Plan for human mission to asteroid gains speed

[Neil]

It took them nearly 2,000 years to get that down.  Humanity doesn't have 2,000 years to figure out how to work asteroids.

We're getting better at getting better.

In some areas.  In spaceflight, we've remained rather static since the late 1960s.  When it comes to consumer electronics, we've come a long way.  When it comes to propulsion techniques and their applications, it's still 1968.

[jimmy olsen]

It took them nearly 2,000 years to get that down.  Humanity doesn't have 2,000 years to figure out how to work asteroids.

We're getting better at getting better.

In some areas.  In spaceflight, we've remained rather static since the late 1960s.  When it comes to consumer electronics, we've come a long way.  When it comes to propulsion techniques and their applications, it's still 1968.

1968 nuclear propulsion is good enough, we're just too cheap and behold to alarmists to build it.

[Neil]

1968 nuclear propulsion is good enough, we're just too cheap and behold to alarmists to build it.

More the first than the second.  There is no country with both money and leadership to engage in such an undertaking.

[DontSayBanana]

Neil, you're trying so hard to sound academic, you're missing an obvious point: we can blow shit up to tug quantities of certain materials not occurring on Earth.  Drag it to the atmosphere, slap some heat shielding on it, and fish it out of the water when it splashes down.

[Tonitrus]

Neil, you're trying so hard to sound academic, you're missing an obvious point: we can blow shit up to tug quantities of certain materials not occurring on Earth.  Drag it to the atmosphere, slap some heat shielding on it, and fish it out of the water when it splashes down.

And if there is a small miscalculation in orbital entry; goodbye Albuquerque.

[Neil]

Neil, you're trying so hard to sound academic, you're missing an obvious point: we can blow shit up to tug quantities of certain materials not occurring on Earth.  Drag it to the atmosphere, slap some heat shielding on it, and fish it out of the water when it splashes down.

I'm arguing from a practical standpoint.  While you could do something similar to that (although dynamiting asteroids in space is problematic because you have to chase down the ejecta, and launching mass at the Earth is dangerous), we won't.

[DontSayBanana]

And if there is a small miscalculation in orbital entry; goodbye Albuquerque.

That didn't stop us from slinging pretty frikkin' big Apollo capsules.  And do I need to say the words "Skylab" and "Australia?"

[Tonitrus]

An asteroid, even a modest chunk of one, is probably far worse than any flimsy human contraption (unless it's loaded with lots of nuclear crap).

And while an asteroid chunk may have lots of nice metals on it, the overhead costs in terms of prepping it up in space, and then retrieval from the ocean floor, probably make it, as Neil said, financially unsound.  Unless spacelift costs come down exponentially. 

And that will probably never happen unless we learn to manipulate gravity.  Which will probably never happen.

[Neil]

And if there is a small miscalculation in orbital entry; goodbye Albuquerque.

That didn't stop us from slinging pretty frikkin' big Apollo capsules.  And do I need to say the words "Skylab" and "Australia?"

The Apollo capsules massed virtually nothing.  Large chunks of ore mass significantly more.

Besides, bringing Skylab down deliberately into Australia and launching much larger masses at the Earth from far away are totally different.

[Neil]

An asteroid, even a modest chunk of one, is probably far worse than any flimsy human contraption (unless it's loaded with lots of nuclear crap).

And while an asteroid chunk may have lots of nice metals on it, the overhead costs in terms of prepping it up in space, and then retrieval from the ocean floor, probably make it, as Neil said, financially unsound.  Unless spacelift costs come down exponentially. 

And that will probably never happen unless we learn to manipulate gravity.  Which will probably never happen.

And how do you get it there in a reasonable amount of time?

[jimmy olsen]

Jetspacks! Squee!

http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2009-11/manned-mission-asteroid-could-be-stepping-stone-mars?page=

Gearing Up for Manned Mission To An Asteroid
The Plymouth Rock project could be a stepping stone to Mars
By Clay Dillow Posted 11.24.2009 at 2:17 pm 3 Comments

Orion, Coupled For Asteroid Mission Lockheed Martin is studying the feasibility of a manned mission to an asteroid employing two Orion spacecraft connected at the nose. Lockheed Martin

Cue the Aerosmith soundtrack; a plan to send a manned space mission to land on an asteroid is gaining traction within both NASA and the aerospace industry as experts look to bridge the feasibility gap between lunar missions and an eventual rendezvous with Mars. Of course, no party is ruling out the possibility of an Armageddon-esque trip to a Near Earth Object (NEO) on a harmful trajectory, should the need arise in the future.

