Comments on: NEO policy

By: Matthew Brown

Matthew Brown — Mon, 06 Jun 2005 17:21:20 +0000

The Idea of using Asteroids as Cyclers would be about as populer politicaly as nukes in space. “You mean you want us to have a near miss every 26 months with something that wiped out the dinosaurs?”

It will be a tough battle, we need to think of begining that battle now while we are working on the tech to make it feasible.

I for one love the idea, also would like to park asteroids in orbit to mine, manufacture products and ship back to earth. (SOme time around 2045 would be good)

And as the asteroids are mined out we can turn them into space stations. But conviencing that they will be safe after we been trying to increase funding for tracking them. Its gonna be a tough sell, to the average person who doesn’t understand gravity.

By: Michael Mealling

Michael Mealling — Thu, 02 Jun 2005 20:20:00 +0000

Why do we have to view them as things to blow up or send away? An interplanetary space station with in situ resources that comes by the earth every few years to drop off products and pick up supplies sounds like a great formula for a commercial success! Let’s not sick the military on it. Let’s give it to the BLM and tell them to find a way to keep in a useful, stable orbit so we can mine the suckers…

By: Brent

Brent — Thu, 02 Jun 2005 14:28:25 +0000

Potentially civilization ending NEO’s I think are a much bigger national security threat than Nazis/Communists/favorite bad guy. That NEO’s are “natural” doesn’t make them any less an enemy.

Also, the idea that the military’s role is only to kill other militaries is not really a traditional idea. A few years back it was the army and navy that were explorers. The navy made maps everywhere and launched numerous scientific expeditions to the poles and Pacific. The army surveyed the interior. Guardsmen routinely are called in to handle natural disasters. And the Army Corps of Engineers are soldiers too. That the military is here only to “kill people and break things” seems a pale and vaguely antagonistic way of describing the historical importance of a military and its role in society.

NASA has big scientist types and, in the mind of the ignorant John and Jane Q Public, the monopoly on national space expertise. In the NEO world, and indeed the entire space surveillance and cataloguing mission, NASA relies almost totally on Space Command assets and personnel. Believe me, Space Command has some of the best astrodynamicists and space smart people on the planet.

By: Rand Simberg

Rand Simberg — Thu, 02 Jun 2005 01:44:43 +0000

Nope. This is management of nature, not defense against hostile forces, which is what the traditional military does. Traditionally, the Army Corps of Engineers has taken care of problems like this (e.g., building dams to protect floodplains, etc.). They’d do as good a job with it as NASA or the Air Force, at least based on past performance…

By: Brent

Brent — Thu, 02 Jun 2005 00:09:35 +0000

Well, guess I should have clicked the hyperlink, huh?

The only worthwhile agency would be the United States Space Force, with planetary defense as a mission. An agency without a mission that might not be needed for 50,000 years won’t last long on the chopping block. Besides, what good is a new agency if it cannibalizes NASA and DOD personnel and equipment. I’d rather make it an office under NASA than an entire federal agency encompassing one random dude in a broom closet.

By: Brent

Brent — Thu, 02 Jun 2005 00:03:21 +0000

I don’t think Congressman Dana (that R words just too hard!) is looking for a new agency, but which agency should be given the NEO mission (NASA vs DOD/USAF, etc..)

I’d like the USAF to get the mission personally. Planetary defense is a much more inspiring mission than making sure GPS beeps well.

By: cIclops

cIclops — Wed, 01 Jun 2005 19:38:12 +0000

NEOs could be a growth industry. Schweickart will need more of those tracking beacons as there are now two more "potentially-hazardous" objects on the impact risk list, maybe he can negotiate a volume discount for the new agency.

By: Dan Schrimpsher: Space Pragmatism Blogger

Dan Schrimpsher: Space Pragmatism Blogger — Wed, 01 Jun 2005 15:22:26 +0000

Seems kinsof odd that Rep Rohrabacher would support a new agency, but not the tracking of an actual threat. I guess it depends on how much of a threat he believes it is. Interesting enough, I wrote on the subject of a NEO agency this morning after reading wireds article.