Notices
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Canon To Deflect Asteroids

  1. #1 Canon To Deflect Asteroids 
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    100
    [Could use a nuclear canon. Large mine shaft like barrel made of reinforced concrete, rifled slightly, going into bed rock down about a half mile; maybe 150 feet in diameter. At the bottom of that is a large chamber surrounded by thick walls of reinforced concrete. (If the rock is strong enough you won't need the concrete.) Bottom of the barrel has a ten foot ledge surrounding the rim, inside of the barrel. On this ledge you construct a bullet shaped projectile of maybe a thousand tons of reinforced concrete, the ledge is holding it in the barrel shaft, above the chamber. When the Earth is in a proper position, determined by computers for aiming the projectile at the approaching asteroid, you set off a 1 megaton nuclear bomb in the chamber. This will fire the thousand ton concrete bullet at the asteroid. {Expect f5 tornado or hurricane force winds in area around projectile coming out of ground at 35,000 miles per hour.-- estimates}
    Try to hit the asteroid to one side, like shooting billiards, the meteor will be knocked into a path that misses the Earth.]
    If you make this well enough you could do more than one shot with it.
    Also a line of these canons could be set up, running north and south on the Earth, to aim at asteroids, at different angles of trajectory. So you would have this line of canons ready, because you don't know which one would be properly aimed until the asteroid approaches.

    Firing a canon like this at the sun, repeatedly might be a way of putting the Earth into a slightly higher orbit to help stop global warming by the Earth being further away from the sun. The recoil would push the whole Earth away from the sun by a slight amount.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Freshman Communist Hamster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    30
    Now that would be dramatic to watch firing.


    Up the workers!
    Down Mcdonalds and their evil McCholesterol McShite
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,789
    The only problem with this idea is that when the projectile hits the asteroid we don't know how many pieces might break off from it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    j
    j is offline
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    431
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler
    The only problem with this idea is that when the projectile hits the asteroid we don't know how many pieces might break off from it.
    The only problem?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,789
    Quote Originally Posted by j
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler
    The only problem with this idea is that when the projectile hits the asteroid we don't know how many pieces might break off from it.
    The only problem?
    Not the only one of course but one of the most troublesome.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,893
    We already have the technology to rendezvous a probe with an asteroid. It would be relatively simple to put a nuclear warhead on a probe and detonate it near the surface of a dangerous asteroid. I think that would be a much more practical way of diverting an asteroid, rather than building a huge nuclear cannon that we would probably only need once every thousand years.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    405
    Hey, ghost. Good to see you here.

    But there are a number of problems with your scenario. First of all, it's evidently far too much to invest in a once every 500,000 years event, even if it is overdue Could be 20,000 years before its needed. Secondly, you've got nuclear explosions on the land, and thirdly you're using the Earth to do the aiming. Sometimes "computers" are not the answer to everything - if the gun isn't on the right latitude for the particular asteroid, the Earth's rotation isn't going to help at all, is it? This is something requiring millimeter precision.

    So, uh, what SciFor said. It's easier and more sensible to place the bomb rather than try to fire it like a billiard cueball.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Silas
    Hey, ghost. Good to see you here.

    But there are a number of problems with your scenario. First of all, it's evidently far too much to invest in a once every 500,000 years event, even if it is overdue Could be 20,000 years before its needed. Secondly, you've got nuclear explosions on the land, and thirdly you're using the Earth to do the aiming. Sometimes "computers" are not the answer to everything - if the gun isn't on the right latitude for the particular asteroid, the Earth's rotation isn't going to help at all, is it? This is something requiring millimeter precision.

    So, uh, what SciFor said. It's easier and more sensible to place the bomb rather than try to fire it like a billiard cueball.
    Well look at all the money wasted on the cold war for decades. The way that our Govt. throws money down the toilet, what difference would it make. (They are now spending over 200 billion dollars trying to develope a democracy among Iraqui moslem religious factions which want to kill each other. I believe that democracy is doomed to failure. Over 200 billion down the toilet.) Most of the nuclear explosive force is under the land, which they have already exploded many nuclear tests underground without any significant trouble. I suggested having a line of these canons running north and south, so that the one at the proper latitude would be used. Also the projectile could be equipped with some kind of guidance, like laser or radio wave guided, with rockets to correct its trajectory in flight. Placing a bomb on the surface will have some effect, but space is empty, and a nuclear bomb in space is far less effective at producing a shock wave or momentum change in space, then it would be in the atmosphere of the earth. [That Bruce Willis movie, armageddon, thought about drilling into the asteroid to place the bomb. Placing it on the surface
    would not do that much because the explosion would be pushing against empty space on one side, and would not produce enough momentum against the asteroid to affect much. Heating it up on one side will produce some material flying off into space but only a small thrust against the asteroid.]

    More ideas about this:
    Could have an amount equal to 15 tractor trailer trucks of dry ice (frozen CO2) in the chamber before you set off the nuclear bomb. This would convert heat directly to carbon dioxide gas pressure to propel the cement bullet at the asteroid. It would also help prevent heat from destroying the back of the cement projectile or the chamber or the minshaft barrel. [A amall walkway tunnel could give access to the chamber before detonation. Very little pressure would be lost through the tunnel, because it is small and would probably collapse sealing itself off. Could have strong doors blocking it to delay any pressure from escaping in the tunnel.]
    There might be a way of putting a guidance system on this cement projectile with rockets to help guide it to the target and make course corrections. This would need to survive the blast and great acceleration of the projectile. The nose and rear of the projectile could have some sort of heat shielding to help survive the nuclear explosion and the rapid movement through the atmosphere.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,789
    ghost7584......

    I think you're just trying to see if we are that stupid to even think you're trying to say something intelligent about that cement. That piece of work belongs in the trask thread.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •