Impactor hunter

[Digit]

Yep! Plus a certain amount of debris would also be moved away from Earth's orbit, definitely a case of doing something is better than doing nothing I think.

Roy.

[E.P. Grondine]

Back here in the real world, it turns out that archaeology does have practical applications:

http://en.rian.ru/science/20100624/159552578.html

E.P. Grondine
Man and Impact in the Americas
(some people call it a landmark book, others a great book, others use it constantly for reference.
Chris, Johnny, there's still a special on it over at http://cosmictusk.com)

[Minimalist]

Logic would suggest that small masses travelling at X mtrs/sec would stand less chance of penetrating the atmosphere or be as damaging as more massive impactors with the same velocity.

Not only would logic suggest that, Roy, experience proves it 10,000 times per night, every night: shooting stars!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVLSwwr2wMk

If you could be certain to get them that small. Breaking up a single 100,000-ton asteroid into a hundred 1000-ton asteroids doesn't seem to be a superior option.

[Digit]

Accept Min that there is a good chance that some would now miss altogether.

Roy.

[Minimalist]

Maybe, but the earth's gravitational attraction would seem to be more of a factor for a smaller object than a larger one. I still think it would be best to detect it far enough out so that the orbit of the whole thing could be minutely changed. That's all it would take. I know there are theories ( I wouldn't call them "plans" just yet ) to do exactly that. The time to test them is now...not when a large rock is two days out.

[E.P. Grondine]

I think you folks are beginning to understand why I wrote "Man and Impact in the Americas".

[E.P. Grondine]

Amazing. It turns out that archaeology actually has a practical use:

RELEASE: 10-156

NASA PLAYS KEY EXPLORATION ROLE IN NEW ADMINISTRATION SPACE POLICY

WASHINGTON -- NASA Administrator Charles Bolden issued the following
statement today regarding President Obama's new National Space
Policy:

"NASA's new direction, announced as part of the fiscal
year 2011 budget, is embodied in the new National Space Policy. I
would like to thank Lori Garver, my deputy, who led this policy
review for NASA, and Phil Mcalister, the NASA representative, who led
our working group effort.

"NASA has a key role in achieving the goals defined in the new policy.
We are committed to working with other agencies, industry, and
international partners to achieve national goals in exploration -
human and robotic - and technology development that will ensure a
robust future for the U.S. and our friends around the world.

"The new space policy sets our nation on a path to develop the next
generation of capabilities we will need to live and work in space.
Human and robotic exploration will flourish and bring a wealth of
economic and scientific dividends. We will reach new horizons of
discovery and expand the reach of humans throughout the solar system.

"This policy embraces the historical roles of the agency, such as
research and development of launch systems, robotic missions to
destinations throughout the solar system, and Earth science,
including climate change.

"But it also challenges NASA to embrace new roles and areas of
emphasis, such as enhancing use of the International Space Station,
IDENTIFYING AND CHARACTERIZING NEAR EARTH OBJECTS, and eliminating
or limiting orbital debris and its danger to spacecraft.

"In addition, we will expand our partnerships with private industry,
allowing commercial companies to take a larger role in the
exploration of space while NASA pursues those activities the agency
is uniquely qualified to do.

E.P. Grondine
Man and Impact in the Americas
(some people call it a landmark book, some a great book, some keep it at hand for reference)