Author Topic: Space Elevator Development  (Read 27990 times)

Offline Paul451

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3790
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2694
  • Likes Given: 2334
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #60 on: 02/01/2021 06:14 am »
How do the space elevator proposals plan to deal with traffic in LEO moving at very high relative velocity? Sooner or later there would be a conflict between the tower and a satellite that has lost control or is being used deliberately as a weapon.

In general, just removing them. If you have a space elevator, you can build enough infrastructure to target and remove any satellite that threatens the tether.

Offline Paul451

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3790
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2694
  • Likes Given: 2334
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #61 on: 02/01/2021 06:16 am »
I was also mainly talking about orbital rings and feathers which can go to any orbit you want.

Feathers?

Offline daedalus1

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1031
  • uk
  • Liked: 534
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #62 on: 02/01/2021 06:26 am »
Once you have cheap reusable rockets to orbit, which is happening now. The impossible dream of space elevators to GEO becomes even more impossible.

Offline Seamurda

  • Member
  • Posts: 74
  • UK
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #63 on: 02/02/2021 01:14 pm »
I was also mainly talking about orbital rings and feathers which can go to any orbit you want.

Feathers?

Tethers - Skyhooks et al.

Online spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5550
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2757
  • Likes Given: 3306
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #64 on: 02/20/2021 01:30 pm »
A space elevator might work on the moon, or even Mars, but on earth the gravity well as well as sometimes extreme weather conditions might make a space elevator very impractical.

I could see the moon as a possible space elevator first location.  Gravity is lower, no atmosphere.  It could possibly run from LL1 to the Moon's surface. 

As someone said, new large cheap rockets might make a space elevator unnecessary, as well as large SEP tugs for large bulk non-perishable cargo. 

Offline aceshigh

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
  • Liked: 269
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #65 on: 02/22/2021 06:20 pm »

As someone said, new large cheap rockets might make a space elevator unnecessary, as well as large SEP tugs for large bulk non-perishable cargo.

I still see large cheap rockets akin to cheap airplanes.

You will still want to have ports and railroads to move very large amounts of cargo, even if the infrastructure to build a port for shipping containers is more expensive than building a 2km tarmac runway.

Offline Paul451

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3790
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2694
  • Likes Given: 2334
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #66 on: 02/23/2021 04:50 am »
I still see large cheap rockets akin to cheap airplanes.
You will still want to have ports and railroads to move very large amounts of cargo, even if the infrastructure to build a port for shipping containers is more expensive than building a 2km tarmac runway.

Problem is that, given how difficult it is to build a space elevator from Earth (likely impossible with known materials, given any kind of engineering safety factor), even if atomically-perfect nanotube-woven-ribbon was capable of supporting its own weight over that length, the amount of cargo that could pass up the tether each year would be low. It isn't really a "bulk transport".

In a way, it's rockets that are the cargo ships. Space elevators are supersonic maglev trains in undersea vacuum tunnels.

Offline darkenfast

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1620
  • Liked: 1946
  • Likes Given: 9957
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #67 on: 02/23/2021 08:12 am »
I would think that a tower would be vulnerable to any LEO object that cannot be kept under active control. All these orbits cross the equator.

To me, space elevators are one of those sci-fi ideas like building a monorail on pylons across, or a tunnel under, the ocean: maybe you can someday solve the challenges, but is it really going to be better than all the container ships and airliners that you will have at the time?
Writer of Book and Lyrics for musicals "SCAR", "Cinderella!", and "Aladdin!". Retired Naval Security Group. "I think SCAR is a winner. Great score, [and] the writing is up there with the very best!"
-- Phil Henderson, Composer of the West End musical "The Far Pavilions".

Offline daedalus1

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1031
  • uk
  • Liked: 534
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #68 on: 02/23/2021 09:34 am »
It certainly won't be for humans. If you could send it up at 40 mph (which is faster than any lift on earth, and they're mains powered..these certainly wont be) it would take a month. But on the bright side, you won't be weightless until you get there.

