...and the space junk issue gets worse and worse...

Hi All,

The 'Space junk' issue and UFO "Conflict" parallel just gets more and more amazing.

Please see: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14757926

Regards,

Griff

CONTENTS DELETED

it seems to me that if there was someway to just get a rocket up there and maybe a wildcat steering program, that a series of mass collections would begin from the smash ups and the clumps of debries would start becoming large enough to burn up on re-entry. i think maybe 30 ''wildcat'' missles to start the 'billard break'' condition would be enough to start that.
jim

From: "Hemmings, Rob K." <[hidden email]>
To: "'[hidden email]'" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, September 2, 2011 2:54 AM
Subject: RE: [SHADO] ...and the space junk issue gets worse and worse...


 
Hi Griff,

Funnily enough I just mentioned that on the Universe Today site:

http://www.universetoday.com/88595/space-debris-problem-getting-worse-new-report-says/#comments

I love that site and visit it every day.

Cheers,
--
Rob



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Gonna step up the geek here

1960's Japanime solution: Send Astro-Boy into space with some wild new attachment to suck up the debris & then battle the giant robot that's creating it.  Problem solved everyone gets a moral lecture on being "green".

1970's Saturday morning cartoon solution: Launch a ship into space armed with a gi-normous magnet.  That could collect the debris & then fire off into the sun.  Cool unlikely explosion at the end.

1990's Bruce Willis solution:  Launch a ship into space and put very powerful explosive charges on each piece of debris.  Blow the stuff to a harmless ash that can be disintegrated by the Earth's atmosphere.  Very flashy, crew dies, Earth saved.

2000's Metal eating plague solution:  Secret government agency launches metal eating nano-bots that clear the debris, they evolve and become sentient and then come down to Earth and begin an apocalyptic terror (ala Gort & the remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still).

Just brain storming;
Matt


--- In [hidden email], "." <aquaboi@...> wrote:

most of the space debris isnt magnetic. to avoid static  charges.
but somethng of a great mass would attract them, maybe a balloon filled with water. then i would cluster and fall  to earth harmlessly except for short term fireballs..
jim

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 18:05:22 -0700 (PDT)
"." <[hidden email]> wrote:

> most of the space debris isnt magnetic. to avoid static
> charges. but somethng of a great mass would attract them, maybe
> a balloon filled with water. then i would cluster and fall  to
> earth harmlessly except for short term fireballs.. jim
>

That would have to be a very, very big balloon indeed - with at
least the surface area of a small country, I think.

Maybe even a small planet. I mean, I know my orbital mechanics is a bit
rusty, but as I recall there IS a large gravitational body nearby - Earth
(not to mention the Moon). The real problem is that all these objects have
pretty high inertial energy and momentum that keeps them from falling out of
orbit in a reasonable time.

 

  _____  

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
James Gibbon
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2011 7:54 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [SHADO] Re: ...and the space junk issue gets worse and worse...

 

 

On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 18:05:22 -0700 (PDT)
"." <[hidden email] <mailto:aquaboi%40sbcglobal.net> > wrote:

> most of the space debris isnt magnetic. to avoid static
> charges. but somethng of a great mass would attract them, maybe
> a balloon filled with water. then i would cluster and fall  to
> earth harmlessly except for short term fireballs.. jim
>

That would have to be a very, very big balloon indeed - with at
least the surface area of a small country, I think.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi,

How about this...

According to NASA, the equivalent mass of twice the ISS has had to be moved to avoid potential collisions in earth orbit! Space junk means everything from rocket upper stages weighing several tons down to the odd spanner lost in space by space-walking astro- or cosmonauts. Friction and gravity will eventually bring all the space junk back to earth, but will take centuries.

What's the solution? It won't be easy.  We can't shoot it down, because even if we are accurate enough to hit the junk all we are likely to accomplish is blasting it into lots more smaller pieces that will need tracking.  We could shoot it with high-powered lasers, but unless we were able to vaporize the debris completely, all we'd be doing is boring very nice holes in it. No, we have to gather the stuff and bring it back to Earth.  But how?

Space junk collector: a very fine net to capture the debris and hold it. The net could be built from kevlar or carbon nanotubes.  Nanotubes have the highest strength-to-weight ratio of any material and would allow  for a very large, very light weight net.  Our point here is to make the net light rather than strong, since our capture speeds will be low and the lack of gravity ought to make it easy to keep the junk tethered together.  The point of making it strong, then, is so it can be light enough to be big enough to maybe gather all the junk — all 18,000 pieces — into a single mass.

