-
#20 by JohnFornaro on 06 Apr, 2013 13:29
-
From the illustration on the AvWeek article:
It's somewhat comforting emotionally, but obviously not financially, that the bucket design is conforming to my design for a multipurpose UDH....I did notice that their asteroid bucket is similar in design to my UDH: Unpressurized Deployable Hangar...
The AP:
"The government document describing the mission said it would inspire because it 'will send humans farther than they have ever been before.'"
The government will say anything, even if it's not inspirational. -
#21 by JohnFornaro on 06 Apr, 2013 13:35
-
I might get some negative response to this post but...
To me, this project (no matter how plausible in engineering terms and potentially useful in scientific terms) represents a surrender of the future of HSF. There will be no BEO, probably not in any of our lifetimes, unless Inspiration Mars somehow hits their target launch date.
Not from me you won't.
There is no intention of the government to implement a permanent human presence in space beyond LEO, much less even promote it. Every time, these days, they trot out the code term "inspiration", get ready for another disappointment in HSF. -
#22 by ChileVerde on 06 Apr, 2013 13:45
-
A few rearranged snippets from this morning's Washington PostQuote
http://tinyurl.com/d7rexk6
President Obama wants NASA to grab an asteroid, send astronauts to study it
By Brian Vastag, Published: April 5 [2013]
The Washington Post
Under the plan, an Atlas V rocket would launch the robotic craft toward a 20- to 30-foot-wide asteroid. Upon arrival, the craft would deploy a big bag, stuff the asteroid into it and start motoring toward the moon. The Space Launch System and Orion would later deliver the human crew.
The asteroid-capturing robot could launch as soon as 2017, with astronauts flying to meet it near the moon by 2021, according to a NASA briefing presented to Congress last week.
Crews visiting the captured asteroid could conduct experiments in extracting water, oxygen, metals and silicon, all valuable materials that would help future astronauts “live off the land” during long missions.
By this summer, NASA is to decide whether the project is feasible, according to agency documents.
The president’s request includes $78 million for NASA to develop technologies for the project and $27 million for beefing up the agency’s asteroid-detection work. The mission would fulfill a goal Obama set three years ago to send astronauts to an asteroid.
On Friday, Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), a big NASA booster, championed the project, saying it “combines the science of mining an asteroid, along with developing ways to deflect one, along with providing a place to develop ways we can go to Mars.” -
#23 by JohnFornaro on 06 Apr, 2013 13:59
-
Looking for promised funding instability? Here ya go:Quote from: WaPo
By this summer, NASA is to decide whether the project is feasible, according to agency documents.
Plus, in the future, looking back to today, you also get plausible deniability. "See? even then, we warned the taxpayer that it might not fly." -
#24 by JohnFornaro on 06 Apr, 2013 15:14
-
Oh my garnet.
The WaPo, my favorite newspaper, continuing to spout the official line without analysis or thought.
Headline:
President Obama wants NASA to grab an asteroid, send astronauts to study it
By Brian Vastag,
Apr 05, 2013 10:53 PM EDT
********************************
The asteroid mission has been arbitrarily chosen by President Obama, in his speech on 04-15-10, where he denigrated a return to Luna under the false logic of "Been There, Done That".
Mr. Vastag technically reports accurately when he writes that this mission would "fulfill a goal Obama set three years ago". This is a continuing characteristic of journalism, not solely restricted to the WaPo. The journalist accepts the authoritarian goal without question, and holds up the promised fulfillment of that goal as a worthy accomplishment.
Mr. Bolden has asserted, "I can’t tell you which asteroid, but there will be one in 2025". This is a case where they literally draw the bullseye, which would be the "bag" that they propose to send, around the target that they hit, and then proudly state that it was their intended target. They literally, from the NASA Administrator on down, have no idea where they're going, but they insist that they know what they're doing.
A citizen with more than a sixth grade education would ask, "Why capture an asteroid"? NASA's answer is, according to this journalist, "In order to extract water, oxygen, metals, and silicon". Mr. Vastag completely accepts this authoritarian implication, that these minerals are only to be found on an asteroid and that it would take ten years to even bring them back. He has no idea that every last mineral he specifically mentions is available about four days travel away, at the lunar poles. If humans ever want to "live off the land", while also being off planet, they had better practice on Luna, the original "harsh mistress".
Mr. Vastag mentions the "optimistic" budget numbers in the Keck study, about $2.6B, but he has not read the study with an analytical mind. It is far more likely that the asteroid mission' budgeting profile will resemble the James Webb Space Telescope budgeting profile, because of the unstated complexity involved in it. JWST was originally budgeted at $500M, and now expected to cost over $8.8B. It is still not ready for flight. At this rate, the asteroid mission should cost about $46B, with no assurance that it could fly either.
The asteroid mission is a red herring offered by the Administration, seemingly intended to divide the space enthusiasts in the country, in order to keep them from calling for a polar lunar base, which would begin developing a new off-planet economy, and possibly more.
**********************************
The Keck study:
http://www.kiss.caltech.edu/study/asteroid/asteroid_final_report.pdf
WaPo article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/president-obama-to-direct-nasa-to-grab-an-asteroid-send-astronauts/2013/04/05/02aa0a60-9e2a-11e2-a941-a19bce7af755_story.html -
#25 by Robotbeat on 06 Apr, 2013 15:29
-
Not surprised the Moon huggers hate it.
-
#26 by Proponent on 06 Apr, 2013 15:37
-
It's now boiled down to a desperate attempt to find some justification, any justification, for SLS in the near term (before 2030) without having to appropriate billions for payloads that the cost of the rocket development simply won't allow.
I couldn't agree more.
