Is there any kind of news regarding the development of the space elevator? There seem to be precious few articles about it, although I read in an engineering magazine recently that research into carbon nanotubes is really picking up steam. I'm chomping at the bit here. I want the space elevator. Is there any way the space elevator wouldn't be the most revolutionary invention in the history of the human race? Its still looking like it'll be a reality sooner or later, right?
- Status
The required technology is many decades away, so it's really not much of a concern for those of us alive today.
Actually, one thing I don't see discussed often in connection with the space elevator is that it is like a railroad: the entity that owns and/or operates it has to own infrastructure between point A and point B. An SSTO rocketplane would be a lot more flexible: take off from any point, land at any point. Of course, there is no reason both SSTOs and space elevators could not exist together...
What does it matter how its owned? Nobody ever said railroads are bad for that. The idea is to be efficient and cheap, railroads are good things.
What I don't get is how can you guarantee 100% it will not fall down! It would be like nuclear power, just the threat of it makes it unusable.
And also, is gravity not just 10% weaker in LEO? So we've only saved us 10% of the energy from launching from Earth? Doesn't sound impressive.
What I don't get is how can you guarantee 100% it will not fall down! It would be like nuclear power, just the threat of it makes it unusable.
And also, is gravity not just 10% weaker in LEO? So we've only saved us 10% of the energy from launching from Earth? Doesn't sound impressive.
Well, the idea is not necessarily that it would be more energy efficient overall, but that it would be able to operate on lesser amounts of power over a longer period of time, and therefore would be MUCH cheaper to operate. No need for super-cooled liquid oxygen and all that stuff. It could possibly even be solar powered or solar power-assisted one day, perhaps by placing a solar array at GEO.
But the cost savings are really the great allure of space elevators. I think I read somewhere that estimates to construct it once adequate materials are available ranged between 5 and 10 billion US dollars. Pee in the ocean as far as space ventures are concerned. And then the cost to haul materials and people up on it would be much cheaper as well; something like $10/kilo. On that kind of cost, many, many kinds projects, experiments and equipment could be placed in space. Even elementary schools could potentially do space experiments.
The cost of building large spacecraft for exploring the solar system and possibly nearby stars would decline precipitously. We could build massive radio arrays and even optical arrays in space that would make our current scopes looks like toys. I believe the space elevator really will be our stepping stone to the stars.
And from what i understand, the main hurdle right now is just perfecting our ability to produce high quality and longer strand carbon nanotubes. The really great thing about that is that there are there are many other industries other than just the space industry that are actively working on developing carbon nanotube technology. I've read predictions, albeit perhaps overly optimistic predictions, that carbon nanotubes will be up to par within 10-15 years. But a lot of the stuff I've read about it other than that engineering article are already several years old, so that's why I was wondering if anyone knew what the current prospects were.
But the cost savings are really the great allure of space elevators. I think I read somewhere that estimates to construct it once adequate materials are available ranged between 5 and 10 billion US dollars. Pee in the ocean as far as space ventures are concerned. And then the cost to haul materials and people up on it would be much cheaper as well; something like $10/kilo. On that kind of cost, many, many kinds projects, experiments and equipment could be placed in space. Even elementary schools could potentially do space experiments.
The cost of building large spacecraft for exploring the solar system and possibly nearby stars would decline precipitously. We could build massive radio arrays and even optical arrays in space that would make our current scopes looks like toys. I believe the space elevator really will be our stepping stone to the stars.
And from what i understand, the main hurdle right now is just perfecting our ability to produce high quality and longer strand carbon nanotubes. The really great thing about that is that there are there are many other industries other than just the space industry that are actively working on developing carbon nanotube technology. I've read predictions, albeit perhaps overly optimistic predictions, that carbon nanotubes will be up to par within 10-15 years. But a lot of the stuff I've read about it other than that engineering article are already several years old, so that's why I was wondering if anyone knew what the current prospects were.
There are all kinds of other things beside nano tubes that need to be developed for space elevators but yes anything that provides access to space at under $1000 or so a pound would definitely make space much more main stream space elevators are great but it's gonna take a while. the major technologically issues are the cable(nanotubes) and the climber and political cuz that's always an issue.
Shouldn't the cable be some 30 000 km long to not fall down?
The counterweight mass at the end of the cable would resemble that of a satellite on geosynchronous orbit. The mass that could climb up the cable would need to be small enough to not pull the counterweight satellite down.