Offline aceshigh

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
  • Liked: 269
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #69 on: 02/23/2021 04:41 pm »
I still see large cheap rockets akin to cheap airplanes.
You will still want to have ports and railroads to move very large amounts of cargo, even if the infrastructure to build a port for shipping containers is more expensive than building a 2km tarmac runway.

Problem is that, given how difficult it is to build a space elevator from Earth (likely impossible with known materials, given any kind of engineering safety factor), even if atomically-perfect nanotube-woven-ribbon was capable of supporting its own weight over that length, the amount of cargo that could pass up the tether each year would be low. It isn't really a "bulk transport".

In a way, it's rockets that are the cargo ships. Space elevators are supersonic maglev trains in undersea vacuum tunnels.

No, then rockets would still be airplanes, and space elevators would be supersonic maglev trains in undersea vacuum tunnels.

Meaning... one is expensive to transport cargo, not efficient, and to VAST VAST columes, quite polluting.

And the other is for the moment, technologically unfeasible.

Offline Frogstar_Robot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 498
  • Liked: 724
  • Likes Given: 138
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #70 on: 03/10/2021 03:11 pm »
FYI


MARCH 9 - MARCH 11, 2021

ELEVATORS
S P A C E   E D I T I O N

From Icarus to Jack and the beanstalk, to ancient Anasazi legends – we have dreamed of ascending to the heavens. Usually, these are cautionary tales. “Don’t tempt the gods.” “Don’t rise above your station.” And yet, we rise. First, we dreamed of flying - we achieved it. Then we dreamed of launching - done. The next step was a “giant leap” on the Moon. Now what? Elevators.

Blue Marble Week | March 2021 will explore:
- Gravitational Elevators (Lunar Space Elevator Infrastructure) and
- Centripedal Elevators (Space Elevators from Earth)

We’ll look at both through the lenses of
1) Hardware, 2) Business, 3) Outreach, and 4) Framework

Join us for a host of speakers discussing the topics of:
1) Workforce Development
2) Infrastructure and Space Hardware
3) The Linkage of Cyber and Space
4) Transportation and Industrial Bases

Online, free to register. I didn't get any notice of this event, so missed a day already.
« Last Edit: 03/10/2021 03:12 pm by Frogstar_Robot »
Rule 1: Be civil. Respect other members.
Rule 3: No "King of the Internet" attitudes.

Offline Lodrig

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 196
  • Virginia
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #71 on: 03/17/2021 06:38 pm »
A space elevator might work on the moon, or even Mars, but on earth the gravity well as well as sometimes extreme weather conditions might make a space elevator very impractical.

I could see the moon as a possible space elevator first location.  Gravity is lower, no atmosphere.  It could possibly run from LL1 to the Moon's surface. 

As someone said, new large cheap rockets might make a space elevator unnecessary, as well as large SEP tugs for large bulk non-perishable cargo.

Agree with one amendment, now that our interest in the moon is focused on the poles a Y shaped elevator that brackets the moon at 2 point near the poles would be ideal.  On decent you can choose which pole to arrive at and arrive on the surface close to said pole without having to make a long trek from the equator to the poles.  Lastly the attachment point is now tangent to the surface rather then vertical which should make logistics much easier as the elevator climber can be a horizontal train.

Offline Vultur

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2456
  • Liked: 1049
  • Likes Given: 184
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #72 on: 03/17/2021 07:20 pm »
Once you have cheap reusable rockets to orbit, which is happening now. The impossible dream of space elevators to GEO becomes even more impossible.

I am skeptical of space elevators, but very-high-infrastructure-cost/low-cost-per-kg alternative launch schemes in general (space elevators, space fountains, launch loops, etc.) probably require a much larger launch market than currently exists to make sense.

So reusable rockets might actually be a necessary intermediate step (lowering costs enough to greatly increase the size of the market).

Offline Frogstar_Robot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 498
  • Liked: 724
  • Likes Given: 138
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #73 on: 03/17/2021 07:33 pm »
Some videos from the Blue Marble week on Space Elevators are hosted on the Liftport Group youtube page https://www.youtube.com/c/Liftport/videos. I watched some of the Day 2 proceedings.

