Starship Asterisk*

metamorphmuses wrote:Hmm, yes, you're right it could not be manned. But surely its trajectory would need to be very precise, and its alignment to the asteroid would have to be precise as well. So, it would need to be adaptive and "intelligent" in its navigation, or it would have to be monitored and remotely piloted by a crew? I admit my ignorance here. I ask myself, what would be the feedback response time necessary to make course adjustments? Because if it were not an artificially "intelligent" craft, and the course adjustments were needed on a minute-by-minute basis, then a remote crew on Earth is not feasible, due to the fact that the asteroid would probably be several light-minutes away from Earth. I'm thinking out loud here.

Chris Peterson wrote:Getting it there would be easy- no more difficult than any number of flyby probes we've operated in the past. And the control system would be pretty simple, as well- not what anybody would call AI, just a simple servo system. All the tug does is orient itself on one side and maintain a fixed distance by modulating its thrust. That's one thing that makes this system attractive- its extreme simplicity (which also translates to reliability).

Beyond wrote:

emc wrote:I appreciate that there's a potential solution to oblivion.

Oh... i don't know... oblivion has it's advantages.

emc wrote:

Beyond wrote:

emc wrote:I appreciate that there's a potential solution to oblivion.

Oh... i don't know... oblivion has it's advantages.

i imagine if most of us faced oblivion we would be olivion in the john

Beyond wrote:That is so Newtonian of you

emc wrote:

Beyond wrote:That is so Newtonian of you

it’s all thanks to a cranial lump and my shabby attire smeared with greasy fingers from reading about gravitational tractors and neufer’s long standing influence… it’s beyond reasoning

TEB wrote: Only the solid ones are really dangerous.