Talk:Double Asteroid Redirection Test
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Spaceflight C‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
A news item involving Double Asteroid Redirection Test was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 25 November 2021. |
An item related to this article has been nominated to appear on the Main Page in the "In the news" section. You can visit the nomination to take part in the discussion. Editors are encouraged to update the article with information obtained from reliable news sources to include recent events. Notice date: 26 September 2022. Please remove this template when the nomination process has concluded, replacing it with Template:ITN talk if appropriate. |
Orphaned references in Double Asteroid Redirection Test
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Double Asteroid Redirection Test's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "targets":
- From AIDA (mission): "AIDA study". ESA. 19 December 2012. Archived from the original on 20 October 2014. Retrieved 2014-09-19.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (help) - From Don Quijote (spacecraft): "Sancho study: designing the minimum Earth escape spacecraft". ESA. 23 May 2012. Archived from the original on 15 May 2015. Retrieved 17 June 2015.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (help)
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 18:46, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
- Interesting, thanks. But I see no "targets" reference now, so it looks like this was fixed a while ago. ★NealMcB★ (talk) 19:47, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
6 km/s impact - possible mistake - or not
In the article is written: " It is estimated that the impact of the 500 kg (1,100 lb)[12] DART at 6 km/s (3.7 mi/s)[4] will produce a velocity change on the order of 0.4 mm/s, which leads to a small change in trajectory of the asteroid system, but over time, it leads to a large shift of path"
6 km/s cannot be true as no extraterrestical probe can be slower than terrestical escape velocity ( v > v[sub]k2[/sub] = 11.2 km/s). -- 80.146.191.154 (talk) 07:20, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
- Have you considered what the quoted velocities are relative to? — JFG talk 11:47, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
- Also, the 11.2 km/s escape velocity is explained in this way: "Escape velocity decreases with altitude.... At the surface of the Earth, if atmospheric resistance could be disregarded, escape velocity would be about 11.2 km (6.96 miles) per second [relative to the Earth]." https://www.britannica.com/science/escape-velocity . As the object gets further from Earth, its velocity relative to the Earth decreases (as long as gravitational, or other, forces, etc do not happen or can be ignored). This new velocity will be the escape velocity at that point.
- The 6 km/s is the relative velocity between the 2 objects that are impacting.
Significance - deflection distance
After doing the math, it looks like an inch a second leads to less than 500 miles a year, right? Not much compared to the size of the Earth? A few mm per second is less than that. Jokem (talk) 03:12, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
- From my math, it looks like it is just under 500 (497 miles) if you take one inch per second then times it by 60 (minute) then times it by 60 (for an hour) then times it by 24 (for a day) then times it by 365. Jurisdicta (talk) 03:37, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
- "A miss is as good as a mile". It doesn't take much of a nudge to make a significant difference if you're trying to prevent a collision. 500 miles seems an adequate margin for a miss as that's twice the altitude of the ISS. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:52, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
- A potential impactor might need to be deflected (or delayed) by an Earth radius ? - Rod57 (talk) 12:08, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
- Since the Earth is about 8000 miles around, I don't see where 500 miles is much comfort. Instead of landing on Yuma, AZ, it lands on the outskirts of El Paso. Maybe I am missing someone's point here? Jokem (talk) 08:44, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Mass breakdown - How much Xenon will NEXT-C use after dedicated F9 launch
Can we clarify : When planned as a secondary payload, DART would have used a long push from NEXT to get out of earth orbit and on its way to the asteroid. Now DART is a dedicated payload on F9, will it still use NEXT (and xenon) as much as originally planned ? NASA still seem to be hoping for a 1000 hours of operation. Since F9 put it on escape trajectory, is the NEXT thruster still essential for the mission, or just a bonus to cause a harder impact ? The article says craft is 610 kg, and implies impactor is 500 kg. Does that mean it will expend 110 kg of propellant en-route (including Xe) ? or that the craft includes a 500 kg passive ballast mass (copper?) ? Is there a breakdown of the 610 kg total launch mass ? - Rod57 (talk) 12:04, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:15, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Image Description
The first image of the article titled "The DART impactor and CubeSat ... " has a description text that includes dates, that do not include the year. This makes it a little confusing when newly reading the article and will be exasperated when the article moves into historical context. SquashEngineer (talk) 13:57, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Not done This file is hosted on commons. Any requested changes should be directed to the specific image talk page [1]. Pabsoluterince (talk) 23:03, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Possible inconsistency?
In the 'Sequence of operations for impact' segment there is a picture from 3 seconds before impact, but the impact is still a day or two away from now. The picture appears to be from an official press kit, so I assume it's a render or artist's interpretation for illustrative purposes, but that is not disclosed here. Shouldn't we make clear that this is just a placeholder image, or wait for the real thing? 2603:8080:5701:9E54:E0FB:BA41:E1D9:182B (talk) 16:52, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
- Indeed, those images are intended to simulate/illustrate what DART will see leading up to the impact. I feel that including these images here can be misleading, so I've removed them for now. That final simulated image at T-3 seconds is a Hayabusa close-up image of 25143 Itokawa, whose image happens to be copyrighted on Wikipedia... Nrco0e (talk) 18:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Confused by various terms used for the same (?) thing
To me the various indications “asteroid”, “double asteroid”, “minor planet”, “moon” are confusing. In the section “Effect of the impact on the orbit of Dimorphos and Didymos” is written that the hit must be directed opposite to the asteroid’s motion. But isn’t only the minor-planet moon Dimorphos to be impacted, as stated in the initial section?Redav (talk) 13:50, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Why change context to “was”?
The mission just started with all the data analysis? 65.36.113.88 (talk) 23:19, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Yes, I agree. The mission has not been completed yet (they still have to gather data and complete other things). 64.67.42.115 (talk) 23:42, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Why was this article flagged for “contains an unencyclopedic or excessive gallery of images”?
Okay, maybe it can be edited down slightly, but this should set the standard for maximum number of “encyclopedic” photos.