Small asteroid misses Earth by only four thousand miles

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:40:23 -0700, Hop David wrote:
/cut

However if your arguments consist only of this C.R.A.N.K. b.s., you have
no chance of persuading me. I'll just assume you're an obnoxious idiot.

Hm. That's not a very nice assumption, especially since I said nothing of
this sort to you. I simply noticed that in Lou Scheffer's comic post (and
to whom I replied, not you) he used the name "Citizens for Regulation of
Asteroid/Nuclear Katastrophes" which abbreviates to C.R.A.N.K.

I thought that was kind of funny to point out (Lou probably intended it to
sound this way), but I guess I was wrong...

--
The butler did it.

Ugo wrote:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:40:23 -0700, Hop David wrote:
/cut


However if your arguments consist only of this C.R.A.N.K. b.s., you have
no chance of persuading me. I'll just assume you're an obnoxious idiot.


Hm. That's not a very nice assumption, especially since I said nothing of
this sort to you. I simply noticed that in Lou Scheffer's comic post (and
to whom I replied, not you) he used the name "Citizens for Regulation of
Asteroid/Nuclear Katastrophes" which abbreviates to C.R.A.N.K.

I thought that was kind of funny to point out (Lou probably intended it to
sound this way), but I guess I was wrong...


Well then, I guess I snapped at you for no reason. Sorry about that.
--
Hop David
http://clowder.net/hop/index.html

On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:43:35 -0700, Hop David wrote:
I simply noticed that in Lou Scheffer's comic post (and
to whom I replied, not you) he used the name "Citizens for Regulation of
Asteroid/Nuclear Katastrophes" which abbreviates to C.R.A.N.K.

I thought that was kind of funny to point out (Lou probably intended it to
sound this way), but I guess I was wrong...


Well then, I guess I snapped at you for no reason. Sorry about that.

No problem. Honest mistakes happen...

--
The butler did it.

Henry Spencer wrote:


(There is some possibility, depending on exactly when attitude control was
lost and when the solar array broke off, that MCO -- somewhat damaged and
minus its solar array -- might have survived its atmosphere pass to make
one orbit of Mars. However, that orbit would have had a perigee so low
that there wouldn't have been a *second* orbit.)

"perigee"?
"periares"?
"periplanet"?
"peri???"

There are different terms for Earth/Moon/Sun,
is there one for each planet or for planets in general?

Tom Clarke

On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 16:55:18 -0400, in a place far, far away, Tom
Clarke made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

(There is some possibility, depending on exactly when attitude control was
lost and when the solar array broke off, that MCO -- somewhat damaged and
minus its solar array -- might have survived its atmosphere pass to make
one orbit of Mars. However, that orbit would have had a perigee so low
that there wouldn't have been a *second* orbit.)

"perigee"?
"periares"?
"periplanet"?
"peri???"

There are different terms for Earth/Moon/Sun,
is there one for each planet or for planets in general?

Periapsis. For Mars, it is periares.

Tom Clarke wrote:
Henry Spencer wrote:



(There is some possibility, depending on exactly when attitude control was
lost and when the solar array broke off, that MCO -- somewhat damaged and
minus its solar array -- might have survived its atmosphere pass to make
one orbit of Mars. However, that orbit would have had a perigee so low
that there wouldn't have been a *second* orbit.)


"perigee"?
"periares"?
"periplanet"?
"peri???"

There are different terms for Earth/Moon/Sun,
is there one for each planet or for planets in general?

Tom Clarke



Periapsis is the general term.

But it seems common usage is making perigee synonymous with periapsis.
Some other words with apparently the same root being used in a more
general fashion: geology, geosynchronous, geography, etc.


--
Hop David
http://clowder.net/hop/index.html

"Tom Clarke" wrote in message
...

"perigee"?
"periares"?
"periplanet"?
"peri???"

There are different terms for Earth/Moon/Sun,
is there one for each planet or for planets in general?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periapsis

Rand Simberg wrote:

On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 16:55:18 -0400, in a place far, far away, Tom
Clarke made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

[snip]

"perigee"?
"periares"?
"periplanet"?
"peri???"

There are different terms for Earth/Moon/Sun,
is there one for each planet or for planets in general?

Periapsis. For Mars, it is periares.

Do you have a cite for the latter? It doesn't appear well formed to
me: cf. "periastron" (not "periaster") and "perihelion" (not
"perihelios"). I don't think I've seen a corresponding term for Mars
used, but by analogy I'd expect it to be "periareion", or perhaps "periarene".

--
Odysseus

On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 02:33:57 GMT, in a place far, far away, Odysseus
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

There are different terms for Earth/Moon/Sun,
is there one for each planet or for planets in general?

Periapsis. For Mars, it is periares.

Do you have a cite for the latter?

No, just many memories of JPLers using the term.

From: "redneckj"
Sounds like an ideal type body for asteroid material return.
300-1,000 tons of material if you can figure a capture to orbit
method.

The problem with such an object all by itself is that you don't
discover it until it's already whipping by, too late to change its
trajectory into capture, and it's so small you can never find it again.
But with a boulder dislodged from 433 Eros or similar asteroid, you can
find it easily and have plenty of time to plan nudging it into a
capture trajectory. How about this idea: Nudge it into a trajectory
that comes up from behind Luna and then loops around ahead of Luna
getting an anti-assist into capture orbit. After a few months it'll be
in the right phase with respect to Luna's orbit to pass too close to
Luna and be dislodged from that capture orbit, so during that time you
nudge it to such an orbit that it never gets close to Luna for years.
Maybe during the initial anti-assist, have it pass ahead and to the
side of Luna, putting it into an orbit that is seriously non-coplanar
with Luna's orbit, then it'll be relatively easy to nudge that orbit to
never get close to Luna's orbit at all so phase with respect to Luna's
position in orbit becomes irrelevant. The only problem with that idea
is that it's far from an equatorial orbit around Earth, so it takes
more energy to rendezvous with it to mine it. But if the boulder's
orbital plane is the same as ISS, then this may not be a real problem
given we're going to ISS anyway from non-equatorial launch sites.