[sai_c]

There is only one point around the whole Oumuamua topic for me, that makes me a bit sad. Extraterrestrial or not is not it, but that we had no means to just fly there (with or without humans) and checkout what it is.

Even worse, it seems no one in the scientific community (please correct me if I'm wrong) stepped up and said "We need to change this!". And it seems we will not have those means in the coming years/decades.

Honestly, if we can't do this in our own neighbourhood, because we simply lack the will power and consensus to do it, it says a lot about the future of space exploration.

[bagels]

It's a really challenging goal. It'd take probably more delta-v than any other spacecraft launched. Oumuamua orbit wasn't characterized until after it was already heading away from the solar system, which makes the requirements even higher and the launch window pretty small.

Budgets have to be allocated and prioritized who will pay for it and prioritize it ahead of other space missions?

Finding a scientist who would love to have this is a lot easier than finding someone to fund and build this. It'd probably require a rocket with more detla-v than any other ever made to be put on standby for years, ready to launch within a few days.

[lamontcg]

And you're not going to be doing a multi-planet flyby gravity assist trajectory, you're going to have to do it direct, which makes the delta-V budget crazy high.

It probably looks something like having a fueled up Saturn V in LEO with the probe on it (particularly for a lander rendezvous, never mind the insanity of doing sample return) just waiting to go (and nevermind boiloff).

[lamontcg]

Well https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00945... actually proposes a multiplanet flyby (Venus Earth Earth) followed by an Oberth burn at Jupiter. Would need to launch in 2028 on SLS and has a 15.8 km/s ∆v budget and flyby in 2054. Unfortunately I can't see the full text (sci-hub still down) so I don't know what the details are of the powered flyby of Jupiter or the relative velocity when they intersect.

[bagels]

Thanks for sharing this! Much lower dv budget if you can do gravity assists, but you have the obvious downside of a 30 year mission! High risk of failure.

It has to compete against landing on Titan, landing on Venus, etc.

[thro1]

Couldn't we have couple of probes boucing at high speeds (what are the limits?) around planets in the system ready to redirect just for such case ?

[thro1]

I just found out about the Comet Interceptor - designed to remain parked in space, ready to fly to a new target at short notice https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/esa-mission-la... - but it's not the same as a few like that being already in motion and between slingshots at different corners of our system (if something like that could be at all possible..)

[lamontcg]

If you want to intercept something that will quickly leave the solar system you have to get on a trajectory that will quickly leave the solar system. And you have no idea of what the correct plane will be in advance.

[sandworm101]

It wouldn't need to be all that big. Park something out beyond geostationary orbit where it can sit ready to go on a few days notice. It doesn't need to be complex. A GoPro atop of a bathtub of xenon, with some big solar panels, would have the necessary deltaV. Slapping an srb on it for the initial oberth kick away from earth should speed it up too.

[a2800276]

Not sure why this would make you sad. There are an arbitrary number of events in the universe that could warrant attention. There's no possible way we could create means to "fly" to all of them. Trying to create these means is futile, unless you arbitrarily pick "intercept big space sausage floating through the solar system".

Neglecting the obvious question of priorities considering all the shit we could be fixing on earth, better observatories would be much more useful than spaceships to take Bruce Willis out to inspect stuff. And there is a lot of funding going towards capabilities in that direction.

[avz]

It seems to me that "the universe" is not an appropriate term for our close planetary neighborhood.

There is a difference between an interstellar object passing within 85 times the distance to the Moon (so closer than Mars at closest approach to Earth) and say a supernova thousands or millions of light years away (and hence thousands or millions of years ago).

I don't know where the universe begins, but I'd say Low Earth Orbit and the Moon don't qualify while Proxima Centauri does. For reference:

Distance from ground to space: ~100 km

Distance from California to Australia: ~12,000 km

Distance to the Moon: ~400,000 km

Distance to 'Oumuamua's closest approach: ~33,000,000 km

Distance to Mars at closest approach: ~55,000,000 km

Distance to the Sun: ~150,000,000 km

Distance to Neptune: ~4,500,000,000 km

Current distance to 'Oumuamua ~5,000,000,000 km

Distance to Sedna: ~13,000,000,000 km

Distance to Proxima Centauri: ~40,000,000,000,000 km

[a2800276]

s/universe/solar system/

There are still plenty of other possibile curiosities than interstellar rocks in closer proximity than Proxima Centauri. Each would require highly specialized instruments.

Not sure what the window of opportunity was for O6a, but it's doubtful that it would have been possible to prepare a mission in that timeframe. It follows that such "spaceships" would need to be prepared ahead of time and maintained indefinitely for an event which may not occur again for centuries ...

[russdill]

There will be plenty of other interstellar objects that pass through our solar system. Oumuamua wasn't some special once in a lifetime event, it's just we are just getting the capability online to see these objects. We will see these objects earlier and earlier, we will see a lot more of them, and in all likelyhood future missions will intercept such objects. Maybe even sample return someday.

[euroderf]

So what is the chance that one will be made of antimatter ? Somewhere close to nil ?

[russdill]

It would not make it very far as it passes though interstellar gas that is not antimatter.

[antonvs]

Science fiction has skewed people’s perspective of what’s possible or practically achievable in space travel.

The issue is not willpower and consensus, but what’s economically and physically possible.

You’re right, though, that this says a lot about the future of space travel. We’re unlikely to have successful colonies on other planets within the next century or so, and sending live humans to other star systems is even less likely.

[Dalewyn]

Kerbal Space Program should be compulsory to all if for no other reason than to teach how moving around in space /actually/ works.

Most of the spaceflying we see in games and on TV would never actually work because that's not how physics work.

[lm28469]

Most people don't know how a pressure cooker, a microwave or a radio work, we have a lot of much more important things to teach before teaching space travel

[ianai]

From interviews of scientists in places like John Michael Godier’s YouTube and similar, I do sense scientists see the value and some demand to be able to investigate such things. I think one recent interviewee even mentioned having drawn up plans for building up some readiness and a project to do a fly by of Oumuamua.

Further, rocket launches seem to be an emerging market in that the price to launch comes down as more capability ramps up. So it’s possible the market might answer this before government.

[adastra22]

We absolutely have the capability to send a flyby mission to visit 'Oumuamua. We just don't have the money or inclination to do so, given other priorities.

[T-A]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/european-comet-in...

[DeWilde]

Maybe better not to do it, could be a trap that provokes a dark forrest strike.

[colordrops]

Avi Loeb stepped up and he's getting shit on left and right for it, despite very strong credentials.

[bayesian_horse]

If you put out an extraordinary claim on extraordinarily weak evidence, that is usually what happens.

[colordrops]

What's weak about the evidence?

[a2800276]

On the other hand, he's likely the only astrophysicist apart from Neil Degrasse Tyson any non astrophysicist has ever heard of.

[adastra22]

Hawking? Einstein?

[JPLeRouzic]

Those are not astrophysicists but theoretical physicists?

[adastra22]

I’m not sure that is a real distinction. Astrophysics is a subfield of physics, and these men were physicists who dealt cosmology.

[a2800276]

They are also no longer among us. Sorry, should have qualified "living"