ALBERT

Description: Interpretation of the impact record on Gaspra requires understanding of the effects of collisions on a target body of Gaspra's size and shape, recognition of impact features that may have different morphologies from craters on larger planets, and models of the geological processes that erase and modify impact features. Crater counts on the 140 sq km of Gaspra imaged at highest resolution by the Galileo spacecraft show a steep size-frequency distribution (cumulative power-law index near -3.5) from the smallest resolvable size (150 m diameter) up through the large feature (1.5 km diameter crater) of familiar crater-like morphology. In addition, there appear to be as many as eight roughly circular concavities with diameters greater than 3 km visible on the asteroid. If we restrict our crater counts to features with traditionally recognized crater morphologies, these concavities would not be included. However, if we define craters to include any concave structures that may represent local or regional damage at an impact size, then the larger features on Gaspra are candidates for consideration. Acceptance of the multi-km features as craters has been cautious for several reasons. First, scaling laws (the physically plausible algorithms for extrapolating from experimental data) indicate that Gaspra could not have sustained such large-crater-forming impacts without being disrupted; second, aside from concavity, the larger structures have no other features (e.g. rims) that can be identified with known impact craters; and third, extrapolation of the power-law size distribution for smaller craters predicts no craters larger than 3 km over the entire surface. On the other hand, recent hydrocode modeling of impacts shows that for given impact (albeit into a sphere), the crater size is much larger than given by scaling laws. Gaspra-size bodies can sustain formation of up to 8-km craters without disruption. Besides allowing larger impact craters, this result doubles the lifetime since the last catastrophic fragmentation event up to one billion years. Events that create multi-km craters also globally damage the material structure, such that regolith is produced, whether or not Gaspra 'initially' had a regolith, contrary to other models in which initial regolith is required in order to allow current regolith. Because the globally destructive shock wave precedes basin formation, crater size is closer to the large size extrapolated from gravity-scaling rather than the strength-scaling that had earlier been assumed for such small bodies. This mechanism may also help explain the existence of Stickney on Phobos. Moreover, rejection of the large concavities as craters based on unfamiliar morphology would be premature, because (aside from Stickney) we have no other data on such large impact structures on such a small, irregular body. The eight candidate concavities cover an area greater than that counted for smaller craters, because they are most apparent where small craters cannot be seen: on low resolution images and at the limb on high resolution images. We estimate that there are at least two with diameter greater than 4 km per 140 sq km, which would have to be accounted for in any model that claims these are impact craters.

Description: We have examined the lifetimes of Near-Earth asteroids (NEA's) by directly computing the collision probabilities with other asteroids and with the terrestrial planets. We compare these to the dynamical lifetimes, and to collisional lifetimes assumed by other workers. We discuss the implications of the differences. The lifetimes of NEA's are important because, along with the statistics of craters on the Earth and Moon, they help us to compute the number of NEA's and the rate at which new NEA's are brought to the vicinity of the Earth. Assuming that the NEA population is in steady-state, the lifetimes determine the flux of new bodies needed to replenish the population. Earlier estimates of the lifetimes ignored (or incompletely accounted for) the differences in the velocities of asteroids as they move in their orbits, so our results differ from (for example) Greenberg and Chapman (1983, Icarus 55, 455) and Wetherill (1988, Icarus 76, 1) by factors of 2 to 10. We have computed the collision rates and relative velocities of NEA's with each other, the main-belt asteroids, and the terrestrial planets, using the corrected method described by Bottke et. al. (1992, GRL, in press). We find that NEA's typically have shorter collisional lifetimes than do main-belt asteroids of the same size, due to their high eccentricities, which typically give them aphelia in the main belt. Consequently, they spend a great deal of time in the main belt, and are moving much slower than the bodies around them, making them 'sitting ducks' for impacts with other asteroids. They cross the paths of many objects, and their typical collision velocities are much higher (10-15 km/s) than the collision velocities (5 km/s) among objects within the main belt. These factors combine to give them substantially shorter lifetimes than had been previously estimated.

Description: We have performed new simulations of the formation of asteroid satellites by collisions, using a combination of hydrodynamical and gravitational dynamical codes. This initial work shows that both small satellites and ejected, co-orbiting pairs are produced most favorably by moderate-energy collisions at more direct, rather than oblique, impact angles. Simulations so far seem to be able to produce systems qualitatively similar to known binaries. Asteroid satellites provide vital clues that can help us understand the physics of hypervelocity impacts, the dominant geologic process affecting large main belt asteroids. Moreover, models of satellite formation may provide constraints on the internal structures of asteroids beyond those possible from observations of satellite orbital properties alone. It is probable that most observed main-belt asteroid satellites are by-products of cratering and/or catastrophic disruption events. Several possible formation mechanisms related to collisions have been identified: (i) mutual capture following catastrophic disruption, (ii) rotational fission due to glancing impact and spin-up, and (iii) re-accretion in orbit of ejecta from large, non-catastrophic impacts. Here we present results from a systematic investigation directed toward mapping out the parameter space of the first and third of these three collisional mechanisms.

Description: Invest this decade in in situ instruments(including sample selection and handling can we choose using VR?) to TRL 6; put them on flight missions in the 2020s and 2030s to relevant destinations where in situ precision can provide meaningful constraints on geologic history.