Need opinions and guidance building a space elevator.

[boomboom4200]

Spambot ??

 

[bkbirge]

This thread has been dead too long...

http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Acad...90783588352&trk=eml-anet_dig-b_nd-pst_ttle-cn

 

[bkbirge]

The vapor tech that won't die...
http://www.space.com/24739-space-elevator-tether-technology.html

 

[DwaynieAD]

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

 

[Gravedigger Dav]

I'm still waiting for flying cars.
Hopefully that elevator would go to a parking garage.

 

[96tbird]

This news really flies in the face of the first couple of posts in this thread. So much disbelief from armchair physicists.

Good thing Canadians refuse to listen to naysayers.

This is great, I can't wait! Then, When it falls down, and it will, I can't wait to say "I knew it." It will be fun to have 20km of space garbage spread out over the Canadian wilderness.

 

[bluesblaster]

not really, who's gonna clean that mess up? Besides it might fall on some hapless woodland creature, and for what ? the cost to boost a rocket to that height is small compared to the price of building a tower a half mile tall, where is the savings? the whole idea is stupid

 

[fdeck]

Here's the patent:

Invalid Link Removed

A patent has to demonstrate that the technology is feasible, but only to the extent of convincing the patent examiner. There is no requirement of a working model. It looks like some thought went into the theory, but of course the proof is in the pudding. And there are many strategic reasons to apply for a patent, other than to actually develop the technology yourself.

 

[DwaynieAD]

This news really flies in the face of the first couple of posts in this thread. So much disbelief from armchair physicists.

Good thing Canadians refuse to listen to naysayers.

This is great, I can't wait! Then, When it falls down, and it will, I can't wait to say "I knew it." It will be fun to have 20km of space garbage spread out over the Canadian wilderness.

No it doesn't, article clearly states despite the patent the technology doesn't exist

 

[Febs]

Here is an update on the Kickstarter project. Not suprisingly, it appears to consistent primarily of complaints from contributors that they were scammed, that Liftport did not even ship them the rewards that they were promised, and that Michael Laine has refused to provide an accounting of the $100,000+ that he received as a result of the Kickstarter campaign:

Invalid Link Removed

 

[96tbird]

No it doesn't, article clearly states despite the patent the technology doesn't exist

Sarcasm folks.

 

[Angus]

People should not be surprised- $100k was a meaningless amount for this kind of technology, and this kind of response is happening more and more with crowdfunding (no "rewards", people getting pissed at the lack of accounting/transparency even though they are clear that there is no oversight, etc). If you want to donate to a crowdfunding project, do not expect it to be paid back in any fashion. It is not a good thing, but remembering that might keep people from donating to causes when they have serious expectations.

IMO, crowdfunding is often problematic for large-scale projects.

And there are many strategic reasons to apply for a patent, other than to actually develop the technology yourself.

Having looked over the patent, and knowing the current state of patent filing, I think that is the reason this one was filed.

 

[96tbird]

The most logical way to attempt to build one is as in the patent: thin light construction kept rigid by pressurization. Basically a balloon in a tube shape.

Patenting that process is a play at future earning potential without having to actually develop it.

 

[TOOL460002]

Patent law is so nuanced and detailed. I highly doubt there are many people who could legitimately sign off on this and know it is viable.

 

[Jazz Ad]

the cost to boost a rocket to that height is small compared to the price of building a tower a half mile tall, where is the savings? the whole idea is stupid

Actually, it's not.
The current cost of sending stuff to space is roughly 10k$ per kg, which prevents any large scale project to happen in orbit. The ISS is pretty much the only exception, it cost hundreds of billions and a dozen of countries to make it happen.
The cost of a space elevator would be covered within years and the first country to get it will have an instant monopoly on space delivery.

 

[bluesblaster]

I still don't see the point , so your a half mile closer to orbit. In the grand scheme of things it seems like a fairly insignificant advantage.

 

[Jazz Ad]

I don't understand your half-mile comment.

There are currently roughly 22,000 man-made objects orbiting the Earth, including 2,200 functionning satellites.
Yet, you don't see the economical advantage of dividing the shipping cost of these by 1000?

 

[Angus]

I don't understand your half-mile comment.

There are currently roughly 22,000 man-made objects orbiting the Earth, including 2,200 functionning satellites.
Yet, you don't see the economical advantage of dividing the shipping cost of these by 1000?

Except that there is no real economic comparison possible, since we do not even have the technology necessary to build a building on this scale, thus we do not know what it would really cost to design, construct, maintain and use a building like this. There is really zero way to even suggest it is economically feasible.

 

[bluesblaster]

I don't understand your half-mile comment.

There are currently roughly 22,000 man-made objects orbiting the Earth, including 2,200 functionning satellites.
Yet, you don't see the economical advantage of dividing the shipping cost of these by 1000?

nevermind, I read it wrong. However a 12 mile high tower still seems like to little considering orbit is another 50 miles up.

 

[David Jayne]

There are currently roughly 22,000 man-made objects orbiting the Earth, including 2,200 functionning satellites.

Which is kind of a problem for some huge tethered, stationary object in that giant field of 15,000 MPH debris. It would inevitably be damaged or destroyed creating even more space junk. There's already so much up there that it's self - multiplying. It may eventually become unmanageable making orbital missions impossible.
Space Junk Explained: How Orbital Debris Threatens Future of Spaceflight (Infographic)