backtop

Print 44 comment(s) - last by Mclendo06.. on Oct 25 at 2:02 AM
NASA believes a space elevator is a plausible idea

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's global competition to build a space elevator is underway in New Mexico's Chihuahuan Desert. NASA is offering a $150,000 cash prize to the team that is able to lift the most weight to the top of a 200-foot tether in the shortest amount of time. All machines must get energy from sources such as sunlight, lasers or microwaves. NASA first sponsored an elevator construction contest last year.

Jolly Roger, a solar-powered elevator car taking part in the contest in the desert, is a solar-powered elevator car that uses 135 mirrors on the ground to power itself. Brian Turner, who designed the Jolly Roger, has already spent around $30,000 in the project. Other designs include a device that is able to convert microwave beams from a generator into electrical power.

The LiftPort Group has recently unveiled its road map to build the LiftPort Space Elevator, a device designed to transport cargo and people into space. The company's idea revolves around a cable tethered to an object located in geosynchronous orbit. LiftPort wants to have a space elevator built before 2020.

Even though some researchers and entrepreneurs have shown interest in NASA's contest, aerospace big guns Boeing and Lockheed Martin haven't shown much support for this particular NASA project.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Music...
By Le Québécois on 10/21/2006 2:05:01 PM , Rating: 3
I just hope the music selection for the final product will be good because I'm sure it won't be a 20 seconds ride and I wouldn't want to hear any crappy elevator music for 2 hours :p .




RE: Music...
By dnd728 on 10/21/2006 5:27:25 PM , Rating: 2
You are far too optimistic. To make it in two hours you'd have to go at over 11,000 mph. Taking instant acceleration.


RE: Music...
By mlittl3 on 10/21/2006 6:54:07 PM , Rating: 2
I think you are thinking about the distance to the moon or something. It is only 57 miles to the official start of space. A 30 mph elevator would reach that distance in two hours. I think speeds of up to 100 mph are possible and then the journey would take 30 mins. Trains between London and Paris travel much faster than 100 mph so I think this is plausible.


RE: Music...
By mlittl3 on 10/21/2006 7:04:55 PM , Rating: 1
Ok, geosync orbit around the planet is 22,000 miles which would require 11,000 mph elevator to reach in two hours, however, the elevator is tethered to the surface and would not require that altitude. I think tethered implies geosync by design because its attached to the earth and would not go anywhere if done properly. The elevator just needs to be high enough to be outside earth's gravity field which is around 60 miles up. Think about that plane that simulates gravity at high altitudes by moving at a certain speed in a certain path.

Satellites at 22,000 miles up need to be that high to avoid crashing into earth's atmosphere and establishing an untethered geosync orbit.


RE: Music...
By MrBungle123 on 10/21/2006 8:12:00 PM , Rating: 4
If the farthest reaches of earth's gravity is 60 miles would you kindly explain how we have a satellite that is trapped by earths gravity that is around 200,000 miles away? You know the moon... I'm sure you've heard of it. :)


RE: Music...
By mlittl3 on 10/21/2006 8:40:39 PM , Rating: 2
Albeit an old article, I'm sure the science is the same.

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2000/ast07sep_1...

According to NASA, the trip would take 5 hours. There's the definitive source so we can all stop talking out of our asses including myself.


RE: Music...
By Le Québécois on 10/22/2006 3:22:25 AM , Rating: 2
Well first I must say that I chose that number not at random but at what I did consider to be a correct time for the assension.

I didn't use any maths but only what I know from the project so far and my simple logic mind.

But for the 5hours time from the NASA..they sure probably know any better than me...but they wouldn't be doing this contest if they really did know how to make it so there is a slim chance that they are wrong(this doesn't make my 2 hours more right, it's just a statement).

To conclude, 1-2-5 or 10 hours won't change a thing...if the music suck for 20 seconds, it will still suck after what ever more time you will listen to it.


RE: Music...
By dnd728 on 10/23/2006 2:49:33 PM , Rating: 2
"if the music suck for 20 seconds, it will still suck after what ever more time you will listen to it."

exactly what I was hinting


RE: Music...
By dnd728 on 10/23/2006 2:47:14 PM , Rating: 2
Come on... it talks about the elevator only starting(!) at the top of a 50km(!!!) tall tower and using electromagnetic propulsion. It's also not realistic placing the mass at a geostationary orbit - the elevator (weight+acceleration), cable, winds, storms, rain, ice... would all pull it down, along with friction slowing it down too. You need to place it higher, and the higher the better, as it would allow you to use a smaller mass and also give you some optional leverage leaving earth (depending on departure altitude). It's an archaic approach patched with the newly discovered nanotubes.


