I don't think that's the hard part... I think the -now waddawe do with it- comes after intercepting it.

My two cent shoebox idea would be to have a processing plant on one side of the rock, and simply process it. For every ten tons of rock there's bound to be nine tons of crap which you jettison out the back, creating a handy little mass reaction engine that pushes what ever is left of said rock towards earth for splash down.





ninja'ed by gamgee

If by "intercepted asteroids in the past" you mean "managed to hit one with a pea shooter when on a ballistic and easily predictable course that kicked up a small dust cloud" then you are correct.

In order to viably harvest from an asteroid you need to be able to cause it to have both a safe and easily accessible orbit from Earth. Without this there's too much of a break in the supply chain, causing a need to stockpile. By stockpiling, though, you drastically increase your risks while earning no profits. If anything happens to the asteroid before the next transport, there goes all the revenue you actively worked on. You may not need to bring it in an orbit around the Earth, but it needs to be reachable from the earth at multiple times in the year.

This comes to my mind.
http://i.imgur.com/kLqtO.jpg

and this:
http://youtu.be/dQpGwnN3dfc

As Defron pointed out, our interceptions basically amount to ramming speed. In order to mine an asteroid this buisness venture would need a spacecraft that could perform a soft-landing on an asteroid, (or at least give it's payload a soft-landing) and even if they ape the apollo the program that still means putting a lot of effot into designing, launching, and testing a craft before you can start putting mining equipment in space. A successful interception would be a major milestone for them and a reliable sign of progress.

True, but in theory we've done an interception before. It's not so much of an unknown anymore. Humans are nothing if not persistent.

The composition of each asteroid is very different. Not to mention that depending on the size of the Asteroid, the gravitational pull of the ship on the asteroid could even pose a problem.

Though couldn't we use the ship's gravitational pull on an asteroid to adjust the asteroid's orbit? (in those asteroids small enough to yeild appreciable results)

It won't happen until Skylon is ready, hopefully the current engine tests are going well because that thing will change everything. All these new space companies will simply have to adapt or go bankrupt because Skylon would just overwhelm the market, although it is medium orbit spaceplan it would only take three of them to reach beyond the Moon. Three of them launch within minutes of each other, the meet up in orbit. Two of the Skylon planes would be carrying extra fuel in it's payload and transfer that over to the first, replenishing it's tanks. That there is enough fuel to go further than any other shuttle like craft.

One Skylon would then descend back to the runway to land, the other will stay up in orbit around the earth. The one that landed would return to orbit just two days later, refuel the orbiting Skylon which will then continue to orbit with a full tank and be ready to rescue to the first Skylon plane which is visiting the asteroid if there is a problem.

The amazing thing about Skylon is there is no need for any humans in the take off, orbit and landing stages, it is fully automated in that respect. Additionally, you launch several Skylon planes for the price of the cheapest commercial and government equivalent. Well actually no point in mentioning government, they are way to expensive. Skylon is intended to be so cheap to launch that it would force the American companies trying to get into the space boom to either buy Skylons or run the very serious risk of losing all their customers, and the American government would not consider bailing them out giving the cost... it is why they are looking to companies in the first place as space is so expensive.

If the engines are proven to work, watch this space.... Skylon is the moment we have all been waiting for!

Again with enough time all of these will be overcome. I hate to make it sound so mystical, but I've seen enough to know its only a matter of time and money. That's really all I can say on the matter.

I read something about space mining could really help economies around he world, especially the U.S. economy. But, there will be wars fought over stuff like this.

United States- "This is our moon to mine"

China- "No, it is ours"

=WAR

UK-"If you don't learn to share you ain't getting our technology"

=No war


So many people do not realise that Europe is in fact the best placed entity for commercial space enterprise. America's problem is that is stuck with rocket technology and despite this, it is continuing to push ahead with it. China is just lightyears behind anyway. Russia needs to do a lot of work but has an option to team up with Europe.

Europe is looking towards using runways and spaceplanes, and are by far the technology leaders in that respect. They expect the first spaceplanes to be in manufacture before 2020 by a British company called Reaction Engines, then there is another European company - this time from Germany - who will likely follow just a few years later. America doesn't even have a spaceplane company and NASA doesn't have any research on the concept, the US is estimated to be at least 25 years behind Europe in this regard and they are only realistic competitor... if you can call them that.

These spaceplanes are going to render the rockets obscelete due to cost and maintenance issues that are inherent with the design of them, and the two stage planes like Virgin Galactic's Spaceship Two are too small and fuel inefficient to do anything more than carry a dozen passengers, cargo is all but out of the question. So with the first generation engines of Europe's spaceplanes we can expect a 12 tonne cargo capacity, a 30+ passenger capacity and a minimum of seven days operation with a human presence on board... which is Shuttle terroritory.

