The only thing that would be better than a reusable rocket is a space elevator.
In the future we would be able to travel to the Bigelow space hotels using Branson's Virgin galactic. Or perhaps we could travel from London to Sidney in 3 hours via his Spaceship three.
Quote from: michaelwy on 10/02/2011 10:26 pmIn the future we would be able to travel to the Bigelow space hotels using Branson's Virgin galactic. Or perhaps we could travel from London to Sidney in 3 hours via his Spaceship three. Virgin galactic has done nothing about orbital flight and point to point is not viable as a business.
The lack of markets, not the lack of technology, is what stands between us and cheap access to space. IMHO.
1. as long as Burt Rutan is alive, he also has the brains.2 Point to Point travel would be possible then. It would have to be about the price of a Concord ticket. The rich and famous can travel between Europe and Australia in a few hours. 3.As for the Space Elevator, it can be built of carbon nanotubes, according to Michio Kaku.
Quote from: michaelwy on 10/03/2011 02:01 am1. as long as Burt Rutan is alive, he also has the brains.2 Point to Point travel would be possible then. It would have to be about the price of a Concord ticket. The rich and famous can travel between Europe and Australia in a few hours. 3.As for the Space Elevator, it can be built of carbon nanotubes, according to Michio Kaku. 1. Rutan has retired2. Not true, there are many issues with PTP that don't make viable3. One person's opinion doesn't mean it's true.
1. Rutan has retired
2. Not true, there are many issues with PTP that don't make viable
3. One person's opinion doesn't mean it's true.
True. Materials are the #1 issue with space elevator concepts. It's not enough the material has to be *theoretically* capable of the load/unit mass it's got be available in the *quantity* to do the job. I'm not sure how many elevator advocates realize how much of this they need.
Quote from: Jim on 10/03/2011 02:24 am1. Rutan has retiredTrue. He was the public face of Scaled Composites. Time will tell how diligent Scaled have been in growing replacements. I suspect they have been quietly encouraging new talent in relative obscurity until now.
Quote from: john smith 19 on 10/03/2011 09:24 amTrue. Materials are the #1 issue with space elevator concepts. It's not enough the material has to be *theoretically* capable of the load/unit mass it's got be available in the *quantity* to do the job. I'm not sure how many elevator advocates realize how much of this they need. There are other issues, like orbital debris, weather, interference with other spacecraft, etc
Quote from: Jim on 10/03/2011 02:16 pmQuote from: john smith 19 on 10/03/2011 09:24 amTrue. Materials are the #1 issue with space elevator concepts. It's not enough the material has to be *theoretically* capable of the load/unit mass it's got be available in the *quantity* to do the job. I'm not sure how many elevator advocates realize how much of this they need. There are other issues, like orbital debris, weather, interference with other spacecraft, etcThere also are economic issues. Back of the envelope calculations quickly reveal that if space elevator price points are to fall below $500 per pound, staggering amounts of mass need to be lifted to LEO on a regular basis in order to amortize the capital costs of building the elevator, even if all of the countless technical challenges can be solved.A $10 billion space elevator with ten year service life "costs" $121 million per month merely for the capital. (I used a generic financial amortizatrion program). This figures also ignores ongoing operating costs.At a $1,000 per pound price target, an elevator operator needs to loft 121,000 pounds per month. At a $500 per pound price target, an elevator operator needs to loft 242,000 pounds per month.= = =Yes, I did do this on the back of a business envelope and may have dropped a few orders of magnitude. Others are encouraged to check my math.
few days ago new interesting concept appeared from DirectP2 see at page http://www.launchcomplexmodels.com/DirectP2/leviathan140.html and I made some calculation of how much acceleration could deliver underwater launch tunnel 50m long for Falcon9 54m high rocket placed at the depth of 100m underwater. so operation is simple:
{snip}And elevator throughput is seldom discussed. What speed can the elevator cars achieve? (recall they must travel 36,000 km to reach geosynch) How many elevator cars can the bean stalk support?In my opinion the elevator would be far from the panacea a lot of people wish for.
Quote from: Jim on 10/02/2011 11:16 pmQuote from: michaelwy on 10/02/2011 10:26 pmIn the future we would be able to travel to the Bigelow space hotels using Branson's Virgin galactic. Or perhaps we could travel from London to Sidney in 3 hours via his Spaceship three. Virgin galactic has done nothing about orbital flight and point to point is not viable as a business.Branson has said that if Spaceship Two is a success, and 400 people have already signed up for a trip, he would build an orbital Spaceship Three. Branson has the money to make it happen, and as long as Burt Rutan is alive, he also has the brains. Point to Point travel would be possible then. It would have to be about the price of a Concord ticket. The rich and famous can travel between Europe and Australia in a few hours.