Chelyabinsk was missed because of its impact direction. Small objects originating past our orbit are visible to telescopes; even large ones coming from the sun are not.
Making some assumptions about 2024 YR, parallel deflection (altering when it passes Earth's orbit not where) at 40,000 mph (possible with current rockets) would require a 17 ton impactor in 2028. For comparison, the DART impactor was about 1500 lbs and 1/3rd this speed. Completely doable; comparable to the moon missions. We've known how to accelerate and steer such a mass for decades.
It we were to wait until 2031 (6 months before impact) we would be looking at a 13,000 ton impactor -- that's 6 space shuttles. No existing rocket motor pack can maneuver an orbital mass of that size, so it's 2028 or nothing.
Your comment about such a mission pulling us together as a species reminded me of a poli-sci professor I had 30 years ago. We were talking about the possibility of global governance and out of the blue he said, "the only thing that would cause humans to form a global government would be an alien invasion." People overcome differences only in response to an external threat.
The Davos men are already salivating about the prospect of 2024 YR.
So if a planet-killer came at us from the sun, it could take us totally by surprise? That's a pleasant thought.
All that says is that they need to start developing these anti-asteroid weapons now and at least have some on the bench for when they're actually needed. There's no reason not to do this. The risk is much too high, even if the probability is low.
The Davos men are already trying to run the world. I'd say them re-doubling their efforts after we save the planet is a small price to pay, given that most will absolutely not be in favor of global governance.
An ELE sized asteroid (2 km diameter) originating from behind the sun might be visible once it hit the orbit of Mercury. But that gives you ~3 months notice, just long enough to knock a few things off your bucket list and then kiss your ass goodbye.
There actually is a NASA project to do exactly what you're talking about: https://science.nasa.gov/mission/neo-surveyor/ Don't think it has a launch date, but 2024 YR might motivate the space bureaucrats a little.
So the key is to detect it before it goes behind the sun, which is exactly what happened with 2024 YR4. In addition to an anti-asteroid capability, we also need to expand our sky-monitoring capabilities. I don't know if we're at 100% yet, but ideally, we ought to not only have 100% coverage, but also overlapping coverage, since these telescopes are monitored by humans and to err is human.
The insufferable Neil deGrasse Tyson made an emblematically snarky comment the other day about how 2024 YR4 proves it's not time to be defunding science. Yet, I've never seen a concerted attempt by the scientific community to rally, in unison, in favor of an anti-asteroid capability. Probably because they're all off pursuing their own agendas and clout.
Unfortunately it's political human nature to ignore a problem until the very last minute when there is no choice but to deal with it or suffer the consequences.
There's an analogy with the solvency of Social Security: We know what will happen. We know what the damage will be. We know how much time we have until it happens. We know how to prevent it from happening. The sooner we do something the easer it will be fix the problem and the more options we will have for strategy.
And yet...and yet... no politician of either party wants to take any action NOW, because it's not going to happen TODAY.
I don't see any way out of this. We have to hope we draw the 98% card and then we can go back to pretending that asteroids are not a problem unless you're a dinosaur.
On the bright side, if it DOES happen in 2032, whatever's left of civilization will suddenly discover the need to prioritize asteroid defense and claim that we couldn't have known how important it was. So at least there's that, for some future generation.
I don't think we are in the political climate - worldwide - where our leaders will actually respond. Especially, if as you say, three years to prepare is the bare minimum.
There is so much instability in the world. Leadership is reactive and/ or defensive, not responsive. Could our political leaders around the globe sit down and strategically, thoughtfully, corporately put together a solution and implement it? I don't think they will. I'd like to be wrong about this.
Chelyabinsk was missed because of its impact direction. Small objects originating past our orbit are visible to telescopes; even large ones coming from the sun are not.
Making some assumptions about 2024 YR, parallel deflection (altering when it passes Earth's orbit not where) at 40,000 mph (possible with current rockets) would require a 17 ton impactor in 2028. For comparison, the DART impactor was about 1500 lbs and 1/3rd this speed. Completely doable; comparable to the moon missions. We've known how to accelerate and steer such a mass for decades.
It we were to wait until 2031 (6 months before impact) we would be looking at a 13,000 ton impactor -- that's 6 space shuttles. No existing rocket motor pack can maneuver an orbital mass of that size, so it's 2028 or nothing.
https://chatgpt.com/share/67b157f3-d5bc-8008-8ab4-84fde7a521c4 (yes, I checked the basic math and assumptions) I'm weird -- I like orbital mechanics. But I'm not wasting any brain cells worrying about this.
Your comment about such a mission pulling us together as a species reminded me of a poli-sci professor I had 30 years ago. We were talking about the possibility of global governance and out of the blue he said, "the only thing that would cause humans to form a global government would be an alien invasion." People overcome differences only in response to an external threat.
The Davos men are already salivating about the prospect of 2024 YR.
So if a planet-killer came at us from the sun, it could take us totally by surprise? That's a pleasant thought.
All that says is that they need to start developing these anti-asteroid weapons now and at least have some on the bench for when they're actually needed. There's no reason not to do this. The risk is much too high, even if the probability is low.
The Davos men are already trying to run the world. I'd say them re-doubling their efforts after we save the planet is a small price to pay, given that most will absolutely not be in favor of global governance.
An ELE sized asteroid (2 km diameter) originating from behind the sun might be visible once it hit the orbit of Mercury. But that gives you ~3 months notice, just long enough to knock a few things off your bucket list and then kiss your ass goodbye.
There actually is a NASA project to do exactly what you're talking about: https://science.nasa.gov/mission/neo-surveyor/ Don't think it has a launch date, but 2024 YR might motivate the space bureaucrats a little.
So the key is to detect it before it goes behind the sun, which is exactly what happened with 2024 YR4. In addition to an anti-asteroid capability, we also need to expand our sky-monitoring capabilities. I don't know if we're at 100% yet, but ideally, we ought to not only have 100% coverage, but also overlapping coverage, since these telescopes are monitored by humans and to err is human.
The insufferable Neil deGrasse Tyson made an emblematically snarky comment the other day about how 2024 YR4 proves it's not time to be defunding science. Yet, I've never seen a concerted attempt by the scientific community to rally, in unison, in favor of an anti-asteroid capability. Probably because they're all off pursuing their own agendas and clout.
Unfortunately it's political human nature to ignore a problem until the very last minute when there is no choice but to deal with it or suffer the consequences.
There's an analogy with the solvency of Social Security: We know what will happen. We know what the damage will be. We know how much time we have until it happens. We know how to prevent it from happening. The sooner we do something the easer it will be fix the problem and the more options we will have for strategy.
And yet...and yet... no politician of either party wants to take any action NOW, because it's not going to happen TODAY.
I don't see any way out of this. We have to hope we draw the 98% card and then we can go back to pretending that asteroids are not a problem unless you're a dinosaur.
On the bright side, if it DOES happen in 2032, whatever's left of civilization will suddenly discover the need to prioritize asteroid defense and claim that we couldn't have known how important it was. So at least there's that, for some future generation.
I don't think we are in the political climate - worldwide - where our leaders will actually respond. Especially, if as you say, three years to prepare is the bare minimum.
There is so much instability in the world. Leadership is reactive and/ or defensive, not responsive. Could our political leaders around the globe sit down and strategically, thoughtfully, corporately put together a solution and implement it? I don't think they will. I'd like to be wrong about this.
Fascinating article. Something to watch.