RE: Music...
By johnsonx on 10/21/2006 9:53:40 PM , Rating: 2
Your understanding of gravity and orbital mechanics is exactly zero.

Anything moving along the tether is not in orbit, and therefore weightless, until it reaches 22,000 miles. Anything in a lower orbit moves faster than the earth rotates, and therefore cannot be attached to a stationary tether.


RE: Music...
By Hypernova on 10/21/2006 5:48:04 PM , Rating: 3
I would say there are more pressing concerns, like when someone farts...


Lockheed, Boeing, not happenin
By shamgar03 on 10/21/2006 5:47:43 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, like they would want to give up their big contracts for current space shuttles by developing something that would drastically reduce costs of space travel.




RE: Lockheed, Boeing, not happenin
By Ringold on 10/21/2006 6:00:14 PM , Rating: 2
One can only imagine the dirty politics Lockmart & Boeing will be playing to slow down, delay and internally sabotage projects like this -- until their own profit is assured. Giants like them just don't act competitively, almost impossible for them to. Good luck; engineers aren't always the best business people, but they'll have to learn that and politics to really get anywhere.


RE: Lockheed, Boeing, not happenin
By OddTSi on 10/22/2006 2:19:27 AM , Rating: 2
The single most expensive part of space travel today is fuel. Hell, most of the weight is fuel. Boeing and Lockheed aren't making any money off of fuel. So you two need to rethink your conspiracy theory.


RE: Lockheed, Boeing, not happenin
By johnsonx on 10/21/2006 9:38:18 PM , Rating: 2
Not likely. A successful space elevator would bring with it contracts for the orbital platforms, numerous small spaceships for local orbital work, and new types of space exploration vehicles to be launched from the platform (and probably even assembled in orbit later on).

I've read more than one place that NASA asked the creator of Babylon-5 (J. Michael Strazcinski (sp?)) if they could copy the design of the 'Star Fury' fighters for use as worker ships at the ISS and later space stations. He said sure, as long as they agree to still call it a 'Star Fury'. NASA said no problem.

I have no idea if those particular craft will ever be produced, but it certainly does stand to reason such spacecraft will be needed if a space tether were built. Lockheed and Boeing, among others, will certainly have plenty of work to do.


RE: Lockheed, Boeing, not happenin
By Mclendo06 on 10/21/2006 11:34:47 PM , Rating: 2
Do you have any idea how much it would cost to build a space elevator? First off, years have to be spent in R&D for development of super-light superstrong material because the material at geosync is basically holding up the 22,000 miles of material which will be hung below it (which will vary in weight from 0g to 1g when it's at the surface). Then, you get to run space missions for however many years it takes to move all that material up to geosync orbit (it has to be hung from geosync orbit unless you can figure out how to build a 22,000 mile high tower from the surface of the earth straight up without it buckling -and the force required to cause buckling decreases linearly with the cube of the length, making the build up approach effectively impossible). Plus, you get to do this fun mission of likely going off and finding a nice chunck of asteroid or something and bringing it into geosync orbit to use as the main anchor for everything (or more space missions to launch ballast). Also, you have (get) to maintain the thing. It would honestly probably be the largest single engineering undertaking of all time, probably costing on the order of multiple hundreds of billions to trillions. So right, if I was major aerospace company, I wouldn't want to get a contract like that.


RE: Lockheed, Boeing, not happenin
By Xavian on 10/22/2006 1:11:50 AM , Rating: 2
you do realise that there are asteroids in earths orbit already right? they a simply not known about by common folk though. I dont see why we cant use one of those, plus a tower wouldn't really be required, merely a few super strong, super light tethers to support the elevator and provide a decent backup incase one fails.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-Earth_asteroid


RE: Lockheed, Boeing, not happenin
By timmiser on 10/23/2006 4:55:19 PM , Rating: 2
Nice idea but you'd need to find an astroid in geosync orbit or your cable will wind around the earth like a tetherball, pulling the astroid into the earth for certain doom! So if you do find a geosync astroid, if you attach a cable to it and start pulling up weight, you will pull the astroid out of it's perfect orbit, and once again bring it into the earth for certain doom!