Is this not correct thinking? Couldn't we already build a sort of space elevator by launching a satellite to GEO with 30 x 10^3 km fishing string attached to it?
The counterweight mass at the end of the cable would resemble that of a satellite on geosynchronous orbit. The mass that could climb up the cable would need to be small enough to not pull the counterweight satellite down.
Is this not correct thinking? Couldn't we already build a sort of space elevator by launching a satellite to GEO with 30 x 10^3 km fishing string attached to it?
How are you supposed to tie the ends? In a bow knot? Even if the rope holds, how about whatever that's attached to it? How can something not break, it'll whip the entire planet.
Booban":294ub2b6 said:
A lot of the fishing string at the satellite's end would weigh very little, it's moving at orbital or near orbital speed. Tension created by the string's own mass would become less and less the higher up you go. Only portion of the string near Earth, a few hundred or thousand kilometers, would weigh and hence would create tension.
Is the string strong enough to hold a few hundred kilometers of it's own mass (before the string itself becomes weightless)? If it is, the rest of the strength could be used for the payload to crawl up the string.
Edit: this could be rather easily determined by measuring the density of the string and then tying a mass of required proportion to it and seeing whether it will hold. If it does, I see no big problems with this concept.
That's the very reason carbon nanotubes are required no material currently has the ability to work substancial research has gone into it plus fishing string wouldn't be able to carry anything else up
Space elevator tech implementations
Some SF books, like 3001: Final Odyssey, have space elevators supported from below. Others, like the Red Mars/Green Mars/Blue Mars series support it from above by hanging it. Which method is better? Also, the Red Mars/Green Mars/Blue Mars version went past parking orbit to provide escape velocity to objects. That, though increased the stress. Would you do that?
Some SF books, like 3001: Final Odyssey, have space elevators supported from below. Others, like the Red Mars/Green Mars/Blue Mars series support it from above by hanging it. Which method is better? Also, the Red Mars/Green Mars/Blue Mars version went past parking orbit to provide escape velocity to objects. That, though increased the stress. Would you do that?
Re: Space elevator tech implementations
The working space elevator design as I understand it relies on centripetal force to keep it suspended. To achieve this, the elevator can either be tethered to a large object positioned somewhat past geosynchronous earth orbit, or extend the cord itself well beyond GEO, to the point that it reaches a state of equilibrium. As you pointed out, this can be useful for launching vehicles because it will slingshot a vehicle without needing any fuel. I believe the point where the tension is greatest is halfway between the earth's surface and GEO, so whether you use a counterweight or extend the tether, it should be the same either way.
The working space elevator design as I understand it relies on centripetal force to keep it suspended. To achieve this, the elevator can either be tethered to a large object positioned somewhat past geosynchronous earth orbit, or extend the cord itself well beyond GEO, to the point that it reaches a state of equilibrium. As you pointed out, this can be useful for launching vehicles because it will slingshot a vehicle without needing any fuel. I believe the point where the tension is greatest is halfway between the earth's surface and GEO, so whether you use a counterweight or extend the tether, it should be the same either way.
Re: Space elevator tech implementations
Keep in mind, I am not an engineer, nor do I have a college degree of any kind. Having said that, I think the counterweight configuration is better, because the counterweight can also serve as a spaceport to control entry and exit from that end of the space elevator. Just IMHO!
Keep in mind, I am not an engineer, nor do I have a college degree of any kind. Having said that, I think the counterweight configuration is better, because the counterweight can also serve as a spaceport to control entry and exit from that end of the space elevator. Just IMHO!
Re: Space elevator tech implementations
I see the biggest challenge in the initial assembly. I understand how it could stay in place once built but how do you get it to remain in place while placing the cable? Do you build a platform in space and then launch the cable toward the ground at super speed? I see no way to build from the ground up.
I see the biggest challenge in the initial assembly. I understand how it could stay in place once built but how do you get it to remain in place while placing the cable? Do you build a platform in space and then launch the cable toward the ground at super speed? I see no way to build from the ground up.
Re: Space elevator tech implementations
Build from the ground up with balloons. Or drop from geosync orbit while simultaneously moving your counterweight out.
bdewoody":15phyofj said:
Build from the ground up with balloons. Or drop from geosync orbit while simultaneously moving your counterweight out.
