[FPSPACE] NASA and NEOs[Scanned by MAIL]

[Matula, Thomas L.]

Jens,

First the a nuclear device is not the best option and should not be considered first as modeling using the programs Sandia Labs developed for predicting the effects of nuclear devices has shown. 

Second, both the Limited Test Ban and COmprehensive Test Ban Treaties outlawed the use of nuclear devices in space, even if for NEO defense. Yes, such is the measure of irrational fear folks have of the N-word. Pity as nuclear devices have many valuable applications in geoengineering in space as Project Gnome showed on Earth. 

So your use of nuclear devices is a red herring. The key is that the U.S. Air Force has been ahead of NASA at every turn in regards to recognizing and addressing the NEO issue, despite it not being their mission offically... 

Indeed if the U.S. Air Force has been given the mission in the 1990's, instead of NASA, the catalog of PHO's would be complete today, the detection system for long period comets in place and first NEO practice mission whould have already been conducted. Again while NASA studies the problem the U.S. Air Force is waiting to deal with it.

Tom


-----Original Message-----
From: Jens Kieffer-Olsen [mailto:dstdba at post4.tele.dk]
Sent: Sun 4/8/2007 12:38 AM
To: Matula, Thomas L.; FPSPACE at friends-partners.org
Subject: RE: NASA and NEOs[Scanned by MAIL]
 

 -----Original Message-----
 From: Matula, Thomas L. [mailto:MATULAT at uhv.edu] 
 Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2007 1:06 AM
 
> Jens,
> 
> One reason to practice with a NEO with zero chance of hitting 
> the Earth is if you mess up you don't waste the Earth. If you 
> use a PHO as your practice mission you might just mess up and 
> hit the Earth. Sure the risk is small, but I prefer it to be zero.
> 
> Tom 

 I entirely agree with you, Tom, that the Air Force should
 hold back from doing the real thing, if their raison-d'être
 for being in the game is to channel nuclear devices into
 outer space under the pretext of practicing PHO deflection.

 But an early deflection attempt by NASA would under no
 circumstances be destructive, and as long as the object
 stands no risk of fragmenting into more objects there is
 no risk of worsening odds. 

 Entirely harmless for example is the 'tractor' solution.
 In fact, I could imagine a 'tractor' mission soon after
 2030 as a proof-of-concept.

--
Jens Kieffer-Olsen
Slagelse, Denmark