The robotic part of this project is actually kind of cool, but it has nothing at all to do with SLS. -
#27 by Robotbeat on 06 Apr, 2013 16:08
-
This plan beats the hell out of just a stunt to high lunar orbit. If we're going to have SLS, let's use it for something awesome like this.
-
#28 by Khadgars on 06 Apr, 2013 17:58
-
I was looking and surprised no one has mentioned this yet, even though I know its come up before but looks like we have the beginnings of an official roadmap with capturing a small asteroid and bringing it to the moon and visit it by 2021.
What are your thoughts on such a mission? -
#29 by rdale on 06 Apr, 2013 18:41
-
It's been heavily mentioned
Do a quick perusal of the other threads.
-
#30 by Archibald on 06 Apr, 2013 19:18
-
It could be said that NASA, for good and worse, and per lack of convenient destination, just try and create one !!!
(lack of convenient destination = L2 is an empty place, asteroids are one-shot deal far in the future, Moon has already been done, Mars is too far away and Venus a hell hole)
Or perhaps this an atempt at making the goal fixed by Obama (asteroid by 2025) a little more easy, to fulfill that goal more rapidly... and then ask for something more interesting !
-
#31 by MP99 on 06 Apr, 2013 19:49
-
I might get some negative response to this post but...
Okay, there is no reason why this isn't hypothetically doable and I think it should be executable in practice. My real objection is that this represents an abandonment of deep space flight. It's a tacit admission that it is too difficult and costly to build DSH and fly it to any target, so they've got to fly the target to the Earth/Moon system.
I had the same reaction (see above) when the suggestion was that this would take place instead of a deep-space mission in 2025.
The latest seems to be that the 2021 date for EM-2 would be maintained, but that this would be waiting for them at EML-2 when they get there. You'd also assume this would give some advance info (pics, at least) to give the crew some advance warning for what they'll encounter.
Question is whether this would cause knock-on delays.Those who have supported the NEA and Phobos missions have done so on the grounds that "we have already been there" (to the Moon). Their argument is often that NASA needs to push on to further boundaries and leave the Moon to others now that the technical issues of getting there are more-or-less resolved. What this new plan really amounts to is an abandonment of Flexible Path and, IMHO at least, any illusion of Mars being the goal of SLS. It's now boiled down to a desperate attempt to find some justification, any justification, for SLS in the near term (before 2030) without having to appropriate billions for payloads that the cost of the rocket development simply won't allow.
To me, this project (no matter how plausible in engineering terms and potentially useful in scientific terms) represents a surrender of the future of HSF. There will be no BEO, probably not in any of our lifetimes, unless Inspiration Mars somehow hits their target launch date.
Question is whether this would steal budget that would be used to prepare for a mid-decade in-place-NEO mission. (I could see how it would, including additional missions to the target, but...)
cheers, Martin -
#32 by alexterrell on 06 Apr, 2013 20:06
-
Do you mean this one:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2013/apr/06/nasa-lasso-asteroid-rodeo-research
I can't find this in the latest couple of threads here.QuoteThe cash will be used to find a suitable small asteroid – currently expected to be around 25ft and weight 500 tons. As it stands, the mission would use a robotically-controlled spacecraft to approach the asteroid, attach a large version of a "baggie with a draw string", and then drag the captured rock back to near Earth.
500 tons is still a monster for this. -
#33 by Khadgars on 06 Apr, 2013 20:08
-
Do you mean this one:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2013/apr/06/nasa-lasso-asteroid-rodeo-research
I can't find this in the latest couple of threads here.QuoteThe cash will be used to find a suitable small asteroid – currently expected to be around 25ft and weight 500 tons. As it stands, the mission would use a robotically-controlled spacecraft to approach the asteroid, attach a large version of a "baggie with a draw string", and then drag the captured rock back to near Earth.
500 tons is still a monster for this.
Ya thats what I was referring too. -
#34 by yg1968 on 06 Apr, 2013 20:18
-
This plan beats the hell out of just a stunt to high lunar orbit. If we're going to have SLS, let's use it for something awesome like this.
Ironically enough, the spacecraft would be launched on an Atlas V 551.
I like the fact that the spacecraft will be using SEP. -
#35 by yg1968 on 06 Apr, 2013 20:38
-
#36 by alexterrell on 06 Apr, 2013 20:40
-
#37 by ChileVerde on 06 Apr, 2013 20:43
-
A question about the asteroid at EML2:
EML2 is a point of unstable equilibrium in the along-orbit direction, though IIRC the delta-V needed to keep things there is like 100 m/sec/year, aka a foot per second per day. Can the SEP module that brought the rock to L2 provide this, could something else, or is it too long-term a problem to worry about? -
#38 by alexterrell on 06 Apr, 2013 20:50
-
Taking on board the negative views ... but, this could be useful, IF something is then done with the 500 ton rock.
It could provide enough shielding mass to enable a Bigelow BA-2100 type moduel to be place at L2.
It might provide enough volatiles to fuel a Mars mission.
Or it might be allowed to drift around until finally used by the Chinese or (Not so-) Deep Space Industries.
-
#39 by Bubbinski on 06 Apr, 2013 21:16
-
I'm conflicted.
On one hand I like the idea of learning how to move asteroids around, and being able to demonstrate bringing them to the earth-moon neighborhood for future mining. I suppose we could also use this technology to move a future Chelyabinsk explosion type rock away from earth. (Or toward it if in the wrong hands!)
But as far as moving a very small asteroid toward lunar orbit and making it meet the goal of landing on an asteroid by 2025? I'm not inspired by this. I'd much rather send an Orion w/crew out there to a bigger asteroid out there, we could start flying people out of the earth-moon system with that type of mission. And I'd much rather spend the $2.6B or whatever on something that would detect all asteroids in our neighborhood, then find a suitable target(s) to fly people to.
Do a quick perusal of the other threads.