Talk:1998 KY26

possible second moon

In my celestia program on my computer, I did some reserch on this asteroid. I changed the time on the program to 12 Jun, 2130 and I found out that earth's gravity has a probability of pulling it in orbit starting at ~455,463 km. Though it might orbit alot earlear. Fquantum ^talk 18:56, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Quasi-satellite

Every 11 years, the orbit of KY26 seems to pass the earth's orbit(near earth) in 5.3 weeks. The last time it did it was in 1996. The next time will be in 2009, when it will indirectly orbit the earth for one time. Dispite the approach in 2020, the earth's gravitational well might slow down the orbit enough to capture it in direct orbit then we will have a second moon. -- Fquantum ^talk 19:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Possible Impact

This planetoid has a 1 in 7.2 million possible chance of impacting in 2009. But what if the moon's gravity breaks up part of the apollo's surface and slingshots the planetesimals, and KY26, back to earth, with the possibilaty of hitting one of more famous buildings, or even cause a volcano eruption? Wouldn't that be terrible? Fquantum ^talk 16:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Use in a trip to Mars

According to simulations done in ORSA this asteroid will pass very near the Earth in 2013, then travel around the sun once, then on its next apogee it will pass near Mars (in 2015). A robotic spacecraft could rendezvous with 1998 KY₂₆ in April 2013, ride it around the sun mining water and whatever else until November 2014, then execute a burn to rendezvous with Mars in mid 2015. A similar opportunity exists in except that the middle portion of the trip (riding with the asteroid) would only be about 3 months rather than ~1.5 years. I don't know if this would constitute original research so I haven't added it to the article yet. Let me know if you think it would be OK to add this. -AndrewBuck (talk) 04:54, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 1998 KY26. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100701151236/http://spacewatch.lpl.arizona.edu/1998ky26.html to http://spacewatch.lpl.arizona.edu/1998ky26.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040223071648/http://echo.jpl.nasa.gov/~ostro/KY26/ to http://echo.jpl.nasa.gov/~ostro/KY26/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040218061952/http://echo.jpl.nasa.gov/~ostro/KY26/JPL_press_release.text to http://echo.jpl.nasa.gov/~ostro/KY26/JPL_press_release.text

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:59, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Outdated and unreferenced

The object's rotation period of only 10.7 minutes means that it has one of the shortest sidereal days of any known object in the Solar System -- This information was added in 2009,[1] without a citation. It may have been true at the time, but we now know dozens of objects with shorter rotation periods than this. Its rotation period is not unusual for objects of its size (of which almost none were known in 2009).[2] The section should either be updated, or the statement be removed. Renerpho (talk) 02:32, 17 September 2020 (UTC)