...

Visualization? (1)

G-Man (79561) | about a year ago | (#44676213)

So we're now using 'The Secret' as our engineering method? Cool, we're using it for everything else in Govt. anyways...

NASA needs expert advise (1)

Dishwasha (125561) | about a year ago | (#44676223)

Has NASA run the footage by Bruce Willis yet?

Re:NASA needs expert advise (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676543)

Of course not. You expect Bruce Willis to leave his highly-paid job as a tool pusher [wikipedia.org] for some half-assed mission that hasn't even settled on the soundtrack yet? Please. Not until the Aerosmith soundtrack is finished. Then they'll make their pitch.

It should be designed like a big baseball mitt (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676261)

just sayin....

Not sure if a good idea (1)

onyxruby (118189) | about a year ago | (#44676277)

Look, I know we all like growing up and making our favorite tech from video games or movies happen in real life. That being said I'm not sure if a real life version of Asteroid or Space Invaders is a good idea. I know they have some really nifty lasers they also want to test, but somehow this could all going quite badly...

Re:Not sure if a good idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676381)

It's not to play Asteroids it's to

BEWARE, I LIVE!

oh no, we're too late!

Re:Not sure if a good idea (1)

Beorytis (1014777) | about a year ago | (#44676675)

RUN [Anonymous] COWARD, RUN!

Re:Not sure if a good idea (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about a year ago | (#44678349)

Note: No one saw Chelyabinsk coming. Humans are basically blind. Rocks are really hard to see, hell, we didn't even know Eris was out there -- A DWARF PLANET MORE MASSIVE THAN PLUTO, was only just seen in 2008! That's why Pluto's not a planet anymore, because if we left it a planet, we'd have to admit there are PLANET SIZED ROCKS we didn't see drifting about in our back yard.

Just Imagine it: Every channel on TV is talking about the huge asteroid comparable to the one that caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. We have only 8 years to change its course, but since we're missing it's transit this time around, we are all doomed. If only we already had the Mass in orbit already to use as a gravity tug, and the optics in place for full sky observation, we could have detected it sooner, we could have prevented the disaster. We had the technology to get such in place since the 70's, but no funding to do it.... Our greed has finally killed all humans, and chaos rules for the better part of a decade as desperate attempt after desperate attempt fails and society tears itself apart.

And you don't know if it's a good idea to take charge of the space around our planet? It's not just a good idea, it's THE ONLY IDEA we should execute on until we've put down all threats like the 20-30 Hiroshima H-Bombs of Chelyabinsk. Thank the stars that one exploded in the atmosphere and didn't touch down.... You can see that shit happen, and think it might not be a good idea to attain the means to lower the currently 100% Assured Extinction of your species? Ask any astronomer, they'll tell you it's only a matter of time before something big hits us. Bury your head in the sand and ignore the fossil record therein chronicling all the mass extinction level events, and the fact that we're long overdue....

If you're not sure it's a good idea, then you might not have a brain.

Re:Not sure if a good idea (1)

onyxruby (118189) | about a year ago | (#44682175)

It was a joke, going back to the days of old Atari games. Many of today's scientists at NASA grew up playing these games. I'm well aware of the actual scientific value.

I'm seeing a lot of these comments... (1)

websitebroke (996163) | about a year ago | (#44676301)

Relax, people. It's a small asteroid in an orbit beyond the moon. We'll have hundreds of thousands of kilometers between us and a smallish rock in space.

Asteroid rendition? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676303)

At first, I read NASA as NSA. I assume they're going to transport the asteroid to an unnamed country for interrogation?

Hmmm.. (1)

wbr1 (2538558) | about a year ago | (#44676319)

Return to lunar orbit for astronauts to study. I can see lunar orbit as a 'safe' alternative to earth orbit, even though this is small enough to burn up in the atmosphere. It would cut risk to other orbiting objects, and make it 'seem' safer to the masses. However, we have not had an astronaut in lunar orbit for decades. Who the fuck are these astronauts that will study it?

Re:Hmmm.. (1)

GIL_Dude (850471) | about a year ago | (#44676623)

Who the fuck are these astronauts that will study it?

They will probably be astronauts in the same sense that the guy who controls a drone is a "pilot". In other words, they will be in some NASA control center controlling some drone spacecraft with lasers and drills and mass spectrometers.

Visualizing (1, Funny)

puddingebola (2036796) | about a year ago | (#44676343)

NASA Visualizes Asteroid Grab Mission, I visualize replay of Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event. Houston, we have a problem.