Re: Space elevator tech implementations
Well, it's all about the materials. If you can go past geosync to provide free launches, it'd be preferable. The thing is, though, you're going to need propulsion to get back to earth, so I'm not sure it's necessary to be able to slingshot things off the elevator. Either way, you've already accomplished so much by getting things into a nice high orbit.
willpittenger":24eov5ut said:
Well, it's all about the materials. If you can go past geosync to provide free launches, it'd be preferable. The thing is, though, you're going to need propulsion to get back to earth, so I'm not sure it's necessary to be able to slingshot things off the elevator. Either way, you've already accomplished so much by getting things into a nice high orbit.
Re: Space elevator tech implementations
I would still like to see a somewhat serious discussion concerning what the method of construction would be for a space elevator. Assuming that all of the material science is resolved.
As I stated before I understand somewhat how it would operate and stay in place once built but I just can't seem to wrap my mind around a technique to actually build it.
It's very difficult to build radio and TV towers much taller that 1,500 ft high. I don't see balloons as a viable solution and I don't see anyone ever getting a permit to drop it from geo sync. orbit.
So come on guys and gals show me some realistic construction solutions.
I would still like to see a somewhat serious discussion concerning what the method of construction would be for a space elevator. Assuming that all of the material science is resolved.
As I stated before I understand somewhat how it would operate and stay in place once built but I just can't seem to wrap my mind around a technique to actually build it.
It's very difficult to build radio and TV towers much taller that 1,500 ft high. I don't see balloons as a viable solution and I don't see anyone ever getting a permit to drop it from geo sync. orbit.
So come on guys and gals show me some realistic construction solutions.
Re: Space elevator tech implementations
Well, assuming it's basically a big nanotube cable, I don't see how you could do it from the ground up. I would think you'd have to assemble the cable in geosynchronous orbit, attach a weight to the ground end, and do a controlled re-entry that lands in the vicinity of where you want the bottom to be, and pray you've done all the math right!
Well, assuming it's basically a big nanotube cable, I don't see how you could do it from the ground up. I would think you'd have to assemble the cable in geosynchronous orbit, attach a weight to the ground end, and do a controlled re-entry that lands in the vicinity of where you want the bottom to be, and pray you've done all the math right!
Re: Space elevator tech implementations
This is the basic construction method I've heard. Basically, an ultra-thin carbon nanotube cable is fabricated on earth, wound around a spindle, and loaded onto a rocket. It is believed a single rocket cold carry a very thin, full length cable. Once in GEO, the cable is unfurled both toward the earth and in the opposite direction at once (if the extended tether counterweight method is used). Assuming this is all carried out successfully, this very basic elevator cable will not be able to carry much weight, but it will be strong enough to have a climbing machine pull another strand of cable skyward. Then those two strands can pull double duty and pull even more strands up. Eventually, it will be strong enough to be fully functional. That's the theory anyway.
tanstaafl76":29zfu8xj said:
This is the basic construction method I've heard. Basically, an ultra-thin carbon nanotube cable is fabricated on earth, wound around a spindle, and loaded onto a rocket. It is believed a single rocket cold carry a very thin, full length cable. Once in GEO, the cable is unfurled both toward the earth and in the opposite direction at once (if the extended tether counterweight method is used). Assuming this is all carried out successfully, this very basic elevator cable will not be able to carry much weight, but it will be strong enough to have a climbing machine pull another strand of cable skyward. Then those two strands can pull double duty and pull even more strands up. Eventually, it will be strong enough to be fully functional. That's the theory anyway.
Re: Space elevator tech implementations
Here is a thought experiment or story idea.
Dropping the line requires a factory in orbit, a factory which becomes the plumb of the line. It extrudes one continuous cable of carbon nanotube, sending it down to earth in a smooth, uninterrupted push, stopping just shy of the mountaintops. Initially the tubular cable, as it descends, is as hollow and thin as possible, with less hollowness and less thinness as the manufacturing process pays out the cable. At the top, the cable is as solid, thick as practical, perhaps with a diameter of 20-25 metres, as opposed to a diameter of 3-4 metres at the bottom.
The factory has attached to it another factory that makes short, stubby, heavy-as-lead blocks that are bolted on upwards and outwards. The completed assembly looks like a full wide flower bathed in sunshine on top of a long stalk reaching to the misty clouds below.
The cable is not anchored to the earth because the plumb of the line is orbiting x thousand kilometres lower than the Communications Satellite Band (CSB). The orbits are parallel (that is, parallel the way lines of longitude are parallel) with: the Central Australian desert, Singapore, west of the Himalayas, Western Russia; and also Alaska, California, Ecuador, and Rio. With every orbit the cable is moved east one eighteenth of one degree plus a constant.
