NASA chooses to get boulder from asteroid rather than an entire redirect

[prophet_01]

A 4m asteroid in lunar orbit will not be visible "for the whole world to see".

I was refering to the original ARM, not this new profile. A 4m boulder is indeed hardly visible and sadly far from the original idea... That boulder isn't nearly as visionary.

edit: about the step towards more missions toward (the m-word). I do think that a medium/long duration mission in deep space with a manned vessel would be beneficial in terms of developing and proving technologies. It's been a while since a human went beyond LEO

Edited March 26, 2015 by prophet_01

[Sampa]

This makes a LOT more sense than trying to move the entire asteroid! fuel efficiency! However, I think NASA should still plan on a redirect mission for the asteroids headed right for Earth (what point is there for grabbing an asteroid boulder when the human race is going to get wiped out before we have a chance to study the boulder?)

[Ralathon]

This makes a LOT more sense than trying to move the entire asteroid! fuel efficiency! However, I think NASA should still plan on a redirect mission for the asteroids headed right for Earth (what point is there for grabbing an asteroid boulder when the human race is going to get wiped out before we have a chance to study the boulder?)

You know what's even more efficient? Just having the probe put the rock in small container with a heat shield and a chute so we can study it on earth!

The entire point behind these missions was to have humans do something cool outside LEO. Rendezvousing with a small pebble and going back home is rather pointless.

Congress should give NASA some proper budget so they can do something useful with Orion: Develop the Altair lander, do a full sized asteroid capture, develop a hab and send humans to a near earth asteroid or something along those lines. Alternatively, I'm leaning towards scrapping the whole Orion program and using those resources for more probes.

[Kebra]

I hope it's filled with valuable minerals, and it will spike an interrest from the private sector to start collecting aswell.

[Dkmdlb]

The ARM mission's sole purpose was to give something for Orion to do.

My first thought when I heard the story! And I haven't even seen that mentioned in any of the stories I've read about this! Now what the expletive are they going to do with SLS and Orion?!?! They have nothing left!

What is going on over there?

[Kibble]

This mission is much closer to the goal of advancing space travel architecture, and sustainable ISRU infrastructure than going right to Mars. If we can mature asteroid redirect techniques and technologies, suddenly space isn't just a big desert you have to trudge thru on giant rockets - there's well-placed oases to help you along a little easier. As long as you have the right probes to extract the useful materiels. Not that NASA is going to try to extract said materials, but the first rockets didn't get onto orbit. They had to mature the technology.

And now that the boulder option was selected I realize the multitude of reasons - larger minor planets are much easier to find than minor planets within the size and mass range the SEP vehicle will nominally move, but still have near-negligible gravity making landing easier. The challenge then is trying to land on top of a boulder, and secure it with the capture mechanism. A big challenge, but likely easier to do than trying to bag it.

[GreenWolf]

Alternatively, I'm leaning towards scrapping the whole Orion program and using those resources for more probes.

This. At the current rate it's going, NASA is never going to send humans anywhere on its own ever again. SLS and Orion should just be nixed, and the money being wasted on them used to fund more deep space probes.

[Kibble]

This. At the current rate it's going, NASA is never going to send humans anywhere on its own ever again. SLS and Orion should just be nixed, and the money being wasted on them used to fund more deep space probes.

That's not how government funding works.

[Ralathon]

This. At the current rate it's going, NASA is never going to send humans anywhere on its own ever again. SLS and Orion should just be nixed, and the money being wasted on them used to fund more deep space probes.

Don't nix the SLS, we need a big payload rocket for heavier probes and long distance missions (Uranus, Neptune etc). But Orion really has no destination in its current state. It can't land on the moon without lander. It can't get to the NE asteroids without some kind of hab. It can't get to Mars without a giant mothership. On it's own it can't really do anything other orbiting the moon.

Either give it some kind of purpose with other parts or stop wasting resources on it... Preferably the former, since it is almost done and I am fully in favor of manned spaceflight. But as is it's the shuttle program all over again: A spaceship robbed of its destination.

[Nibb31]

I hope it's filled with valuable minerals, and it will spike an interrest from the private sector to start collecting aswell.

Even if it's pure gold, 70 tons of it floating around the Moon isn't going to be worth it.

[vger]

At this point, it's so small, they should probably just stick a parachute and heatshield on the rock and land it at Edwards AFB and forget about the Orion part of the mission. It's getting ridiculous.

I hope not. ARM is the only current excuse we MIGHT have for going back to Lunar orbit.

I would like to see some real progress in space exploration as well, but I guess there's a couple of issues with missions like this. First is justification, especially in the light of politics. Science is all nice and well, but what does it cost to redirect that asteroid and what is the resulting benefit? Secondly, this brings us to politics, most politicians have a prime objective and that is re-election. So why fund a project which is years into the future?