Or use a robotic arm... (2)

Steve1952 (651150) | about a year ago | (#44676359)

Mounting a robotic arm and small reentry capsule on the asteroid transfer vehicle could do the same mission. I like space travel, but the main thing this video showed me is that the politics are making NASA propose dumb ideas. NASA is burdened with the politically mandated "Senate Launch System" and the apparently unkillable Orion capsule, but insufficient funds for anything else. So here we are. Personally I would kill the SLS and Orion, subcontract manned work to SpaceX, and use the funds for advanced space-related R&D.

Asteroids are made of OIL! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676397)

Just thought I'd do my part to help get this project funded.

Why send people? (2)

sjbe (173966) | about a year ago | (#44676479)

The scenario presented for a possible mission around the year 2025 involves literally bagging an asteroid in a huge inflatable cylinder and returning it to lunar orbit for astronauts to study.

I'm kind of at a loss for why you would want to do that. Ignoring for the moment the geopolitical WMD ramifications of doing this, what advantage would there be in having people there that we cannot accomplish with robots? Sending people adds massively to the cost, complexity and danger. If we have the ability to capture the asteroid with robot we probably have the ability to analyze the asteroid with robots too. I just don't see what the gain of sending people would be other than bragging rights. Because we can isn't an adequate reason because we can send people to other more useful missions and accomplish research/exploration goals.

Re:Why send people? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44683049)

Mostly so they can have bragging rights that their astronauts have rubbed their nuts on a for realsies asteroid. So there. (I imagine you'd want your genitals to be fairly dry otherwise they'd stick though like your tongue to a freezer wall. I've heard).

I wonder if they're going to call it.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44676635)

Operation Grab-Ass?

That's great (3, Insightful)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | about a year ago | (#44676917)

Because when you use infographics and animations to explain things these days it's much more readily assumed to be a practical solution by the masses and so they will gladly support and fund it. Just look at Hyperloop.

If you had a link to a 2000 page factual whitepaper about the same thing it would be protested and government would cancel it.

Better yet, NASA should put this on Kickstarter and give away T-Shirts and seats to watch the launch of the mission and people will willingly throw millions at the project and cut out the government tax middlemen.

Asteroid Capture (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44677317)

I'm far more interested in the asteroid capture mission. That seems to have far more technical hurdles and 'firsts'. The astronaut mission would be the longest mission in a capsule environment beyond LEO, but with extensive life support systems developed on the ISS this should not be a huge challenge.

Maybe by this point SpaceX will have fully reusable heavy-lift rockets and Dragons flying toward all corners of the solar system with propulsive landing science packages onboard.

Isn't science Great!!!!! (1)

Stan92057 (737634) | about a year ago | (#44679027)

Isn't science Great!!!!! We are going to get our very own second moon all thanks to science.

2025? (1)

tlambert (566799) | about a year ago | (#44680089)

2025? Really ambitious, NASA... or maybe not...

Isn't 2024 about the time Planetary Resources plans to start platinum mining operations on a captured, much larger, asteroid?

Where does space law stand on this? (1)

jafac (1449) | about a year ago | (#44680573)

If a planet has land, and land is property, the question must be posed: does an Asteroid have property, which can be owned. And who could own that? We already have companies trying to "sell" people claim to titles of property on both the moon, and mars. But I don't think that there's any basis in international law - in fact, I think that there are some treaties that BAN claiming sovereignity of the moon.

So if NASA can "own" an asteroid, (in the legal sense) - then they could "take" it, and change it's orbit. But if this asteroid belongs to "the world" (by fiat of international declaration) - then it might even be illegal for NASA to MOVE it from it's natural orbital trajectory. (in that case, it might actually be considered "LITTERING" to land a probe on another planet.) (I understand that there are some islamic scholars who have a problem with smashing probes into the moon, because the moon is a sacred object, as a signifier of the start and end of each month in their calendar - and this is also the source of some of the Moon-landing hoax conspiracy theories that are out there. . . )

Would the douchebags of the world try to challenge, in court, what NASA is trying to do with this asteroid?

What about rotation? (1)

Autonomous Crowhard (205058) | about a year ago | (#44689165)

One thing the video didn't address was the capture process. I keep wondering how this whole fly-up-and-bag-it thing would work. I find it unlikely that the rock just be sitting there waiting. It would have some rotation. If we've learned anything from recent close encounters with asteroids, it's that they are rotating on multiple axises. Even a small rock like the one in the video would have a lot of inertia to overcome in order to bring it to a stop. I doubt that little docking clamp they showed would have enough fuel to do the job.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...