Thread: Asteroid Retrieval

NASA is planning a trip to capture an asteroid. The video is just over 4
1/2 minutes.

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/videogallery/index.html?media_id=161659311

I particularly like the capture technology used in the video and figured
that it probably has some usage in Traveller. CT had those Jump Ships
in Sup9 (but never again IIRC). I figure that if the "bag" material in
the video was adapted to Traveller and was composed of lanthanum it
would be more practical than the "special field cables" used in the
original write-up.

Instead of relying on 5,000 ton ships (that was the displacement of the
Jump Ship), you could have autonomous 100 ton ships out in the Kuiper
belt puttering around looking for promising rocks. When a suitable
target is found, they could jump back to the mainworld or wherever the
base of operations was. Your jump drive could then be scaled down from
the Jump Ship's J-6 to J-1. The smaller ships could either carry enough
fuel for two J-1's (there and back) or fitted with the right equipment
to make use of a comet (though moving from that comet to a target rock
might consume too much fuel to make it worth it).

Thoughts?

\_/
DED

This is James Bond villain crazy scheme material. 8-)

Derek Stanley
Sent from my iPhone...

On 2013-04-11, at 12:58, DED <> wrote:

> NASA is planning a trip to capture an asteroid. The video is just over 4
> 1/2 minutes.
>
> http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/videogallery/index.html?media_id=161659311
>
> I particularly like the capture technology used in the video and figured
> that it probably has some usage in Traveller. CT had those Jump Ships
> in Sup9 (but never again IIRC). I figure that if the "bag" material in
> the video was adapted to Traveller and was composed of lanthanum it
> would be more practical than the "special field cables" used in the
> original write-up.
>
> Instead of relying on 5,000 ton ships (that was the displacement of the
> Jump Ship), you could have autonomous 100 ton ships out in the Kuiper
> belt puttering around looking for promising rocks. When a suitable
> target is found, they could jump back to the mainworld or wherever the
> base of operations was. Your jump drive could then be scaled down from
> the Jump Ship's J-6 to J-1. The smaller ships could either carry enough
> fuel for two J-1's (there and back) or fitted with the right equipment
> to make use of a comet (though moving from that comet to a target rock
> might consume too much fuel to make it worth it).
>
> Thoughts?
>
> \_/
> DED
>
>

Maybe I'm not following what you're saying, but my recollection of the
'Sup? 9 jump ship is that it is rated Jump 6 by itself to allow it to
perform, say, Jump 3 carrying something its same size, Jump 1 with
something five times its size, etc. If a jump tug had only Jump 1 for its
base hull it would have no excess jump performance to carry anything.

The "jump grid" bag in Supp 9 would not have been necessary in TNE, as we
dispensed with the notion that the jump "grid" was an external physical
envelope. We would have just talked about how the slung cargo would have
to be tucked in in sufficiently close to the carrier's structure to fit
within the jump field.

But TNE had Virus in it, so you can't really trust it.

> NASA is planning a trip to capture an asteroid. The video is just over 4
> 1/2 minutes.
>
> http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/videogallery/index.html?media_id=161659311
>
> I particularly like the capture technology used in the video and figured
> that it probably has some usage in Traveller. CT had those Jump Ships
> in Sup9 (but never again IIRC). I figure that if the "bag" material in
> the video was adapted to Traveller and was composed of lanthanum it
> would be more practical than the "special field cables" used in the
> original write-up.
>
> Instead of relying on 5,000 ton ships (that was the displacement of the
> Jump Ship), you could have autonomous 100 ton ships out in the Kuiper
> belt puttering around looking for promising rocks. When a suitable
> target is found, they could jump back to the mainworld or wherever the
> base of operations was. Your jump drive could then be scaled down from
> the Jump Ship's J-6 to J-1. The smaller ships could either carry enough
> fuel for two J-1's (there and back) or fitted with the right equipment
> to make use of a comet (though moving from that comet to a target rock
> might consume too much fuel to make it worth it).
>
> Thoughts?
>
> \_/
> DED
>
>

Dave Nilsen wrote:

>>Maybe I'm not following what you're saying, but my recollection of the
'Sup? 9 jump ship is that it is rated Jump 6 by itself to allow it to
perform, say, Jump 3 carrying something its same size, Jump 1 with
something five times its size, etc. If a jump tug had only Jump 1 for its
base hull it would have no excess jump performance to carry anything.<<

Yes, you're right. [...Slaps self in forehead...] Forget it.

>>The "jump grid" bag in Supp 9 would not have been necessary in TNE, as we
dispensed with the notion that the jump "grid" was an external physical
envelope. We would have just talked about how the slung cargo would have
to be tucked in in sufficiently close to the carrier's structure to fit
within the jump field.<<

I'd forgotten about that, but then you get into arguments of how far the
jump field extends out from the ship and the location of the jump drive
within the ship would be important as one would need to make sure the
entire ship was covered. IMTU, I stuck with the grid.

>>But TNE had Virus in it, so you can't really trust it.<<

As if jump drives are more plausible...

\_/
DED

> >>But TNE had Virus in it, so you can't really trust it.<<
>
> As if jump drives are more plausible...

That made me laugh.

> >>The "jump grid" bag in Supp 9 would not have been necessary in TNE, as
> we dispensed with the notion that the jump "grid" was an external physical
> envelope. We would have just talked about how the slung cargo would have
> to be tucked in in sufficiently close to the carrier's structure to fit
> within the jump field.<<
>
> I'd forgotten about that, but then you get into arguments of how far the
> jump field extends out from the ship and the location of the jump drive
> within the ship would be important as one would need to make sure the
> entire ship was covered. IMTU, I stuck with the grid.

Yeah. I was going to get into the J-space pseudo-physics, but obviously
time ran out. You can see the leading edge of what was coming in RSB,
because jump field shape had to do with how deep into J-space is
penetrated, and the shape affects the volume of the jump field, etc. I
thought it would be pretty interesting, but that's what everyone says
about stuff that never gets published.