Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[vadia]

On the moon it would probably work well -- mars less so (due to weather) and Earth weather is probably a nightmare (and even it it's at the equator, if it gets knocked north south it could go around to smash into New York.   Weight wouldn't matter -- air resistance is the only difference.)

I don't know about the effects in reality but the Mars series described a space elevator collapse and it was nasty -- going around the planet a few times, slicing through with red hot energy.  I don't know how much that was sensationalized, but it left an impression on me.

[Starver]

And last, we were talking about a spaceelevator on the Moon.

I suggest you work out what orbital altitude a selenostationary 'top' station needs to be (never mind the orbital height of the counterweight, which needn't be double the height so far if you have enough mass, but will still need some extra distance...

[10ebbor10]

((Note: Read up on how a space elevator works. And orbital mechanics. Physics maybe.))

Mars has a ridously low air density. Mars weather migth seem strong, but it's barely there.

Also, have you any idea how delta-v works. You can't just knock something from an equatorial orbit in a North south orbit. A space elevator is in an orbit. It's not, like you seem to think, a really large sky scraper. It's a thing in an orbit. It can;t just fall over. Besides, with it's little weight it can't do any damage. The higher parts will disintegrate and burn up. The lower parts will land on the ground. Safely, like a feather. (Not really, but no more damage than a falling power cable. Whitout power, that is.)

 We have managed to set up tethered towers 2 mile high without significant problems. Largest problem is the thing freezing. Wind is insignificant. Balloons and magnetic stabilizers keep the thing right.

The Mars series intrepretation has, like most fiction, no basis in reality. At all. ((Really, looping round the planet. What was that thing made of. Lead. And where did it go?)).

As for the Midpoint station on the moon. It'll be at lunarstationary orbit. Either Lagrange 1 or 2.

There are two lunar-synchronous points where an elevator could be placed that would be stable: the Lagrange points L1 and L2. L1 on the Earth side of the Moon is 56,000 km up from the surface, and L2 on the far side is 67,000 km up

[Il Palazzo]

Here's a primer on space elevators as designed for the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts.

http://www.mill-creek-systems.com/HighLift/contents.html

For those of you who don't know much about the thing, but still feel the need to post their opinions.

[Aseaheru]

for space trash being tracked: no it is not. they keep finding more and more pieces, and since a screw going fast enough can destroy a satellite, i think you get the picture.
and the levels are increasing.

[Dutchling]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Wut. A space elebator is longer that I thought it should be o_O

[Aseaheru]

blame it on gravity.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Effeciency losses do add up though. Also, I made some calculations once for orbital power plants, and they don't ever come out energy efficient. Not with current technology. You'd need hyperefficient pannels (60% or more), hyperlightweight pannels, and hyperefficient transmission. Remember that the transmission calls for 1km diameter recievers.

I'd be interested to see your math.

while you people bicker over power, have we finished bickering over food?

Hydroponics or somesuch. The MSI in Chicago has/had a neat little greenhouse thing of hydroponics which could provide a single astronaut with air and pretty much all of their dietary requirements, and it was maybe 10-15 feet long by a bit taller than me high.

No, but two things.
1. 100 launches use 100 times the fuel and 100 times the power of 1 launch. It's only if you're launching 100 times the mass that it gets exponential (because you need to lift the fuel).

Do I really need to spell out that you would use solar power, not chemical power?

How is that relevant at all?
Electricity still isn't free. Cheaper, maybe, but the panels need maintenance and electricity is useful for non-railgun things.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Wut. A space elebator is longer that I thought it should be o_O

That's, like, 1/3 of the distance to Luna by my estimate! Is it reaching to a Langrange point?
And is that car the size of Texas?
And it the cable as thick as Central America?

[Aseaheru]

Yes, no and i hope not.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Even a partial space elevator would be a useful thing, as gravity is a system of diminishing returns.

I don't think the thickness is to scale, because it can't be. If it was, it would be less than a pixel.

[Il Palazzo]

That particular design proposes a varying width(2-16 cm) "ribbon" cable of 5 micron thickness.

[Sheb]

I'm surprised no one though of cosmic rays yet. All those fancy space stations of yours are going to be horrible for that. Even the ISS get 150 mSv per years, and crew to the moon used to receive over 1 mSv/day!

Of course, a buried Moon or Mars base wouldn't suffer from that.

[vadia]

Shielding and thicker glass may make much of the cosmic ray difference.

Buy you are right; it is an issue.

[Sheb]

Well, not much can stop it except sheer mass. The Earth's athmosphere is 1 kg/cm^2, so even to get half of the protection (Which would be equivalent to being at 5000m high on earth, so livable), you'd need 5m of waters all around your station. Not going to work.

[Aseaheru]

whatabout food? isint the current plan for a mars ship to have people live within their stacks of food?