Page 1 of 1 |
[ 13 posts ] |
debris prevention prize
Author | Message |
---|---|
Moderator ![]() ![]()
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745 Location: Hamburg, Germany ![]() |
An article of www.welt.de is speaking of a net or web to catch rocket-sized debris and calls for regulatory measures to prevent further increase of the amount of orbital debris.
What about a Centennial Challenges Prize for a that net or web? The article didn't say anything about participation of NASA in a debris conference the article is reporting about but such a prize could be quite a better regulatory idea than everything else perhaps because it's a positive incentive. The article is mentioning tethers for deceleration of rockets too but for a prize I would prefer the web... Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist) |
Back to top |
![]() |
Spaceflight Participant ![]() ![]()
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:57 am
Posts: 82 Location: PA,USA ![]() |
BUMMER
![]() And I have all ready posted the simple solution at http://www.space-talk.com/ForumE/showthread.php3?threadid=3172&pagenumber=2 |
Back to top |
![]() |
Moderator ![]() ![]()
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745 Location: Hamburg, Germany ![]() |
I am not sure if we are talking about the same problem. I understand the post you are linking to as if you are talking about the debris at the launch of Discovery - do I understand correct? What I had in mind in my post is orbital debris.
Regarding the launch of Space Shuttle I assist your idea. Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist) |
Back to top |
![]() |
Spaceflight Participant ![]() ![]()
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:57 am
Posts: 82 Location: PA,USA ![]() |
Your right my mistake.
![]() |
Back to top |
![]() |
Moderator ![]() ![]()
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745 Location: Hamburg, Germany ![]() |
You didn't a mistake - the term debris is a general term which I a long time didn't know to be used for pieces falling off during launch too. And there is the term "space junk" too.
May be that the term requires deaggregation into orbital debris, launch debris and interplanetary debris if there are significant differences between them. This seems to be the case regarding their speed, direction of movement and objects in danger to be impacted. To this I would add the aspect that orbital debris could be recycled in orbit and doesn't need to be brought there - which isn't the case reagrding launch debris and interplanetary debris. So debris could be subject to several Centennial Challenges prizes perhaps. Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist) |
Back to top |
![]() |
Spaceflight Enthusiast ![]() ![]()
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 3 ![]() |
This is a little off topic, but has anyone watched the anime series, PlanetES? It's a great realistic space drama based on the idea of debris collection in the mid-21st century. The first DVD (R1) includes an interesting interview with the NASA group chartered with tracking and planning the removal of space debris left by orbital missions.
|
Back to top |
![]() |
Space Station Commander ![]() ![]()
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 1:25 am
Posts: 891 ![]() |
One way to tackle the problem with ATK's new proposed line of vehicles:
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/enemover.htm One use of HLLV http://www.astronautix.com/craft/globis.htm Use fewer numbers of bigger comsats--with margin for better hanrdening and better power reserves to cut through jamming. |
Back to top |
![]() |
Moon Mission Member ![]() ![]()
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:15 pm
Posts: 1050 Location: Columbus, GA USA ![]() |
This is a potential future market. An "interceptor" could be sent to match orbits with a dead satellite or bit of debris that had managed to find itself a stable orbit, capture it, and move it to a orbital "junk yard". No sense in deorbiting material that could be recycled where it is at its most expensive.
The valuable or historically significant objects could be returned to Earth for auction to museums and others who just have to have a bit of space history. Is the original Sputnik still up there or did it spin down? Of course this orbital jockeying would be horribly consuming of fuel, and lots of legal issues spring to mind, salvage law and liability to name a few. There is also the fact that some had pretty nasty volatiles or radioactives aboard, and some of the governmental/military ones no doubt have self-destruct boobytraps... Maybe not such a good idea? |
Back to top |
![]() |
Spaceflight Participant ![]() ![]()
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 4:16 pm
Posts: 51 Location: Albuquerque ![]() |
Actually, its the smaller debris that should also post a worry.
Objects that are too small to track but large enough to cause damage post a definite threat to spacecraft. Defunct spacecraft, if fully and properly passivated should pose a reduced risk, especially if placed in a 25 year decay orbit or a non-operational orbit (e.g. supersynch). What we need is something that can deorbit/move old and dangerous debris out of operational orbits, preferably into a decay orbit. Some sort of giant fly paper for debris would be good, but I don't think we have anything like that right now. - Alistair _________________ Mach 25 Begins With Safety |
Back to top |
![]() |
Space Station Commander ![]() ![]()
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 1:25 am
Posts: 891 ![]() |
A large slab of aerogel at one end and a grappler on the other for larger pieces. Solar power and impacts upon the aerogel used to boost you to larger pieces higher up perhaps.
|
Back to top |
![]() |
Spaceflight Participant ![]() ![]()
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 4:16 pm
Posts: 51 Location: Albuquerque ![]() |
That might work for very specific orbits, but I was thinking about the sheer volume of debris in general. I've heard of laser brooms, but I don't think anyone is seriously considering that yet.
- Alistair _________________ Mach 25 Begins With Safety |
Back to top |
![]() |
Space Station Commander ![]() ![]()
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 1:25 am
Posts: 891 ![]() |
You launch several aerogel slabs so you won't have to match orbital speed precisely. It captures the material like Stardust, and it you position it right--the impacts subsitute as thrust instead of burns. For things higher up where you need a lot of fuel...one more payload for HLLV:
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/enemover.htm And yes, it has to be this big to do it right. |
Back to top |
![]() |
Spaceflight Participant ![]() ![]()
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 4:16 pm
Posts: 51 Location: Albuquerque ![]() |
publiusr wrote: You launch several aerogel slabs so you won't have to match orbital speed precisely. It captures the material like Stardust, and it you position it right--the impacts subsitute as thrust instead of burns. For things higher up where you need a lot of fuel...one more payload for HLLV: http://www.astronautix.com/craft/enemover.htm And yes, it has to be this big to do it right. I'd expect LARGE aerogel panels that would to be one method. The LADC sensor for the ISS should help in the development of these, if the LADC gets funding. Deorbiting or otherwise removing derelict spacecraft/rocket bodies will also need to be done. I can't see this being done by a government agency. Once the first commercial satellite gets taken out by debris (more of a question of when in my book), insurance companies will want something done (more debris shielding or less debris). - Alistair _________________ Mach 25 Begins With Safety |
Back to top |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
Page 1 of 1 |
[ 13 posts ] |
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests |