Asteroid 2024 YR4 reaches level 3 on the Torino Scale

[KLiKzg]

If we can observe it in 2028 and get an actual trajectory with high confidence I think we should have the hardware ready to launch with backup or two in place. No reason to see what the real world effects of a possible 100m metallic impact are if a push, dart, detonation, paint, or otherwise would prevent it.

That is why SMPAG was meet up, as we need to have this in place for 2028...& we need to have both 2 windows in 2028 covered & those in 2029, with flyable crafts just sitting in a bay somewhere -ready to go!

Theoretically, I would think an existing Anti-Ballistic Missile would be the best way to deal with it. Stick a GBI in a Starship (I checked, it fits and is within the weight capacity for GTO mission profile) and go full send. That way it would have good enough terminal-phase guidance to actually hit it. Bear in mind that DART had a far larger target with a lot less uncertainty.

Unfortunately I couldn't find any data on extra-atmospheric launch of the entire GBI missile - probably because nobody is dumb enough to ask that in the first place. I would hope it would have the fuel to go the ~4m miles from a GTO orbit, considering its range from surface launch. Nukes are probably a bad idea - more likely to just break it up and ensure that earth will be peppered by assorted meteoroids than anything else.

I don't know if any other ABM would have the performance at those velocities without significant modification. Using publicly available data, GBI appears to be able to handle closure rates of something like 18 Km/s, where SM-3, THAAD, Arrow 3, and 51T6 seem to cap out around 10 Km/s. Considering that 2024 YR4 is already travelling at 13 Km/s it would appear to preclude them. However, considering the angle it would approach from given a 2028 interception, it is possible that closure rate performance may not be so important.

The EKV used in GBI missiles would have to be going 11.5 m/s directly opposite the flight path of the meteor on impact. LEAP, used in SM-3, would need to be going 37.7 m/s. I suspect most of the energy would be burned in getting to interception point, then stopping and turning. Accelerating to 40 m/s in space is trivial.

You are right, nuke will get it breaking in smaller pieces, making more havoc as it goes down....with no certainty of a good outcome...& no knowledge if that nuke blast would knock down satellites, as was the experience with project Fishbowl, mission Starfish Prime!

 

[R0H1T]

with flyable crafts just sitting in a bay somewhere -ready to go

Probably not going to work at that scale, assuming it's that big! Somehow now nukes in space sounds like a better idea although I hear it's a massive jungle out there

When you think about it trying to smash in outer space or just above earth's orbit is a better idea IMO, also side impact?

You are right, nuke will get it breaking in smaller pieces, making more havoc as it goes down....with no certainty of a good outcome...& no knowledge if that nuke blast would knock down satellites, as was the experience with project Fishbowl, mission Starfish Prime!

If a big enough "rock" enters the atmosphere we're pretty much toast, at that time it's just about cutting losses because it'll me mighty hard to blast that super heated piece of galactic crud!

 

[KLiKzg]

Can but doesn't. Trident D5 can carry 4.

It is a rocky asteroid, type S or L. I believe those classes have an upper limit of 30% iron, IIRC.

It would still make a 7,6Mt with that much mass...so that is 7600kt!

Though, making is to much from water, makes a laser or mirror more potent device for heating up more one side & making it move all by itself...no explosion required, only science!

 

[Caring1]

How about we don't nuke it, just in case we end up with masses of chunks of irradiated space debris flying towards us

 

[KLiKzg]

I'd be more worried if it was to hit an ocean and cause a large tsunami depending which ocean it hits could affect how many people will be wiped out considering the vast amount of the world's populace that reside close to coastal areas

& Atlantic ocean is not preferable way, as it would devastate Africa, South & North America, flooded the American Gulf...go on to devastate Europe, including Mediterranean sea!

While a fall in Indian ocean would wipe out all the south Asia, east Africa & many of the islands towards Australia, including Australia.

Even with a 10m tsunami, most of the World would be devastated...World economy collapse & probably new wars started afterwards...

 

[lexluthermiester]

2024 YR4 is roughly the size of a city killer, not a planet killer.

Any object large enough to destroy a city is large enough to cause a planetary climate shift event, which would still negatively impact the entire planet. The object subject of this discussion is at least at or near that size. So it is an object we need to take seriously.