Down the line is poured a resin, which causes debris to stick to it. When the resin gets to a certain weight, it peels off, and falls to earth or sea, except where friction from atmospheric drag has eaten the debris-sodden resin. The dropline scours the entire low earth orbit zone such that in less than eighteen years (18 * 360 degrees, days) Space Debris is no longer a problem. Someone might be able to get a permit using a Debris Sweeper (DS) designed thus.
New areas of research open up, including: Weather Data Collection at any and all altitudes using disposable radio-transmitter data-collectors at many points along the cable; Tornado and Storm Impact on the dropline before Martian droplines are deployed; Hazard Analysis and Safety Margins prior to fixing to earth; two possible energy sources: Static Electricity over the northern and southern light dance; and heat at the lower reaches where the bottom of the dropline suffers atmospheric drag.
--
When the DS is finished, when the skies are clear of space junk, people ask what to do with this strange thing. The cable's penultimate orbit is fixed at the above-mentioned Ecuador-Rio, Australia-Singapore orbit, the plumb is raised to its penultimate height of a couple of hundred kilometres inside the CSB, and the cable is lowered to its penultimate depth just above Ecuadorian mountaintops. (This assumes the factory is still viable.) Countries' Space Departments dock with the dropline at about a thousand miles an hour, and use an external elevator powered by small liquid-fuel rocket to get out of earth's gravity. Countries' Manufacturing Departments use it to receive ore shipments sent down from space. The ore drop deploys an aero-brake for the finishing leg to hard ground or ocean. The South China Sea seems a good place to quarantine the drop before distribution to the area bounded by Bangladesh, Philippines, Indonesia -- the next wave of power-manufacturing economies. And the Australian desert seems good for land drop quarantines.
This arrangement ultimately proves unsatisfactory. The cable is halted over the equator at Ecuador. Even here it isn't fixed to the earth, but at least it is stationary. By this time carbon nano technology and material has advanced enough to produce a tube-and-cable-in-one that measures the same internal diameter (say, six or 7 metres) throughout the length of the cable beyond reasonable fear of breakage or twisting. When it is discovered that the thing can handle severe variations in internal air pressure, regardless of external vacuum or one atmosphere, someone starts positing two droplines joined at bottom and top. If helium pressure below the ascender is greater than above, and helium pressure above the descender is greater than below, then there is a cancellation effect.
So, the DS is now regarded as a scaffold; a second and third carbon nanotube factories are positioned beside and below the first at the mid-point of the new droplines that now get built. The second and third factories each make two equal cables of sufficient internal diameter to accomodate elevator cars, each push one outwards and one downwards, four in total. The factories themselves have a cavity through which cars may pass in either direction without stopping. The down cables are guided on their path down to earth by means of rings around by them and the scaffold, or by electro-magnets, or by something else entirely. The scaffolding is also used for maintenance and emergencies, and promoted as a safety feature.
End of story idea or thought experiment.
--
Advantages of DS:
The dropline is free to bob up and down, so is safer, less scary than a fixed one;
The dropline goes over human manufacturing and launching areas, which generally aren't on equator;
Space debris is cleared.
Disadvantages of DS:
Docking with the dropline at greater than the speed of sound and that is probably hot is scary;
The sonic boom still upsets people.
Advantages of counter-weighted droplines:
What goes up costs nothing when what goes down also costs nothing;
Disadvantages of both synched and non-synched droplines:
If maintenance of orbit is halted, or the cable breaks, then crash.
Tangents arising out of DS:
The wider the DS, the better for sweeping;
Commercial airliners had better not lose track of the cable;
The elevator may need a parachute or some such escape system;
When the ore shipmments or resin-pours drop off the line, the plumb shoots back up;
The heat at the bottom of the cable might be convertible and converted into useful work;
If a team of daredevils attempts to latch onto the moving target and parachute into the ocean, the sonic boom dissuades them, the heat prevents them, and the air speed crunches them.
--
Unsatisfactory Alternative:
A clumsy way to do it is manufacture it completely in the vacuum of space, where it might prove stronger than one manufactured on earth, point the lower end towards a point just outside the Equatorial Belt, and move in. When the in-forces and the out-forces reach a certain mathematical relationship (not equilibrium), or when the pro-geo-synch forces and anti-geo-synch forces reach a certain mathematical relationship (again not equilibrium), or both, the cable is accelerated eastwards so that it is travelling at the same speed as its neighbouring satellites, and slotted into its final celestial working place (=resting place) amongst the satellites. The move towards earth is recommenced until Tocuhdown. The method would require inordinate amounts of thrust and counter-thrust and a high level of confidence in Dropline Orbital Mechanics.