Launch collector into an inclined polar orbit generally higher than the space junk to be harvested.  The polar orbit will ensure that eventually the collector will go over every spot on the Earth as the planet rotates below, but it also means the collector will eventually cross the path of every piece of space junk.

Here's where we need an algorithm and a honking big computer, because this is a 3-D geometry problem with more than 18,000 variables.  Our algorithm determines the most efficient path to use for gathering all 18,000 pieces of space junk. It would start in a high orbit, above the space junk, because we could trade that altitude for speed as needed, simply by flying lower, trading potential energy for kinetic.
Dragging the collector behind a little unmanned spacecraft would be to go past each piece of junk in such a way that it not only lodges permanently in the collector, but that doing so adds kinetic energy (hitting at shallow angles to essentially tack like a sailboat off the debris). It wouldn't always be possible, of course, to gain energy from each encounter, but that's why it would need to start in a higher orbit, so as energy is inevitably lost it can be replenished by moving to a lower orbit.

It would logically start with smaller bits of space junk so the net would gain mass steadily over time, then do the same again at each lower altitude.  Eventually the collector would have corralled hundreds of tons of debris, carrying it down into the atmosphere where atmospheric friction would eventually burn it all up in a spectacular visual display that would create a thin ring of fire all around the Earth.

Crazy idea, sure, but it could work. Small to big, high to low, all it would take is time.  How much time?  If the collector orbits every 90 minutes and it takes an average of a dozen orbits to set up the capture of each piece of space junk, that's 18,000 * 90 * 12  = 19.4 million minutes or 36.9 years to get it all.

Mmm... that's about how long it took to put all that junk up there in the first place.

G

there is another way, a material of somekind could be sprayed onto the junk, in bombs or piece by peice, then the stuff would either collide and assemble into larger masses, or be pulled with a magnet attracted by the magnetic material coating on the junk,
i would assume that standard bombs would work, even just steam bombs to billard break them into colliding into each other and then allow the peices to fall into re-entry.
jim

From: griffwason <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 8:08 AM
Subject: [SHADO] Re: ...and the space junk issue gets worse and worse...


 
Hi,

How about this...

According to NASA, the equivalent mass of twice the ISS has had to be moved to avoid potential collisions in earth orbit! Space junk means everything from rocket upper stages weighing several tons down to the odd spanner lost in space by space-walking astro- or cosmonauts. Friction and gravity will eventually bring all the space junk back to earth, but will take centuries.

What's the solution? It won't be easy. We can't shoot it down, because even if we are accurate enough to hit the junk all we are likely to accomplish is blasting it into lots more smaller pieces that will need tracking. We could shoot it with high-powered lasers, but unless we were able to vaporize the debris completely, all we'd be doing is boring very nice holes in it. No, we have to gather the stuff and bring it back to Earth. But how?

Space junk collector: a very fine net to capture the debris and hold it. The net could be built from kevlar or carbon nanotubes. Nanotubes have the highest strength-to-weight ratio of any material and would allow for a very large, very light weight net. Our point here is to make the net light rather than strong, since our capture speeds will be low and the lack of gravity ought to make it easy to keep the junk tethered together. The point of making it strong, then, is so it can be light enough to be big enough to maybe gather all the junk — all 18,000 pieces — into a single mass.

Launch collector into an inclined polar orbit generally higher than the space junk to be harvested. The polar orbit will ensure that eventually the collector will go over every spot on the Earth as the planet rotates below, but it also means the collector will eventually cross the path of every piece of space junk.

Here's where we need an algorithm and a honking big computer, because this is a 3-D geometry problem with more than 18,000 variables. Our algorithm determines the most efficient path to use for gathering all 18,000 pieces of space junk. It would start in a high orbit, above the space junk, because we could trade that altitude for speed as needed, simply by flying lower, trading potential energy for kinetic.
Dragging the collector behind a little unmanned spacecraft would be to go past each piece of junk in such a way that it not only lodges permanently in the collector, but that doing so adds kinetic energy (hitting at shallow angles to essentially tack like a sailboat off the debris). It wouldn't always be possible, of course, to gain energy from each encounter, but that's why it would need to start in a higher orbit, so as energy is inevitably lost it can be replenished by moving to a lower orbit.

It would logically start with smaller bits of space junk so the net would gain mass steadily over time, then do the same again at each lower altitude. Eventually the collector would have corralled hundreds of tons of debris, carrying it down into the atmosphere where atmospheric friction would eventually burn it all up in a spectacular visual display that would create a thin ring of fire all around the Earth.

Crazy idea, sure, but it could work. Small to big, high to low, all it would take is time. How much time? If the collector orbits every 90 minutes and it takes an average of a dozen orbits to set up the capture of each piece of space junk, that's 18,000 * 90 * 12 = 19.4 million minutes or 36.9 years to get it all.

