Do the Russians know something we don’t?

In the waning days of 2009, the head of Russia’s federal space agency, Dr. Anatoly Perminov, made huge headlines by telling a Russian radio station that their space agency was contemplating sending a mission to Apophis, an 885-foot (270-meter) asteroid first discovered in 2004. Why? To prevent it from hitting Earth, of course.

If you think you’ve heard this story before, you’re probably one of those people who sat through the painful Bruce Willis movie, Armageddon, or its equally painful predecessor, Deep Impact, in 1998. My initial reaction upon hearing about Dr. Perminov was to assume it must have taken an awful long time for the DVDs of those cinematic clunkers to reach Moscow, but apparently the man wasn’t poking fun at Hollywood. He was dead serious.

Although he wouldn’t divulge the source of his information, Perminov was quoted as saying, “I don’t remember exactly, but it seems to me it [Apophis] could hit the Earth by 2032. People’s lives are at stake. We should pay several hundred million dollars and build a system that would allow us to prevent a collision, rather than sit and wait for it to happen and kill hundreds of thousands of people.”

By “we” he meant more than just the Russians, since he intimated that at some point NASA, the European Space Agency, and even China’s space agency might be invited to join the effort. Just what most Americans wanted to hear, I’m sure. After pouring billions of dollars of stimulus money into rescuing our banks, investment firms, car companies, and God knows what else, what’s a few hundred million more to save the world?

What makes this story particularly bizarre is the fact that, assuming he had not started celebrating New Year’s Eve a day or two early, Anatoly Perminov is not your run-of-the-mill doomsday prophet. Quite the contrary. The man holds a PhD in engineering from Russia’s Military Academy, he’s a respected professor who chairs the Moscow Aviation Institute’s Operations of Launch Vehicles and Spacecraft department, and he’s written more than 70 technical papers on space exploration. He’s been the Director of Russia’s space agency since March 2004, and before that he managed the testing and launching of satellites and missiles for Russia’s Department of Defense. With credentials like that, one has to wonder – what does Dr. Perminov know that we don’t know?

Two years ago I had an opportunity to interview Dr. David Morrison, senior scientist at the NASA Astrobiology Institute and one of the agency’s foremost experts on not only the risk of asteroid impacts, but potential ways to mitigate that risk. According to Dr. Morrison, there is no danger of Apophis hitting the Earth when it flies by us on April 13, 2029. He went on to add, however, that there is “… a very, very small chance that, subsequent to that flyby, it will find itself in another orbit, which brings it right back to hit the Earth seven years later. That is a chance that is not zero, and it is worth considering seriously. But it’s not an imminent threat.”

So, at one point in the interview I asked Dr. Morrison the obvious question: were we to discover an asteroid on a collision course with Earth, do we have the technology to prevent a collision? His answer was very interesting. “Given several decades of warning, I have no doubt that we have the space technology and could develop the specific techniques to deflect an asteroid. But given only a few years of warning, we do not have the technology.”

Isn’t that precisely the point Dr. Perminov is trying to make? Except he seems to think we should do it right now, which brings me back to my original question. Do the Russians know something we don’t?

I mentioned in my last blog post I will travel to Anaheim in early February to attend several shows, notably the Pacific Design & Manufacturing Show and Medical Design & Manufacturing West . That means once again subjecting myself to the rigors of airport security – whipping out my photo ID, emptying my pockets of loose change, taking off my shoes, belt, and watch, and if necessary show security I’m not carrying any top-secret files on my laptop computer.

I’ll likely pass through the familiar X-ray machines I’ve been going through for several decades as a technology journalist. But since the foiled Nigerian terrorist attack attempt aboard a Northwest Airlines flight landing in Detroit this past Christmas, there’s been a renewed outcry for more effective screening devices, as the X-ray machine failed to detect the terrorist’s concealed explosives. Indeed, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has for months been conducting a pilot program at selected airports, where a whole body scanning machine that uses millimeter-wave imaging technology screens passengers instead of the x-ray machine.

Not surprisingly, whole body scanning has come under fire from some elected officials due to concerns they violate the privacy of individuals. We asked NASA Tech Briefs readers in our Question of the Week if whole body imaging should be used for airport security, and so far the response has been in favor of the technology.

Like many of the respondents, I believe the potentially greater security whole body scanning technologies offer outweigh any possible indignities these devices impose. Various parts of my body have been imaged for medical purposes throughout my life, so I’m not bothered by airport security looking at my insides for a few minutes.

But I do concur with one of the respondents, who raised the issue of how effective and safe whole body scanning technologies are. Are there are potential problems arising from being exposed to ultra-high frequency energy fields? Can they pose a risk to people with certain medical conditions? How accurate and thorough are these machines? Can they be fooled by certain objects or in certain lighting situations?

Then you have to consider the cost and logistics of implementation. How many hundreds of millions of dollars are we talking about retrofitting hundreds of airports to use these technologies? And will whole body scanning technologies be adopted in other nations as well? What good is it if someone cannot transport concealed weapons through our stringent airport security systems, but can easily pass through another nation’s more lax airport security systems and possibly create havoc when a plane is landing or is in mid-flight?

Let’s hope our officials look beyond knee-jerk privacy concerns to address the nitty-gritty safety and economic considerations of using whole body scanning.

As the holidays fade and the New Year unfolds, it’s back to business for most of us. For NASA Tech Briefs, that includes a bunch of trade shows and conferences our editors will attend over the next few months.

One show I plan to attend is the Pacific Design & Manufacturing Show, taking place at the Anaheim Convention Center in Anaheim, Calif., from February 9 through 11. The show will feature the latest design and manufacturing solutions from hundreds of companies. The diverse array of products and services include adhesives, CAD/CAM/CAE software and services, electrical and electronic components, fluid handling media and controls, instruments and controls, materials, mechanical components, motors and motion controls, testing and inspection products and services, and valves, switches, and controls.

No less than seven other shows are co-located with the Pacific Design & Manufacturing Show. Three of the more significant shows are the Medical Design & Manufacturing Show West, Electronics West, and Green Manufacturing Expo. The Medical Design & Manufacturing Show West and Green Manufacturing Expo represent the burgeoning fields of medical technology and “green” technology – sectors that held their own during the economic downturn and are increasingly important to design engineers.

In coming weeks, I hope to get more details on some of the products and technologies being shown. If your company plans to exhibit, drop me a line and let me know what you’ll be showing. Hopefully, we can meet during the show to discuss what’s new and exciting.