While neither NASA or the White House has signed off on -- or even offered funding to study -- such a mission, briefing charts put together by Lockheed Martin, maker of the space agency's next-gen passenger spacecraft, detail how a mission might work. It's not as far-fetched, or far away, as one might think, with a mission to an NEO possible in a 2020-2025 time frame.

In Lockheed's scenario, aptly titled "Plymouth Rock," a two-person Orion craft would hook up with an unpiloted sister craft loaded with extra water, oxygen and other supplies. Orion would not land on the NEO itself, but would post up nearby while astronauts use jet backpacks to reach the object's surface. That's right: jetpacks.

Once there, scientists could gather compositions samples of the rock and set up other scientific equipment that could be left behind on the NEO. That information would be extremely valuable to science, not to mention give scientists the upper hand should a worrisome rock ever come hurtling directly toward earth.

Right now it's only an idea on a briefing board, but both NASA and aerospace industry wonks feel like the mission is not only feasible, but could offer invaluable experience as a stepping stone between current low earth orbit excursions and forays deeper into space.

Did we mention there will be jetpacks?

[Tonitrus]

While neither NASA or the White House has signed off on -- or even offered funding to study -- such a mission, briefing charts put together by Lockheed Martin, maker of the space agency's next-gen passenger spacecraft, detail how a mission might work.

There's the key. 

Without that, all these "projects", and the recycled "ZOMG, WE WILL GO TO MARS/MOON/ASTEROID/VULCAN BY 20-WHATEVER" that we get every few years, are just fodder for space-geek porn.

And, of course, Lockheed-Martin trying to get more milk out of the government teat to "study" something they probably know they won't have to actually build for quite some time...if ever.

[jimmy olsen]

While neither NASA or the White House has signed off on -- or even offered funding to study -- such a mission, briefing charts put together by Lockheed Martin, maker of the space agency's next-gen passenger spacecraft, detail how a mission might work.

There's the key. 

Without that, all these "projects", and the recycled "ZOMG, WE WILL GO TO MARS/MOON/ASTEROID/VULCAN BY 20-WHATEVER" that we get every few years, are just fodder for space-geek porn.

And, of course, Lockheed-Martin trying to get more milk out of the government teat to "study" something they probably know they won't have to actually build for quite some time...if ever.

They've already been contracted to build the Orion space capsule. There's not much else that needs to be built for a simple mission like that.

[Alatriste]

While neither NASA or the White House has signed off on -- or even offered funding to study -- such a mission, briefing charts put together by Lockheed Martin, maker of the space agency's next-gen passenger spacecraft, detail how a mission might work.

There's the key. 

Without that, all these "projects", and the recycled "ZOMG, WE WILL GO TO MARS/MOON/ASTEROID/VULCAN BY 20-WHATEVER" that we get every few years, are just fodder for space-geek porn.

And, of course, Lockheed-Martin trying to get more milk out of the government teat to "study" something they probably know they won't have to actually build for quite some time...if ever.

They've already been contracted to build the Orion space capsule. There's not much else that needs to be built for a simple mission like that.

Simple? There is nothing simple in that mission... Near Earth Objects are closer to us but that doesn't necessarily mean less Delta V or shorter missions

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/838/1

In fact, about the only real advantage is, such a mission would be relatively cheap because it doesn't need a dedicated lander. However, if the reason is not flag waving but preventing asteroidal impacts, there are about one gazillion better ways to spend money.

And regarding asteroid mining, it only makes sense if the metals, water, amoniac, etc, mined are to be employed in space, making it a circular argument, i.e. we should have a space program to mine asteroids to get metals and water for our space program. From an economic point of view there is no way they could compete with Earth's products.


(NEO, I guess someone has a twisted sense of humor... now, I vote to christen the mission 'Nebuchadnezzar' and the modules 'Morpheus' and 'Trinity')

[Jaron]

We have shit to take care of on Earth first.