Nuking an incoming asteroid is a daft idea - as all NASA's plans seem of late

[SUBMAN1]

I've known about this for some time. The only time a nuke might prove useful against an asteroid is when the object is completely solid / dense, like made out of iron. If the object is loosly held together, then a nuke will just make the problem worse!

This brings me to my point - NASA. I am increasingly loosing faith in this organization. I think it is corrupt. I think it will say what people want it to say with little regard to science. I think they will say whatever the politicians want to hear.

NASA needs to be closed and then reborn as something new with a focus on science. It is no longer a respectable agency the way it is. Yes, they can still launch things, but that is about all they can do. Science was forgotten long ago.

And the funny part - NASA can't understand why they are losing budget? It comes down to this - you feed crap science to the public, Joe Blow public is not so stupid and will eventually figure it out. When this happens, Joe Blow public eventually doesn't care what NASA says or does. When this happens, politicians start not carring about NASA. NASA continues to spin BS to the politicians to maintain funding, but at this point it is already too late - they are a dying organization. Then NASA ends up a relic of the past at some point. I thought NASA scientists were supposed to be smart? Well, seems they missed this basic chain of events. Makes me wonder if they can do any other real science at all? Or are they just relying on technology from the past? Sad.

I have no faith in NASA anymore. To me, they are turning into a major disgrace.

At least their past Astronauts still have a brain.

-S

Nuking an incoming asteroid is a daft idea

Says a man who knows

By Egan Orion: Monday, 28 July 2008, 10:58 AM


APOLLO ASTRONAUT Rusty Schweickart differed with NASA during a public lecture in San Francisco last Wednesday by opining that using nuclear weapons to deflect incoming asteroids isn't a very good idea.


The former lunar lander pilot said a NASA report that made that recommendation last year was misleading. He felt it was probably issued under political pressure to create some justification for putting nuclear weapons into earth orbit.


Schweickart said that asteroid-sized space objects might be deflected by pushing or towing them. He is member of the B612 Foundation, which aims to develop the capability to alter the orbit of an earth-crossing asteroid in a controlled manner by 2015.


Schweickart was too diplomatic to say it in so many words, but lobbing nuclear weapons at asteroids has the potential to break the target into pieces.


When comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 broke apart due to gravitational tidal forces in 1994, at least 21 visible fragments that were up to two kilometres in diameter impacted Jupiter at speeds of approximately 60 kilometres per second.


Such a string of impact events would really ruin our whole eon here on Earth.

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...-idea-stopping

[Jimbuna]

Do you remember a film perhaps ten years back (it was filmed in a news presentation style) where the earth was going to be hit by a huge asteroid ?

They nuked it and when everyone breathed a sigh of relief, suddenly three more appeared from deep space.

I believe they came within a whisker of collision with earth before SSBN's were used to destroy them.

Just as all the world started celebrating, radar picked up thousands of them and the transmission of the film ceased, giving the impression the world had been obliterated.....the end of the film.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Do you remember a film perhaps ten years back (it was filmed in a news presentation style) where the earth was going to be hit by a huge asteroid ?

They nuked it and when everyone breathed a sigh of relief, suddenly three more appeared from deep space.

I believe they came within a whisker of collision with earth before SSBN's were used to destroy them.

Just as all the world started celebrating, radar picked up thousands of them and the transmission of the film ceased, giving the impression the world had been obliterated.....the end of the film.

I missed that one!

Anyway, thousands are out there now. Chances of one hitting is remotely small, but it will happen some day. Just hope its a small one, or that we have the capability to tow it out of the way!

Whats the name of it?

-S

[Seth8530]

was it Armageddon?

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Seth8530

was it Armageddon?

No - that was with the Shuttle and was a pretty bad movie.

-S

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

I missed that one!

Anyway, thousands are out there now. Chances of one hitting is remotely small, but it will happen some day. Just hope its a small one, or that we have the capability to tow it out of the way!

Whats the name of it?

-S

I can't remember, that's why I asked

[XabbaRus]

Deep Impact?

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

Deep Impact?

Nope....thereweren't actually any big names in it as I recall.

It was shot as a news release type.

[ASWnut101]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

I've known about this for some time. The only time a nuke might prove useful against an asteroid is when the object is completely solid / dense, like made out of iron. If the object is loosly held together, then a nuke will just make the problem worse!

Unfortnately, even nukes wont help unless the incoming object is quite tiny (probably less than a kilometer in diameter, and is made mainly of ice, like a small comet). If any decent sized rock comes hurtling towards us, we are pretty much doomed ().

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by ASWnut101

Unfortnately, even nukes wont help unless the incoming object is quite tiny (probably less than a kilometer in diameter, and is made mainly of ice, like a small comet). If any decent sized rock comes hurtling towards us, we are pretty much doomed ().

I don't think so. All you need is advance warning and the capability to move it ever so slightly - less than a minor bit of a degree.

-S

[August]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

I don't think so. All you need is advance warning and the capability to move it ever so slightly - less than a minor bit of a degree.

-S

And a nuke, detonated in it's path would not have that capability?

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by August

And a nuke, detonated in it's path would not have that capability?

On a solid object it would. Not the other way around though - you would just break it up and it would continue on its path. Multiple impacts of smaller objects is much more devastating that one large object. This makes the problem worse, and more wide spread.

-S

[August]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

On a solid object it would. Not the other way around though - you would just break it up and it would continue on its path. Multiple impacts of smaller objects is much more devastating that one large object. This makes the problem worse, and more wide spread.

-S

I didn't say detonate on the object but in front of it. IE between the object and the earth. It shouldn't matter whether it's a solid, liquid or gas.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by August

I didn't say detonate on the object but in front of it. IE between the object and the earth. It shouldn't matter whether it's a solid, liquid or gas.

It makes a big difference in the models. There was never any want to impact it on the surface in the first place - and I am assuming you knew that, but maybe you don't. The full force of a nuke can only be felt if detonated at Alt. Same physics work here on Earth since any ballistic missile will detonate in the sky sending the force of the impact down. I will post models on that shortly if I can find them.

And it makes a huge difference in the models in that when asteroids were considered all completely solid, the nuke model works and it alters course. When the model turns to a lesss dense material such as a giant dirt clod (like my analogy?), the parts simply split into sections and continued more or less on the same course, resulting in multiple impacts. It is kind of like the blast wave simply goes through the object instead of against it.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Here is the optimum burst altitude based on height for a desired PSI - represented by the doted line. This is based on a 1 kt (tiny) nuke explosion - suitcase size. The curves get way more dramatic as the kt gets bigger. Hiroshima was about 20 kt. The Russians have a 100 MT (100,000 times this curve) for comparrison purposes. Not sure if its still in inventory though. The Americans like 300 kt the best I think since they have more 300 kt bombs than any other type.