I have to say, I am disappointed with the quality of work here. The guy hoping to build the Voyager space station didn't understand that the elevator goes to GEO, not LEO. That lead to a very confusing exchange with the elevator guy.

The guy presenting a business case for Space Based Solar to mitigate Global Warming, which he said could only be done with 6 space elevators. However, in his comparison with Starship, he was 1000 times out on his numbers (yes, 3 OOM!). In questions, he revealed he was "going off Elons tweets". He apparently missed the tweet where Elon said there would be a fleet of Starships, not just one!

So these are the guys hoping to spend billions on space infrastructure. I remain highly confident that a Space Elevator for Earth will never be built, let alone 6.
Rule 1: Be civil. Respect other members.
Rule 3: No "King of the Internet" attitudes.

Offline Vultur

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2456
  • Liked: 1049
  • Likes Given: 184
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #74 on: 03/19/2021 05:58 pm »
The guy presenting a business case for Space Based Solar to mitigate Global Warming, which he said could only be done with 6 space elevators. However, in his comparison with Starship, he was 1000 times out on his numbers (yes, 3 OOM!).

Yeah - given modern thin film solar cells, I wouldn't be surprised if space-based solar power could be done with vastly less mass than the 1970-era O'Neill estimates suggested.

And if a fleet of a thousand Starships ever actually exists (which is far from certain - but way more practical and near-term than a space elevator), that's a *lot* of launch capacity.

Quote
I remain highly confident that a Space Elevator for Earth will never be built, let alone 6.

I think you are probably right. In addition to the inherent difficulty/huge cost, more space development would mean more satellites able to collide with the elevator.

If there is a post-chemical-rocket launch-from-Earth system, I'd think laser launch might be a more plausible one.

Offline Frogstar_Robot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 498
  • Liked: 724
  • Likes Given: 138
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #75 on: 03/19/2021 06:19 pm »
And if a fleet of a thousand Starships ever actually exists (which is far from certain - but way more practical and near-term than a space elevator), that's a *lot* of launch capacity.

That is something that favors chemical rockets massively : scalability. Elon can start making a return on investment as soon as he has built one ship.

OTOH, a $20 billion space elevator doesn't make a cent until it is finished. That means a long pay back time, which investors are not keen on.

Rule 1: Be civil. Respect other members.
Rule 3: No "King of the Internet" attitudes.

Offline Genial Precis

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 249
  • Liked: 187
  • Likes Given: 115
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #76 on: 03/19/2021 10:49 pm »
A space elevator on Earth would be the largest megaproject ever built and the primary material of construction would be 100 times beyond the strength/weight performance of any existing materials. It's not even remotely competitive with other forms of infrastructure-to-orbit, much less viable on its own.

That's presumably why no one remotely competent to execute is discussing it.

Offline Frogstar_Robot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 498
  • Liked: 724
  • Likes Given: 138
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #77 on: 03/20/2021 10:09 am »
Of course, if such a magic super-strength material was developed, which could be manufactured economically in large quantities, that would probably benefit many industries, including chemical rockets.

Obayashi who are at least a major construction company, have a "construction concept" https://www.obayashi.co.jp/en/news/detail/the_space_elevator_construction_concept.html. They estimate the cost at $90 billion, assuming a material is available to build it. Tbh, I think it is just one of those paper exercises large companies do for a bit of publicity.
Rule 1: Be civil. Respect other members.
Rule 3: No "King of the Internet" attitudes.

Online JulesVerneATV

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 468
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #78 on: 06/19/2025 09:22 am »

Offline daedalus1

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1031
  • uk
  • Liked: 534
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Space Elevator Development
« Reply #79 on: 06/19/2025 09:30 am »
A space elevator on Earth would be the largest megaproject ever built and the primary material of construction would be 100 times beyond the strength/weight performance of any existing materials. It's not even remotely competitive with other forms of infrastructure-to-orbit, much less viable on its own.

That's presumably why no one remotely competent to execute is discussing it.

Plus a fairly fast lift (10mph) would take three months to get to GEO.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0