David C, nux, 1st post at SDC
bdewoody":2vobef74 said:
Here is a thought experiment or story idea.
Dropping the line requires a factory in orbit, a factory which becomes the plumb of the line. It extrudes one continuous cable of carbon nanotube, sending it down to earth in a smooth, uninterrupted push, stopping just shy of the mountaintops. Initially the tubular cable, as it descends, is as hollow and thin as possible, with less hollowness and less thinness as the manufacturing process pays out the cable. At the top, the cable is as solid, thick as practical, perhaps with a diameter of 20-25 metres, as opposed to a diameter of 3-4 metres at the bottom.
The factory has attached to it another factory that makes short, stubby, heavy-as-lead blocks that are bolted on upwards and outwards. The completed assembly looks like a full wide flower bathed in sunshine on top of a long stalk reaching to the misty clouds below.
The cable is not anchored to the earth because the plumb of the line is orbiting x thousand kilometres lower than the Communications Satellite Band (CSB). The orbits are parallel (that is, parallel the way lines of longitude are parallel) with: the Central Australian desert, Singapore, west of the Himalayas, Western Russia; and also Alaska, California, Ecuador, and Rio. With every orbit the cable is moved east one eighteenth of one degree plus a constant.
Down the line is poured a resin, which causes debris to stick to it. When the resin gets to a certain weight, it peels off, and falls to earth or sea, except where friction from atmospheric drag has eaten the debris-sodden resin. The dropline scours the entire low earth orbit zone such that in less than eighteen years (18 * 360 degrees, days) Space Debris is no longer a problem. Someone might be able to get a permit using a Debris Sweeper (DS) designed thus.
New areas of research open up, including: Weather Data Collection at any and all altitudes using disposable radio-transmitter data-collectors at many points along the cable; Tornado and Storm Impact on the dropline before Martian droplines are deployed; Hazard Analysis and Safety Margins prior to fixing to earth; two possible energy sources: Static Electricity over the northern and southern light dance; and heat at the lower reaches where the bottom of the dropline suffers atmospheric drag.
--
When the DS is finished, when the skies are clear of space junk, people ask what to do with this strange thing. The cable's penultimate orbit is fixed at the above-mentioned Ecuador-Rio, Australia-Singapore orbit, the plumb is raised to its penultimate height of a couple of hundred kilometres inside the CSB, and the cable is lowered to its penultimate depth just above Ecuadorian mountaintops. (This assumes the factory is still viable.) Countries' Space Departments dock with the dropline at about a thousand miles an hour, and use an external elevator powered by small liquid-fuel rocket to get out of earth's gravity. Countries' Manufacturing Departments use it to receive ore shipments sent down from space. The ore drop deploys an aero-brake for the finishing leg to hard ground or ocean. The South China Sea seems a good place to quarantine the drop before distribution to the area bounded by Bangladesh, Philippines, Indonesia -- the next wave of power-manufacturing economies. And the Australian desert seems good for land drop quarantines.
This arrangement ultimately proves unsatisfactory. The cable is halted over the equator at Ecuador. Even here it isn't fixed to the earth, but at least it is stationary. By this time carbon nano technology and material has advanced enough to produce a tube-and-cable-in-one that measures the same internal diameter (say, six or 7 metres) throughout the length of the cable beyond reasonable fear of breakage or twisting. When it is discovered that the thing can handle severe variations in internal air pressure, regardless of external vacuum or one atmosphere, someone starts positing two droplines joined at bottom and top. If helium pressure below the ascender is greater than above, and helium pressure above the descender is greater than below, then there is a cancellation effect.
So, the DS is now regarded as a scaffold; a second and third carbon nanotube factories are positioned beside and below the first at the mid-point of the new droplines that now get built. The second and third factories each make two equal cables of sufficient internal diameter to accomodate elevator cars, each push one outwards and one downwards, four in total. The factories themselves have a cavity through which cars may pass in either direction without stopping. The down cables are guided on their path down to earth by means of rings around by them and the scaffold, or by electro-magnets, or by something else entirely. The scaffolding is also used for maintenance and emergencies, and promoted as a safety feature.
End of story idea or thought experiment.
--
Advantages of DS:
The dropline is free to bob up and down, so is safer, less scary than a fixed one;
The dropline goes over human manufacturing and launching areas, which generally aren't on equator;
Space debris is cleared.