-Tim


RE: Lockheed, Boeing, not happenin
By Mclendo06 on 10/25/2006 2:02:49 AM , Rating: 2
Please understand that NEOs (Near Earth Objects) are objects which are orbiting the sun with orbits possesing eccentricities such that their orbital path crosses the earth's orbital path. They are not in orbit around the earth, as would be required for a space-elevator counter weight. Now, such an object would make a good candidate for a transfer into earth orbit if you can find an acceptable one which is passing close by in the right timeframe. How to go about this would make for an orbit transfer problem I really don't want to see on my next Space Magic (TAMU talk for Orbital Mechanics) homework assignment.


RE: Lockheed, Boeing, not happenin
By Viditor on 10/22/2006 1:43:21 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
years have to be spent in R&D for development of super-light superstrong material because the material at geosync is basically holding up the 22,000 miles of material which will be hung below it


True...this is why research on carbon nanotube cabling is receiving funding from such a wide variety of sources. The strength is 1000x that of steel, the weight is a very small fraction, and it has the added benefit of almost no resistance (solar power generated in orbit could be transmitted throughout the cable and even utilized back on Earth).


RE: Lockheed, Boeing, not happenin
By s12033722 on 10/23/2006 11:34:40 AM , Rating: 2
The build-up approach is nicely solved by the use of a space fountain. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_fountain


RE: Lockheed, Boeing, not happenin
By timmiser on 10/23/2006 4:50:22 PM , Rating: 2
I think you are missing the obvious point. Boeing and Lockheed build airplanes and spaceships. To put it simply, what do they know about space elevators??

Sure there are some common similarities, but to invest anything into the R&D of such a project for the chance to win a $150,000 prize? This is a game for small visionary companies. If things go well in this early development, it is possible that a Boeing or Lockheed may snatch them up for the benefit of both companies.

-Tim



glad to see progress on this front
By hellokeith on 10/21/2006 1:45:03 PM , Rating: 2
btw, what's with the extra small font?




RE: glad to see progress on this front
By piranhaa on 10/21/2006 1:47:58 PM , Rating: 3
Hold control + move mouse wheel down =)


By Le Québécois on 10/21/2006 2:01:40 PM , Rating: 2
No he's right, my fonts size is at normal and it's the only news I have with small font.

I know your suggestion will work, but I think he was just questioning why the font size has changed.


By slunkius on 10/23/2006 5:50:33 AM , Rating: 2
thanks!


SimCity 2000
By darkfoon on 10/21/2006 3:15:14 PM , Rating: 5
This is totally off topic, but when I read this
quote:
a device that is able to convert microwave beams from a generator into electrical power

I instantly remembered SimCity 2000 and my city blowing up because of my microwave power plant.




RE: SimCity 2000
By Discordless on 10/21/2006 4:11:25 PM , Rating: 2
ROFL
That was the first thing that came I my mind after reading the news :D


Space Elevator before 2020. Yeah, right.
By psychobriggsy on 10/21/2006 1:59:28 PM , Rating: 2
I see that they've put it back from 2018 from the earlier story.

If there's a space elevator by 2040 I'll be amazed. It is a vast project. But good luck to them!

... and what's with the weird tiny font?




RE: Space Elevator before 2020. Yeah, right.
By Viditor on 10/21/2006 10:43:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If there's a space elevator by 2040 I'll be amazed


My bet is it will keep getting pushed back until they can develop a carbon nanotube cable...when that happens, things should develop quickly.


By Xavian on 10/22/2006 1:13:48 AM , Rating: 2
considering how fast technology is moving nowadays, i wouldn;t be surprised if a such a material isn't developed in 10 years, maybe less.


Cool concept...
By Devoluti0n on 10/21/2006 6:30:48 PM , Rating: 2
But just imagine how many terrorists would want to take that thing out if it's ever built?

All I know is I'd love to be the guy jumping up and down in the elevator just to give everyone a mini heart attack ;)




RE: Cool concept...
By Xavian on 10/22/2006 1:20:44 AM , Rating: 2
indeed, the concept is appealing to terrorists, what if they manage to destroy the main cable and all its backups, say half way through, imagine a incredibly long tether falling down to earth... the damage would be disasterous.