Mmm... that's about how long it took to put all that junk up there in the first place.

G




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

it makes a nice shield from high energy particles and light though.
jim

From: Deborah Rorabaugh <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 8:04 AM
Subject: RE: [SHADO] Re: ...and the space junk issue gets worse and worse...


 
Maybe even a small planet. I mean, I know my orbital mechanics is a bit
rusty, but as I recall there IS a large gravitational body nearby - Earth
(not to mention the Moon). The real problem is that all these objects have
pretty high inertial energy and momentum that keeps them from falling out of
orbit in a reasonable time.

_____

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
James Gibbon
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2011 7:54 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [SHADO] Re: ...and the space junk issue gets worse and worse...

On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 18:05:22 -0700 (PDT)
"." <[hidden email] <mailto:aquaboi%40sbcglobal.net> > wrote:

> most of the space debris isnt magnetic. to avoid static
> charges. but somethng of a great mass would attract them, maybe
> a balloon filled with water. then i would cluster and fall to
> earth harmlessly except for short term fireballs.. jim
>

That would have to be a very, very big balloon indeed - with at
least the surface area of a small country, I think.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I blame it all on James L. Henderson! :)

CONTENTS DELETED

Hi,

Yes, I do agree the idea was 'off the wall', but well, it was just an idea...

I do think though, that from now on it should be mandatory that ANY company/nation launching vehicles into space should be compelled to provide a verifiable mechanism for all expendable components/sections of the spacecraft to de-orbit as part of their design.

Also, the spacecraft themselves should be designed so that they are capable of destroying themselves once their mission is complete, either by retrograding their orbit to burn up, or by changing their orbits to be captured and eventually destroyed in another planetary body (sun, planet, etc.)

Regards, G

PS. Yeah, Henderson... just deal with the problem!

PPS. Maybe Henderson's secret plan is to put so much space debris in orbit that it is itself a deterrent to the aliens or they would collide with and then are destroyed before they get to earth!

PPPS. I can see Henderson and Jackson plotting to put a HUGE dump up their whilst Commander Straker is away on Moonbase. Don't think that would solve their problems though... I think Commander Straker would get on just fine up there.

CONTENTS DELETED

from what i hear is that nasa is going to devote thier defense satillites, whatever they claim to be, and use those weapons to destroy or deflect space junk. when? i have no idea/
 
i went to the nasa website, nasa.gov, and submitted a solution to the anti- matter engine that they have been budgeted for since 1973, but cannot use due to the extreeme heat it generates melts the thruster bell off and makes the entire engine useless-
and that was to make mini engines that melt away,
kind of like 2001's discovery,
but the entire assemble melts away single file as used.
they emailed me back with a personal message saying,
''great idea! but thats not was was approved in the budget, thanks anyway.'
 so now we see what the real problem is, and that, is this;
 
there needs to be a budget steering commitee to re-direct funds from non-active plans to prototype operations that can be created immediately and are currently useful.
 
jim


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

the command module would have to fire mini- missles at the discarded space junk after burn out. the heat involved in the fireing of the stages is too great for a self destruct to function after.
i think what you are asking for really is a 'quark' style garbage scow that goes around collecting junk.
jim

From: griffwason <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2011 5:08 AM
Subject: [SHADO] Re: ...and the space junk issue gets worse and worse...


 
Hi,

Yes, I do agree the idea was 'off the wall', but well, it was just an idea...

I do think though, that from now on it should be mandatory that ANY company/nation launching vehicles into space should be compelled to provide a verifiable mechanism for all expendable components/sections of the spacecraft to de-orbit as part of their design.

Also, the spacecraft themselves should be designed so that they are capable of destroying themselves once their mission is complete, either by retrograding their orbit to burn up, or by changing their orbits to be captured and eventually destroyed in another planetary body (sun, planet, etc.)

Regards, G

PS. Yeah, Henderson... just deal with the problem!

PPS. Maybe Henderson's secret plan is to put so much space debris in orbit that it is itself a deterrent to the aliens or they would collide with and then are destroyed before they get to earth!

PPPS. I can see Henderson and Jackson plotting to put a HUGE dump up their whilst Commander Straker is away on Moonbase. Don't think that would solve their problems though... I think Commander Straker would get on just fine up there.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

i was thinking more of ''steam bombs'' that would clear an area, colliding any junk into each other, and like a billiard break, knock a few into burn up re-entry. the actual missles used to deliver the bombs could explode and solve the more junk issue. since nitroglyerine leaves almost no residue, only carbon would be delivered to earth in small amounts over time.
jim


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]