Space Elevator

SteveC

SteveC

"Laconic"
Staff member
[ QUOTE ]
Scientist Sees Space Elevator in 15 Years

By CARL HARTMAN
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush wants to return to the moon and put a man on Mars. But scientist Bradley C. Edwards has an idea that's really out of this world: an elevator that climbs 62,000 miles into space.

Edwards thinks an initial version could be operating in 15 years, a year earlier than Bush's 2020 timetable for a return to the moon. He pegs the cost at $10 billion, a pittance compared with other space endeavors.
...................
Edwards' elevator would climb on a cable made of nanotubes - tiny bundles of carbon atoms many times stronger than steel. The cable would be about three feet wide and thinner than a piece of paper, but capable of supporting a payload up to 13 tons.

The cable would be attached to a platform on the equator, off the Pacific coast of South America where winds are calm, weather is good and commercial airplane flights are few. The platform would be mobile so the cable could be moved to get out of the path of orbiting satellites.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's a link to the story.

More information about the Space Elevator
 
I was thinking: "more heroin prophecy.... i.e....somebody's smokin' CRACK.
wink.gif
grin.gif
 
I've been reading about this for the last 5 years and they haven't done anything besides talk. Why would you build an elevator to space when you can't go anywhere once you get there? Whats going to support the whole elevator? Instead of wasting time and money with stupid elevator why don't they do like that civillian astronaut and make a better sapceship besides the space shuttle and spaceshipone?
 
[ QUOTE ]
I've been reading about this for the last 5 years and they haven't done anything besides talk. Why would you build an elevator to space when you can't go anywhere once you get there? Whats going to support the whole elevator? Instead of wasting time and money with stupid elevator why don't they do like that civillian astronaut and make a better sapceship besides the space shuttle and spaceshipone?

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually the skyhook / space elevator would be more useful than rockets. Sir Arthur C. Clarke did a pretty good paper on it. Here's links to the paper:

The Space Elevator Reference, Part I

The Space Elevator Reference, Part II

The Space Elevator Reference, Part III
 
[ QUOTE ]
Whats going to support the whole elevator?

[/ QUOTE ]

See, the earth does this spinning thing, kinda like standing with a ball on a string and spinning it. Stand in the middle, sping the struing, and the ball causes the string to straighten out. Same concept of centrifugal force would keep the elevator in place. At least, that's the theory. Think of it as a MUCH cheaper alternative to launching satellites or space station components into space. Load them onto the elevator, hit the button, and they arrive on a platform at the top. Crews can then move them into position without those pesky gravity problems.

[ QUOTE ]
Instead of wasting time and money with stupid elevator why don't they do like that civillian astronaut and make a better sapceship besides the space shuttle and spaceshipone?

[/ QUOTE ]

Talk to a R&D guy at NASA, and he will tell you about several other options they have totally planned out....in theory. There's not enough $$ in the budget to support a totally new NASA endevour (or Discovery, or Columbia, etc). I liked the linear induction motor launch idea myself. A string of magnet-like motors pull a shuttle craft as it gains enough speed to reach escape velocity. Problem with that is that it would take a LOT of room. The return to earth would be similar to that of the current shuttle, but the cost of solid rocket boosters and recovery teams wouldn't be there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top