Ofcourse, if a super strong material is developed thats resistant to heat and kenetic damage, with multiple backups, i doubt how even a bomb could cut the tether, all that would happen is the elevator would either get stuck or it would either float into space or fall to earth depending on its place on the tether. Since once an object reaches terminal velocity, it cannot accelerate any more, i wouldn't anticipate much damage. Especially if it has a 'black box' which relays its position to command control at all times, allowing people to escape from where the elevator would land, before it gets there.

Lots of saftey procedures like the ones above, could make the threat of a terrorist attack, inconvienient, but not nearly as damaging as a bomb in a building or a plane.


RE: Cool concept...
By johnsonx on 10/22/2006 12:45:11 PM , Rating: 2
Keep in mind also that the tether would most likely be affixed to an ocean platform at the equator. Physical access to such a platform would be very restricted, and it could have formidable defenses. Something along the lines of the U.S. AEGIS Destroyer defense system, with anti-aircraft missiles, anti-ship missiles, and the Phalanx close-in defense system (a radar guided gatling gun that can destroy inbound missiles and aircraft).


By kilkennycat on 10/22/2006 4:34:34 PM , Rating: 2
For those of you with Bibles on your shelf, dust them off and read Genesis 11:V1-8...then take a while to ponder on the priorities and future of the human race.




By Spivonious on 10/23/2006 2:29:40 PM , Rating: 2
I don't have a Bible with me, but I'll assume this is referencing the Tower of Babel? Since we're already in space, I'd assume that developing an alternate way to get there isn't going to upset any deities.


use a balloon !
By OzQuant on 10/22/2006 9:48:26 PM , Rating: 2
Just use a helium balloon. Cheap and easy and no moving parts. It should be enough to go up 200ft.

Or to extend to higher altitude, use a balloon to go as high as possible, then drop a weight with a cable that spins a gear or whatever to make it climb higher. Then you don't need to mess with lasers or microwaves or whatever.




RE: use a balloon !
By Spivonious on 10/23/2006 2:31:22 PM , Rating: 2
200 feet is a lot less than 22,000 miles.


Don't Forget the Ballast Asteriod
By qdemn7 on 10/22/2006 11:03:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
"The system requires the center of mass be in geostationary orbit,"
The Center of Mass, so you're going to need to offset all that weight hanging below geostationary orbit. In SF storees concerning a "beanstalk", there's always a ballast asteriod anywhere from 30-75K miles from the Earth's surface.

For further info read: Arthur C. Clarke's "The Fountains of Paradise" and Charles Sheffield's "The Web Between the Worlds" for different approaches for constructing a beanstalk.




By timmiser on 10/23/2006 5:05:04 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, once you start building beyond geosync orbit, the entire platform would become lighter because it will start pulling away from earth.

The bonus question is, how far out would they need to build it until the end (which will increase in speed the higher it goes due to earth's rotation) exceeds the speed of light and proves Einstein wrong!

-Tim


...
By SilverBack on 10/23/2006 5:00:47 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
But just imagine how many terrorists would want to take that thing out if it's ever built?


Read the LiftPort site.
The Idea is to raise the platform out in the ocean giving it many MILES of clearance. A terrorist would be detected long before reaching the platform.




RE: ...
By Spivonious on 10/23/2006 2:32:11 PM , Rating: 2
Not if they're already on the inside.

I think we should all just forget about being "protected" from terrorists and get on with our normal lives.


umm
By shabby on 10/22/2006 9:57:24 AM , Rating: 2
<clyde> Mexico has a space program?




Read your Popular Science!
By jon1003 on 10/22/2006 5:28:56 PM , Rating: 2
Popular Science mag just had an article about this. It did a nice job of laying out the hurdles to the project. Some of the things they specified in the article were:

-A carbon nanotube flat thread would have to be developed, because it was the only material capable of carrying the great weight strain and resisting the environment to space.

-There would be a platform that would climb the carbon tape, and it would eventually be able to hold many tons.

-There would be a platform built in apace, and the carbon tape would be dropped from here, and cought back on earth.

-The platform would be in the ocean, and it would be able to be moved to steer around storms. The isolation would be part of good security.

-The building materials would be left in space as a counterweight to the cable. The idea of using an asteroid was also mentioned.

-The climbing platform would eventually travel at hundreds of mph, and eventually carry humans when safety was ironed out.




"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki