Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Need opinions and guidance building a space elevator.
- Thread starter mcglyph
- Start date
It would appear the collective minds of TB have defeated the space elevator. Maybe if he used flats things would have turned out better. 
Yeah? My answers aren't going to convince you. There isn't anything to be said which would so much as a put a dent in your tightly held conviction.
The Deep Space Tether Pathfinder (DSTP) is a 5000 kilometer long rotating tether, weighing two tons, to be sent into deep space to test the engineering of a LSE or MSE. As a test of the ability of Space Elevators to return surface samples, the rotation of the DSTP would be used to match the relative velocity between one tip and the Moon during a flyby, allowing for the collection of a surface sample in a “touch-and-go” fashion from a suitable scientific target, such as the floor of Shackleton Crater in the Lunar South Polar Region. The collected sample would then be returned to Earth by the release of a return capsule roughly one half rotation period later, when elevator tip velocity is directed towards the Earth for a direct return trajectory. After sample release, the DSTP would continue into deep space, allowing for long term observations of tether performance in the space environment.
The Lunar Space Elevator Infrastructure (LSEI), a follow-on to the DSTP, is a much longer tether extending from the Lunar Surface, through the Earth-Moon L1 Lagrange point (EML 1) and into cis-lunar space. The LSEI prototype, requiring one launch of a heavy lift vehicle, would be able to lift roughly 1 ton of lunar samples per year, and deploy a similar quantity of equipment onto the Lunar surface. The LSEI would significantly enhance the ability of a Deep Space Habitat (DSH) at EML1, for a small fraction of the total cost of a DSH by, for example, enabling on-site DSH laboratory research into Lunar samples, as well as supporting robotic exploration on the surface. liftport.com.
You have no idea what my convictions are. I've actually found the space elevator to be an intriguing idea ever since I read Kim Stanley Robinson's Red Mars. I was hoping that you would have some better arguments to make, since you have presented yourself as an advocate for the concept.
You say you know what Lagrange's points are, then you probably know why they're not used for body transfers.
Lagrange's points (L1 or L2 for the Moon) are useful to maintain objects in orbit. As transfer points from body to body they are rather crappy, you actually try to avoid them every time you can because they require extra energy to leave them.
For example you can't travel from L5 to L2 on the momentum you'd gain from cycling the Earth.
You'd need engines that would defeat the cargo purposes. In the end it is less fuel costy to send your probe straight from Earth and land to the moon than to use Lagrange points that destroy your momentum.
Besides, as I stated earlier there isn't a single good reason today to settle on the Moon. Which is why we're not there.
The single (not 10 as required for many threads) scientifical argument you delivered earlier is moot.
Einstein's laws have already been well verified by shooting lasers at the moon. There are many flat natural areas that make great reflectors with a high albedo. It was done over 20 years ago, at the end of the 80s. No need to do it again.
The rest of the arguments you provided (pasted actually) are so poor I can't believe you fall for them.
Seriously? Did you even read this before posting it? If so how do you dare using such blabber as an argument in a discussion?
Man that is true, I don't. What is also true is, I'm only an advocate. I've repeatedly said there are no set plans for this, many questions must be answered, and I won't be the one doing any of the answering. If you want more information, you could go to the website, liftport.com, and post in the forum.I'm not a tech. I understand the basic idea.
Well hello, someone is actually way more in tune with the realities than me. As, I've said repeatedly, this is not my project. The list I made, except for the first three, comes straight from a NASA page. As for your understanding of the Lagrange points, and why...these are good questions. Go to liftport.com, post them, I'm sure someone there could give you an answer. I cannot. Honestly, thank you for bringing something interesting to this thread. I believe in this project, I know how many people are involved with this, if it was as simple, as this is not going to work because,"..."then folks with big brains like you would not be on board, thus, there is more to it. There has to be.
I'm not doing any of it. I'm an advocate. If you have questions I encourage you to go to liftport.com. Michael is really busy right now, though I'am going to try to get him on here to respond to some of these very technical questions.
Okay, that graphic sealed the deal.
That is completely nuts. It would be best to let this thread die.
Oh? Can you further describe what makes this so nuts? Honestly, I wanna know. I wanna know why you think so. Really.
OK I was all set to give some $ to this worthy cause but I just looked at my checkbook and I am still broke from a bad investment in a sea monkey farm and the money I gave Geraldo for a share of what he found in Al Capone's secret vault.
"No one in this world has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby."
H. L. Mencken
"No one in this world has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby."
H. L. Mencken
Cost-to-benefit ratio.
How much does steel or carbon fibre cost? Take that amount and figure how much of that material is going to be needed to create thousands of miles of that? Then, take that cost and figure out how much money it will take to send that to the moon. It's a huge waste of money. Think about how much steel goes into a suspension bridge. It takes huge amounts of transportation costs just to get the steel from the steel mill to the fabricator and then from the fabricator to the bridge site. Then, you have to put it all together because it goes there in pieces. Do you really think it's feasible to send hundreds of rocket missions to space (oh, I thought the space elevator was supposed to bring costs down because rockets are a waste of money, hmm, I guess not), to send materials to space and the workers to put it together to build a space elevator? It's thousands of miles long. A railroad from the east coast to the west coast is well over 3,000 miles. No one at liftport_money_scam.com has put forth the logistical expenses because it is totally nuts.
Will you accpet one, from me (though not the OP)?
GREEN MOON CHEESE!
MOAR SPACE ROCKS!
There, look, I went and outdid myself...
It would appear the collective minds of TB have defeated the space elevator. Maybe if he used flats things would have turned out better.
Or more smilies.
But, if you have just $1 to donate to me, or even better $10 to make you a super-supporter, I will have unlocked the secrets of the space time continuum and made Teleportation a reality within the next 12 months! And please hurry, I owe my [del]dealer[/del] uh, sponser, $5 for that last hit.
I have been following this thread sense it started.
I think it is funny.
Saturday night (Sunday morning really) I was coming home from a show and while surfing the radio I came across a station airing a old Art Bell show. I am not sure what year it was originally broadcast but from some of the other talk I would put it somewhere around Bill Clinton's first term (I would guess 94-95).
Art had some guests on talking about this subject.
I found it very funny that they were saying the same thing 17-18 years ago as the OP is saying now.
Nothing has changed.
Technology has come a long way sense then and no progress has been made on this.
Just to show how much, here is a cell phone from 1994 (I had one like it!)
To today,
I think it is one big pipe dream and I do not see any use for it.
As I stated before, If it was feasible and useful it would be built.
I think it is funny.
Saturday night (Sunday morning really) I was coming home from a show and while surfing the radio I came across a station airing a old Art Bell show. I am not sure what year it was originally broadcast but from some of the other talk I would put it somewhere around Bill Clinton's first term (I would guess 94-95).
Art had some guests on talking about this subject.
I found it very funny that they were saying the same thing 17-18 years ago as the OP is saying now.
Nothing has changed.
Technology has come a long way sense then and no progress has been made on this.
Just to show how much, here is a cell phone from 1994 (I had one like it!)
To today,
I think it is one big pipe dream and I do not see any use for it.
As I stated before, If it was feasible and useful it would be built.
I actually did go to liftport.com, and browsed through the site looking for some additional information in response to my question. I went to the "Lunar elevator" tab of the site, and clicked the "Why does it matter?" link. This is what it says, quoted in its entirety:
Before we can build Earth’s Elevator, we’ll need to build one on the Moon. It is significantly easier, and much much cheaper. Importantly - we can build it with current technology – in about eight years. To meet our target date, we need to complete a 1-year Feasibility Study, beginning next year. That will cost $3 million.
Just to be sure I wasn't missing something, I looked through all of the other links under the "Lunar Elevator" tab, but other than a couple of cursory paragraphs and a link to the Wikipedia article, there is no additional information to be found.
So where is the technical information? Honestly, I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt and keep an open mind, but that site is a complete joke.
Edit: I just found the "downloads" section of the site, and saw that is a "Business" section, with subcategories for Cost/Benefits, Finance/Accounting, and Operations/Management section of the site. "A ha," though I, "this must be where I will find the projections for all of the alleged cost savings." I clicked the links, fully prepared to be dazzled, or at the very least, informed, but every link has the same message: "This category doesn't have any files yet." Wow.
