Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday May 19 2015, @09:47AM   Printer-friendly
from the sharks-not-included dept.

ExtremeTech has an article suggesting the International Space Station may add a Laser "CAN-non" in coming years.

The business end of the proposed laser system would be a Coherent Amplification Network (CAN) laser that can focus a single powerful beam on a piece of debris. The laser would vaporize the surface of the target, causing a plume of plasma to push the object away from the station and toward the atmosphere.

This is still just a proposal, but a test version of the laser might be deployed to the station in a few years.

The Extreme Universe Space Observatory (EUSO) is scheduled to be installed on Japan's ISS module in 2017. This is not by design a space-junk-killing piece of equipment. It's intended to monitor the atmosphere for ultraviolet emissions caused by cosmic rays.

However it might serve as an experimental platform for testing (at much lower power) the capability of slight deflections of orbiting space junk.

Also covered here.

We discussed the general problem of space junk here on Soylent News at the beginning of the month.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by engblom on Tuesday May 19 2015, @12:34PM

    by engblom (556) on Tuesday May 19 2015, @12:34PM (#185040)

    I fully know the whole piece of junk does not evaporate, and no I did not misread the summary. The piece of junk gets trust from the vaporizing a small part of the piece. That vapor might stay in space for quite long time. I can imagine those vapors, once solid again will be highly abrasive for high speed satellites and other space equipment.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by iwoloschin on Tuesday May 19 2015, @12:48PM

    by iwoloschin (3863) on Tuesday May 19 2015, @12:48PM (#185044)

    If the vaporized bits are small enough, they might not be of any harm. A single atom smashing into a plate of steel/aluminum/titanium/etc probably won't hurt it much. A gram of atoms is likely a problem though. So the question is really how well is it vaporized, and how easy would it be to detect and fire again on the smaller bits?

    • (Score: 2) by sudo rm -rf on Tuesday May 19 2015, @01:39PM

      by sudo rm -rf (2357) on Tuesday May 19 2015, @01:39PM (#185052) Journal

      Well, one could start training here [atari.com]

    • (Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Tuesday May 19 2015, @02:13PM

      by nitehawk214 (1304) on Tuesday May 19 2015, @02:13PM (#185063)

      I think the plan is to get the things to thrust towards the earth. Using the laser to vaporize a bit on one side causes it to become a tiny little rocket for a moment. If you get it to thrust towards the earth. then on the next orbit it will be below you.

      Now, this might not help for something that is in a highly elliptical orbit, since its apogee would still be above you. Also a problem for things that are spinning. But if you can get it to dip further into the atmosphere, the Earth will drag it in. My guess is this thing would not make the objects noticeably smaller, so tracking on the next orbit isn't an issue.

      --
      "Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
      • (Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Tuesday May 19 2015, @06:24PM

        by frojack (1554) on Tuesday May 19 2015, @06:24PM (#185161) Journal

        You merely try to get it to thrust against the direction of travel.
        Orbital mechanics will handle the rest.

        --
        No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
        • (Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Wednesday May 20 2015, @09:30PM

          by nitehawk214 (1304) on Wednesday May 20 2015, @09:30PM (#185736)

          Ahh yes, you are absolutely correct, It is all a matter of velocity, not direction. I should know better.

          Though I wonder how this lets you deal with debris if you are the one catching up to the debris when it crosses your orbit. I suppose in that situation the space station or craft with the laser also has it's own propulsion and would perform a maneuver to avoid. Once it passes the debris by, it can pew pew it with the laser to get the debris to deorbit.

          --
          "Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
    • (Score: 2) by mhajicek on Tuesday May 19 2015, @04:18PM

      by mhajicek (51) on Tuesday May 19 2015, @04:18PM (#185113)

      Pretty sure the vapor would be akin to RCS thruster exaust. Light and dispersed.

      --
      The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
  • (Score: 2) by forkazoo on Tuesday May 19 2015, @05:46PM

    by forkazoo (2561) on Tuesday May 19 2015, @05:46PM (#185145)

    The laser also imparts some kinetic energy directly, so some of the vapor is being pushed out of orbit as well, rather than staying in orbit. The vapor particles will also be heading in fairly random directions, so a lot of it that gets pushed out will now be in a weird highly eccentric orbit that may be atmosphere-intersecting anyway. They rest will mostly diffuse to the point where the density isn't appreciable higher that space near earth to start with, or get swept away by solar wind. The exact behavior will depend on the specific orbit and composition of the satellite being shot at, nature of the shooting, relative orientations of pew pew laser and target, etc. I'm sure they'll run many simulations on any specific proposed shootdowns, and avoid anything they aren't very confident is a good idea.

  • (Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday May 19 2015, @06:22PM

    by frojack (1554) on Tuesday May 19 2015, @06:22PM (#185159) Journal

    I fully know the whole piece of junk does not evaporate, and no I did not misread the summary.

    I suggest you DID misread the summary.

    causing a plume of plasma

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.