Jump to content

DART: Double Asteroid Redirection Test


Ultimate Steve

Recommended Posts

  On 10/12/2022 at 7:57 PM, magnemoe said:

it generated an comet tail, I say it probably generated a lot of trust pushing out mass from the asteroid. 
I wonder if something like an DU long rod would penetrate deeper even if turned into plasma on contact, or hitting an large area like an shotgun shell as in blowing up the probe like an air burst shell would work better?

Expand  

The difference in impactor mass and target mass are so disparate that it's almost a pure energy analysis, I think. Even with a DU penetrator, the actual penetration depth is going to be significantly smaller than the crater depth.

Given that momentum exchange is not the primary driver, I'd think that relative velocity is more important than impactor mass. Momentum is linear to velocity; energy is quadratic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  On 9/27/2022 at 11:37 PM, tater said:

Only first post in a thread, but it likely contains valuable information as it progresses given the source.

Expand  

 

  On 10/6/2022 at 10:13 PM, tater said:

 

Expand  

The 'streamers' (aka 'Crater Rays') was a big deal after the Dart impact. 

Check this out, from Mars:

221027145036-04-mars-impact-crater-split

Before and after, taken by Mars Recon Orbiter.  Presumed to be the cause of the marsquake detection by InSight last December. 

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/27/world/mars-nasa-meteoroid-impacts-scn/index.html

The article doesn't mention the interesting pattern made by the ejecta - but it does note big (boulder sized) chunks of ice were scattered about - noteworthy b/c of how close it is to the equatorial region. 

See also this 2018 report on 'crater rays' referencing Tycho, among otjers: https://www.astronomy.com/news/2018/08/crater-rays

 

Edited by JoeSchmuckatelli
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

NASA’s DART Data Validates Kinetic Impact as Planetary Defense Method | NASA

 

DART mission more successful than expected

 

"Both Didymos and Dimorphos are more squishy in shape—looking more like peanut butter M&Ms and less like peanut M&Ms—than we expected," Sunshine said. "This shape also challenges some of our preconceptions about how such asteroids form and complicates the physics behind DART because it prompts us to rethink our current models of binary asteroids."

In addition to Dimorphos' irregular shape, the scientists also noticed that the asteroid's surface was noticeably bouldery and blocky. This geomorphic quality likely influenced crater formation, the amount and physical properties of ejecta (debris expelled from impacts), and the momentum of a DART-like impact.

"The Deep Impact mission collided with a comet whose surface is made up of small, mostly uniform grains," Sunshine explained. "Deep Impact resulted in a more uniform fan of debris than the filamentary structures seen after DART's impact into bouldery terrain. As it turns out, the movement of DART-caused ejecta really had a profound effect on the success of DART's mission."

 

The DART spacecraft was not the sole provider of momentum in the impact with Dimorphos; an additional shove was caused by violent spews of debris when the spacecraft slammed into the diminutive asteroid moon.

"There was so much debris ejected from the impact that Dimorphos was pushed approximately 3.5 times more effectively compared to being hit by the DART spacecraft alone,"

New NASA DART data prove viability of asteroid deflection as planetary defense strategy (phys.org)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  On 7/23/2023 at 4:04 PM, steve9728 said:

The cue ball just made a break shot

Expand  

Yes the impactor made an huge crater, large rocks however did not get an high velocity and low velocity dust is carried away by solar wind, its probably also plenty of gravel there to small to see but to large for solar wind to easy push away. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Observations from 20–30 days after the collision are finding Dimorphos's orbital period is 1 minute shorter than originally reported post-impact, which some sources are reporting as a subsequent or continuing change.

  Quote

"We find that no mechanism previously presented for this system can account for this large of a period change, and drag from impact ejecta is an unlikely explanation."

Expand  
  Quote

"Therefore, whatever effect was causing the orbital decay before the collision cannot account for the discrepancy we observe; this includes the binary YORP effect, mutual tides, differential Yarkovsky force, nodal precession, and mass loss."

Expand  

So far I'm finding no indication of peer review having happened yet, so the customary grain of salt should be taken with this news; at least one source reported the margin of error of the original measurement was 2 minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...