Avoid Killer Asteroids: Simple Solution Discovered

[Egret]

I see that rather than address my criticism, you are attempting to deflect it by objecting to my wording. So back to the question --- who DO you think would pay for all that stuff you mentioned?

Maybe if you want your criticism addressed you should prune unnecessary attacks from it.

 

[Damo ET]

Exactly, so instead of one Saturn V, we need to figure out a way to launch 200 Saturn Vs and land them all with fuel still there on the Asteroid.

Makes this even less feasible.

Of course, there is always the nuclear option, if you vaporize part of the asteroid, the gas expelled kicks the rest of it back. In this case, the goal would be to maximize volume of material expelled to maximize the momentum change.

Blowing up asteroids is not an option, we are far better off trying to deflect one 1km object than dealing with the newly created 50+ 250mtr objects!
As for pushing it away with a rocket, that is hard to do with a spinning object.
The best way, (if we have the lead time) would be to gravitationally tow it to a new orbit/trajectory which will miss us. We could even try to tow it to a le grange point so it could be mined in the future, (mind you, that would take some doing).Damo

 

[mfb]

Blowing up asteroids is not an option, we are far better off trying to deflect one 1km object than dealing with the newly created 50+ 250mtr objects!

It depends on the size - blowing up a 20m asteroid into hundreds of 2m asteroids would be fine.

As for pushing it away with a rocket, that is hard to do with a spinning object.

Usually the rotation is slow - if it rotates once in a few hours, you can account for that.

 

[Damo ET]

It depends on the size - blowing up a 20m asteroid into hundreds of 2m asteroids would be fine.

True, but why would 'we' bother blowing up something as small as 20mtrs when:
a, we aren't going to see it if it a rocky/iron object that size till we get hit
b, if it is icy and visible, it is going to vaporize high in the atmosphere an at most scare a few fish with the bright flash.

Blowing them up isn't a sensible option.


Damo

 

[mfb]

The Chelyabinsk meteor this year had an estimated diameter of 20m and a kinetic energy of ~500kT. Have such an object explode over a city, and you don't get away with 1500 injured people.
If you like bigger threats, fine. As long as the products of the explosion are too small to be problematic, a big nuke is an option.

 

[tinypositrons]

An asteroid has a lot of mass and probably a lot of velocity. If you know a rocket that can get to said asteroid, and still have the delta velocity available to push an asteroid out of orbit, give NASA a ring!

 

[Rudolf]

Perhaps you've heard about the project channel Discovery "Day of the asteroid." They are asked to send methods of protection from asteroids, but I decided to write to you. It's strange, but nobody even discusses this method deviations, even very large stones. Blowing them with nuclear weapons may not be effective or even harmful. But a series of nuclear explosions near the trajectory of the asteroid at a distance of action of blast waves, on the side opposite to the desired direction of change in its trajectory, can really solve the problem. Nuclear weapons we have a lot on Earth. Certainly it needs to check the trajectory of the asteroid, after each explosion to adjust the position of the next explosion.
Questions. Where is he now? Can we reach it? What is the accuracy of hitting a given point? How fast can we find out if he strayed and how much?