Disadvantages of DS:
Docking with the dropline at greater than the speed of sound and that is probably hot is scary;
The sonic boom still upsets people.
Advantages of counter-weighted droplines:
What goes up costs nothing when what goes down also costs nothing;
Disadvantages of both synched and non-synched droplines:
If maintenance of orbit is halted, or the cable breaks, then crash.
Tangents arising out of DS:
The wider the DS, the better for sweeping;
Commercial airliners had better not lose track of the cable;
The elevator may need a parachute or some such escape system;
When the ore shipmments or resin-pours drop off the line, the plumb shoots back up;
The heat at the bottom of the cable might be convertible and converted into useful work;
If a team of daredevils attempts to latch onto the moving target and parachute into the ocean, the sonic boom dissuades them, the heat prevents them, and the air speed crunches them.
--
Unsatisfactory Alternative:
A clumsy way to do it is manufacture it completely in the vacuum of space, where it might prove stronger than one manufactured on earth, point the lower end towards a point just outside the Equatorial Belt, and move in. When the in-forces and the out-forces reach a certain mathematical relationship (not equilibrium), or when the pro-geo-synch forces and anti-geo-synch forces reach a certain mathematical relationship (again not equilibrium), or both, the cable is accelerated eastwards so that it is travelling at the same speed as its neighbouring satellites, and slotted into its final celestial working place (=resting place) amongst the satellites. The move towards earth is recommenced until Tocuhdown. The method would require inordinate amounts of thrust and counter-thrust and a high level of confidence in Dropline Orbital Mechanics.
David C, nux, 1st post at SDC
Re: Space elevator tech implementations
Welcome to the forum David!
drwayne
Forum Moderation Team
Welcome to the forum David!
drwayne
Forum Moderation Team
Re: Space elevator tech implementations
One requirement I have is a stopping point at GEO even if the cable itself extends past there. That would allow cargo to be loaded an unloaded. Otherwise, the cable is only a launching system.
Also, in 3001, each elevator would cover several city blocks and had several "normal" elevators inside, including some the size of rooms that could go at very high speeds with no G-forces felt by the occupants.
One requirement I have is a stopping point at GEO even if the cable itself extends past there. That would allow cargo to be loaded an unloaded. Otherwise, the cable is only a launching system.
Also, in 3001, each elevator would cover several city blocks and had several "normal" elevators inside, including some the size of rooms that could go at very high speeds with no G-forces felt by the occupants.
Re: Space elevator tech implementations
I like the idea of the counterweight being adjustable.. then you can send up shipments of cable, or alternatively manufacture them on orbit, and you just let the counterweight out a bit as you drop more cable. Plus it gives you the ability to adjust the orbit of the cable without using thrust, atleast vertically. You'd probably have the same kind of reel-type setup for letting out cable on both the coutnerweight portion and the earthbound portion of the cable in this scenario.
Bottom -----------------(GeoSync)<adjustable>---(Counterweight)
I like the idea of the counterweight being adjustable.. then you can send up shipments of cable, or alternatively manufacture them on orbit, and you just let the counterweight out a bit as you drop more cable. Plus it gives you the ability to adjust the orbit of the cable without using thrust, atleast vertically. You'd probably have the same kind of reel-type setup for letting out cable on both the coutnerweight portion and the earthbound portion of the cable in this scenario.
Bottom -----------------(GeoSync)<adjustable>---(Counterweight)
aphh":2bxa73a0 said:
No, that wouldn't work. For the other posters, the counterweight is put beyond geosync orbit, so there is tension on the string and large weights can be pulled up it without pulling it down.
I know there have been some competitions as far as climbers go, but I just "don't get" the complexity of that problem somehow. Can't we run a power cord along the tether to power the climber, thus powering it much like trolley cars are powered? This seems like a 30 cent engineering problem holding up a 10 billion dollar space elevator.. in a word: ridiculous. IMO the strength of the tether and the dynamics of oscillation/etc are the only problems of note on this challenge.
If it happens it will be the greatest invention of the 21st century.
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
The Lyrid meteor shower peaks this weekend, but don't expect much this year- Started by Admin
- Replies: 0
-
-
A video made by me about space and the loneliness in the universe- Started by drakotol
- Replies: 54
-
SETI chief says US has no evidence for alien technology. 'And we never have
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 11
Latest posts
-
-
Question Recommendations for International Research Competitions- Latest: Andrii Dzygunenko
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram