NASA Wants To Give Our Moon A Moon

NASA must think our moon is getting lonely, because it's mulling the idea of capturing an asteroid and placing it in lunar orbit so it has a rocky satellite all of its own.

According to a report by New Scientist, researchers at the Keck Institute for Space Studies in California have "confirmed that NASA is mulling over" a plan to give it a buddy. The plan would involve launching a robotic spacecraft to grab an asteroid, before placing it in high lunar orbit. The mission would apparently cost around $US2.6 billion, and could be wrapped up by the 2020s.

Why is NASA so keen to give our moon a moon? Well, the Obama administration has said it wants to send astronauts to a near-Earth asteroid. Currently, the best target for a trip — a space rock called 1999 AO10 — would require a dangerous six-month trip by the astronauts in question. Bringing an asteroid into the orbit of the moon is a safer — if complex — option.

The current proposal for lassoing an asteroid would use a specially designed space craft. New Scientist explains:

The Keck team envisions launching a slow-moving spacecraft, propelled by solar-heated ions, on an Atlas V rocket. The craft would then propel itself out to a target asteroid, probably a small space rock about 7 metres wide. After studying it briefly, the robot would catch the asteroid in a bag measuring about 10 metres by 15 metres and head back towards the moon. Altogether it would take about six to 10 years to deliver the asteroid to lunar orbit.

It wouldn't be easy, of course, and according to Louis Friedman of the Planetary Society the proposal still needs "some technical and scientific fine-tuning". There are also alternatives, too, including placing an asteroid at Earth-moon Lagrange point 2. But if the Keck Institute gets its way, the moon may soon have a buddy. [New Scientist]

Picture: lrargerich/Flickr


Comments

    why can i foresee this going horribly wrong.

    7 metres, at least if anything does go wrong it'll just be a little rock.

    Hey, would this technically count as terraforming (lunarforming)?

    7 metre asteroid? They want man to land on a metre rock?

    Why not just bring the asteroid to earth?

      http://www.impawards.com/1998/posters/deep_impact_ver1.jpg

      Agreed since they are cheating at going to an asteroid in which they moved closer why not just bring it back to earth and lay it in their backyard that way they don't even need trained astronauts, think of the savings!

      THIS! why bring an asteroid filled with minerals and resources and leave it at the moon?

    I'm unclear on the endgame here. Is it just so a man can stand on a 7 metre space rock?

    I understand why it's important to visit other worlds and develop technologies that will one day allow mankind to colonise other worlds... but you can't build much of a settlement on a 7 metre rock...

      Its probably in preparation for mining purposes. I know a couple of guys who are doing the math on how to use explosives to put asteroids in our orbit for mining. Theoretically, it could be quite cost effective because you can ship anywhere globally with almost no fuel (gravity will move the resources for you). Of course this is ridiculously dangerous, so they are testing a small asteroid on another celestial body first.

    Whenever they talk about doing stuff like this I am always scared they will upset the delicate balance of the solar system and cause the moon to fall out of orbit.. I know.. stupid.. but but it still worries me..

      Thats a good point, alot of things would stop working with no moon. =(

    Apparently it's in preparation for a future space defence system for incoming asteroids.
    http://spaceports.blogspot.com.au/2010/05/asteroid-1999-ao10-human-mission-target.html

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now