Too bad we couldn't do this closer to Shoemaker-Levy 9 - when even conservatives started realizing that Earth was a duck in a shooting gallery. I thought part of ARM was simply proving that we COULD redirect an asteroid, regardless of the science we can get from the rock itself.

My first thought when I heard the story! And I haven't even seen that mentioned in any of the stories I've read about this! Now what the expletive are they going to do with SLS and Orion?!?!

Relax, we'll still need it for places like Europa.

Edited March 26, 2015 by vger

[GreenWolf]

That's not how government funding works.

I know that. No Buck Rogers = No Bucks (as Winchell Chung succinctly puts it). But wouldn't it be nice if it did work like that?

[Robotengineer]

I thought the video was hilarious.

Why is NASA making videos and towing space boulders instead of doing real science and exploration? Why don't we just drop the rock on Earth?

[vger]

Why don't we just drop the rock on Earth?

That's a silly question. Same reason we aren't using nuclear engines in space. Countries get antsy when something is suspended above them that could do nasty damage.

Granted I would think that the "small" rock would be doable without getting a lot of flak. But.. no. Put it in lunar orbit, just so we have to go THERE to look at it. We need to get humans beyond LEO one way or another. If looking at an asteroid is the solution to that, then so be it.

It also makes this more interesting for shared knowledge. I've always felt like there's a bit of subtle carrot-dangling in the plan to put the rock into a lunar orbit. If Russia or China wants a peek, we can say, "Sure. IF you can get to the moon."

Edited March 26, 2015 by vger

[Dkmdlb]

I've always felt like there's a bit of subtle carrot-dangling in the plan to put the rock into a lunar orbit. If Russia or China wants a peek, we can say, "Sure. IF you can get to the moon."

You think a small rock in lunar orbit is tantalizing enough to get one of those countries to build a rocket capable of getting to the moon when the actual moon itself hasn't convinced them yet?

[vger]

You think a small rock in lunar orbit is tantalizing enough to get one of those countries to build a rocket capable of getting to the moon when the actual moon itself hasn't convinced them yet?

Getting into a lunar orbit and back is a LOT easier than landing on the moon and coming back.

[Robotengineer]

That's a silly question. Same reason we aren't using nuclear engines in space. Countries get antsy when something is suspended above them that could do nasty damage.

Granted I would think that the "small" rock would be doable without getting a lot of flak. But.. no. Put it in lunar orbit, just so we have to go THERE to look at it. We need to get humans beyond LEO one way or another. If looking at an asteroid is the solution to that, then so be it.

It also makes this more interesting for shared knowledge. I've always felt like there's a bit of subtle carrot-dangling in the plan to put the rock into a lunar orbit. If Russia or China wants a peek, we can say, "Sure. IF you can get to the moon."

It seems like a waste though to launch a whole SLS-Orion for a rather small sample, when you could a land smaller asteroid, and distribute the samples from that. And why do we need to leave LEO?

[vger]

And why do we need to leave LEO?

Would you be interested in seeing the airlock?

[Robotengineer]

Would you be interested in seeing the airlock?

No. I meant that leaving LEO simply to leave LEO doesn't make sense.

[vger]

No. I meant that leaving LEO simply to leave LEO doesn't make sense.

We need to get used to putting people beyond LEO again in preparation for Mars. ARM accomplishes that, while giving us some extra science to do in the process. It's been a long time since any human has poked around at rocks that aren't on Terra Firma.

[Mitchz95]

We need to be investing into research in centrifugal gravity and radiation shielding. Realistically, I can't see us ever going beyond the moon without those.

[Kryten]

It seems like a waste though to launch a whole SLS-Orion for a rather small sample, when you could a land smaller asteroid, and distribute the samples from that. And why do we need to leave LEO?

We can easily get samples from asteroids that have re-entered already; what we're after are pristine, primordial samples.

[Reddragon]

Wouldn't visiting an asteroid in it's native orbit with Orion make more sense? I know this would require much more, like a deep space habitat and other equipment for sample collecting and else but those technologies are required for Mars missions anyway so they could at least be tested. I'm all for asteroids (and their resources to be mined in the future) but this mission really seems to be a waste of time and money in it's current form.

[Dkmdlb]

Wouldn't visiting an asteroid in it's native orbit with Orion make more sense? I know this would require much more, like a deep space habitat and other equipment for sample collecting and else but those technologies are required for Mars missions anyway

If we have the equipment for going to Mars, we're not going to waste time with asteroids.

[MrZayas1]

Great... Some more downsizing. WOW, why do I have to be so mad at politics and the world all the time? Especially for stupid things like this. We seem to do nothing but set the bar lower and lower for ourselves and it really makes me upset. >