Imagine the second generation engines, they would very likely carry double the weight due to the massive increase in fuel efficiency from what is a brand new type of engine... the RamJet/Rocket hybrid. This is what the other nations do not have, and Europe will not allow it to be used by America and China if they get all rowdy with each other. It helps Europe that this technology works from take off/landings from Europe itself, although going from the equator is more efficient even for these spaceplanes they don't have to. And anyway, Europe has the best access to Equatorial spaceports, France is the owner of the island where Ariane 5 is launched from... right on the Equator itself.

There won't be a war, trade won't allow it. It is not so much Europe not allowing war between USA and China over space mining... it is Europe literally leveraging it's huge advantage is the trade and transportation needed for space mining and they will never sell the technology.

Yeah, but that particular Star God makes all our technology work all smooth-like. The Necrons will just tear us down to a molecular level then go back to bed.

It's about time something is done, especially for the benefit of repositioning the United States' own NASA as a capable space service, which has been suffering a serious decline. I don't really know what's going on in Russia or China, but I've heard that the U.S. astronauts are using the service of Russian spacecrafts now, is that true?

It's true, and very sad.

Even crazier is some talk of Canada getting in on the space game with their own launch pad. It's mostly idle talk, though some potential launch pad construction areas are being scouted out now. Then there's the states just languishing in its own waste in terms of their capabilities. At this point everyone is going to pass them by.

Yea, the NASA is going downhill, sadly. It almost makes me think that we need another Cold War or some lingering threat that wants to race us in space technology so that the U.S. will get itself in gear. Our economy is in the [censored]ter, and this is an opportunity.

Great expenditures in Defence has not helped the US economy for the last 11 years, if it's helped anything it's helped exacerbate the US economic problem, which goes into the post you quoted as well about why NASA might be using Russian spacecrafts (if true) -- because the US can't afford to keep spending money on this kind of stuff. Thankfully this looks like a private venture so the US budget doesn't seem much of a concern.. on the other hand, haven't seen if they might ask for US government help, which these investors shouldn't because they're swimming in money. To me this isn't worth more than a "cool idea" because more details of the fruition of this haven't yet become available to either praise the idea or tear it to shreds.

Yeah well, if anything is going to spur exploration of the unknown, it's going to be cashy money. Vasco de Gama didn't round the Cape for love of science.

I think this is a good step forward. Governments have been unwilling to spend taxpayer money explore space in earnest, perhaps rightly so. If this company pulls it off we may see other companies going out there for profit. An incidental side-effect would be the development of cheaper space-faring technologies.

It's like StarCraft:

Show me the money.

You think 25.6 billion is a big deal?

...For net worth? Yes, it's a very big deal. Unless you're a multi-trillionaire of some sort. In which case, please forgive us plebians.

This is just completely untrue. Not the part about the Europeans having some very advanced space engines, they do. Very advanced. But the opinion that the united states doesn't (and let's not forget Japan, who also has a very capable space agency).

The US has VASIMR, which could be in effect in 10 years or less as a space tug. It's only capable of operating in Space, but it's exceptionally effecient when doing so. If you are going to be mining asteroids, the VASIMR concept is marvelous. But the US is also exploring RAMjet and SCRAMjets, and is a leader in Ion Propulsion (Dawn Mission).

Thus, saying that the US "only has rockets" is not true at all. Even if it were, rockets are very useful. At some stage in deployment, even the most advanced single-stage-to-orbit Spaceplane concepts (there are no working models yet) need a rocket thruster. The only current systems that could feasibly deliver a payload to LEO that don't involve rockets at some stage are Mass Drivers which are years behind in capability, or momentum displacement systems like an http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevatoror http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_fountain.

I'm not saying the US is the most capable country in the world right now when it comes to space exploration. They may very well have lost that position to Russia or ESA. However, NASA and the US are still very capable. Plus, NASA is doing everything it can to get private US companies into space, and doing it well.

I've been watching the SKYLON project very closely. While it is fascinating, it's still a long way from construction. I don't see any way they could get those into production by 2020. They have yet to even prove that their engine concept will work. Besides that, it's a veriation on the SCRAMjet and many countries and companies are working on their own versions. This includes the US, who got one to http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12075-scramjet-hits-mach-10-over-australia-.html. (Joint venture with AUS)

Dude... yes. 25.6 Billion will get you all sorts of into space and back. Yes it's a big deal, especially if it's just one guy. It's a very big deal.

He said that these are some of the richest men in the world. In that case 25.6 billion is pocket change. You shouldn't be looking at celebs if you're trying to find REALLY rich guys. Try starting at Rothschild and working your way up from there. You'd be pretty amazed at how much these guys have. 25.6 is certainly not a lot when trying to start a space program.

25 Billion is plenty to start a space program friend. Elon Musk already has a program, and billions. He didn't even need that much to get going.
Look up SpaceX.

Just because NASA uses tens of billions to run its programs doesn't mean that everyone that starts a space effort will need that much.

Well I'm talking about something serious here (colonization etc.) but maybe you're right. However, I am undoubtedly right that a net worth of 25.6 billion of any currency dies not make you one of the richest men in the world. Not even close.