Did not expect You to be a Drama queen, here.

I couldn't resist being a bit of a smart-alec..

& what kind of message do we send out to neighbouring ET, with nuking things in space?

Who cares? Seriously, any ET civilization advanced enough to detect that we've used a nuke at all will be smart enough to determine that it was used to alter an asteroid/meteor orbit and will be smart enough to figure out why we did so. It's a non-issue not worthy of any further consideration.

Can ya'll take a moment to Google the phrase "project dart" and watch what happens.

That was an non-nuclear trajectory alteration test and while successful in making a deviation, it showed very conclusively that the forces involved in a strictly kinetic impact would be insufficient to move an object with any mass that would be a danger to population on the ground. A more energetic application is required. We don't have any practical means to launch an impactor with enough mass to answer such a task.

Therefore, the only option we have is a nuclear detonation assisted impact, preferably a hydrogen fusion device. Depending on the size of the object we would likely need to launch several in secession, impacting in a specific periodic schedule.

How about we don't nuke it, just in case we end up with masses of chunks of irradiated space debris flying towards us

The radiation we get from the Sun on a daily basis far out weighs anything we would get from irradiated debris left over from the process involved. It would be a non-issue.

 

[AusWolf]

The radiation we get from the Sun on a daily basis far out weighs anything we would get from irradiated debris left over from the process involved. It would be a non-issue.

It depends on the distance from Earth. I still recommend watching this video:

 

[eidairaman1]

How about we don't nuke it, just in case we end up with masses of chunks of irradiated space debris flying towards us

Icbm but conventional warheads

 

[lexluthermiester]

It depends on the distance from Earth. I still recommend watching this video:

Someone You posted that previously. I've seen it. The info contained therein does not apply to this situation as the detonations will not take place at a location near the atmosphere of earth, and very likely outside the magnetosphere. The radiation output of the potential blast will be of no consequence.

 

[AusWolf]

Someone You posted that previously. I've seen it. The info contained therein does not apply to this situation as the detonations will not take place at a location near the atmosphere of earth, and very likely outside the magnetosphere. The radiation output of the potential blast will be of no consequence.

Sure, but the further away we're planning to intercept the asteroid, the more precise calculations and course corrections are needed, which raises the chance of failure. A good middle point is needed.

 

[Assimilator]

Icbm but conventional warheads

Conventional explosive isn't going to do jack.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Sure, but the further away we're planning to intercept the asteroid, the more precise calculations and course corrections are needed, which raises the chance of failure.

I think your understanding of just how precise we can be is bit out of touch. If we can send probes to every major planetary body, including Pluto, and a considerable number of much smaller ones, including the asteroid subject of Project DART, with exacting precision, we can hit an object coming within proximity of Earth with a nuke with the same level of exactness.

Conventional explosive isn't going to do jack.

Not true. Any explosive force will have an effect, just not as large of one.

 

[AusWolf]

I think your understanding of just how precise we can be is bit out of touch. If we can send probes to every major planetary body, including Pluto, and a considerable number of much smaller ones, including the asteroid subject of Project DART, with exacting precision, we can hit an object coming within proximity of Earth with a nuke with the same level of exactness.

True. Although, Pluto's radius is ~1200 km, but it's 30-50 AUs away. The question is, can we hit a 10x smaller object let's say, 10 AUs away? When do we have to run our calculations and plan the launch to hit it then? How far is the asteroid going to be away at that time? How precise our observations of it are gonna be then? I'm sure greater minds than mine are working on this, I'm just thinking out loud.

 

[lexluthermiester]

The question is, can we hit a 10x smaller object let's say, .10 AUs away?

Short answer, yes. It is a comparatively trivial task. Still needs very precise calculations, but hitting such a target will not difficult. BTW, that distance would be more like .10 or .05 AU, not 10 AU.

I'm sure greater minds than mine are working on this, I'm just thinking out loud.

More experienced, not greater. Most of the people who visit this site have the mental acumen to make such a calculation if they had the education and training. You are no exception. It's just a matter of personal direction in life.