Yes, they have
stopped laughing because we can actually produce the necessary materials and
they are slowly coming out of the lab. I
also think that the lifting devices can be built around a powered helix drawing
its power from the cable itself. The mass
and tension of the cable will nicely counter balance the needed lifting thrust.
Thus
acceleration can be applied throughout the trip.
The real problem
has always been the cable and as I stated upon the discovery of both nano tubes
and graphene, this is no longer a problem in material strength. Better, a continuous graphene ribbon wrapped
around a bundle of nanotubes continuously manufactured sounds just like
something that we can make in space itself. That way the expensive core can be set up and properly
tethered in place while producing the cable itself while managing its counter
weight.
It will be one
amazing engineering accompkishment.
Can Quiet,
Efficient 'Space Elevators' Really Work?
By by Leonard David,
Is it time to push the "up" button on the
space elevator?
A space
elevator consisting of an Earth-anchored tether that extends 62,000
miles (100,000 kilometers) into space could eventually provide routine, safe,
inexpensive and quiet access to orbit, some researchers say.
A new assessment of the concept has been pulled
together titled "Space Elevators: An Assessment of the Technological
Feasibility and the Way Forward."
The study was conducted by a diverse collection of experts from around the
world under the auspices of the International Academy of Astronautics (IAA).
The study's final judgment is twofold: A space
elevator appears possible, with the understanding that risks must be
mitigated through technological progress…and a space elevator infrastructure
could indeed be built via a major international effort.
The tether serving as a space elevator would be used
to economically place payloads and eventually people into space using electric
vehicles called climbers that drive up and down the tether at
train-like speeds. The rotation of the Earth would keep the tether taut and
capable of supporting the climbers.
Rooted in history
The notion of a beanstalk-like space elevator is
rooted in history.
Many point to the ahead-of-its-time "thought
experiment" published in 1895 by Russian space pioneer Konstantin Tsiolkovsky.
He suggested creation of a free-standing tower reaching from the surface of
Earth to the height of geostationary orbit (GEO; 22,236 miles, or 35,786 km).
Over the last century or so, writers, scientists,
engineers and others have helped finesse the practicality of the space
elevator. And the new study marks a major development in the evolution of the
idea, says IAA president Gopalan Madhavan Nair.
"No doubt all the space agencies of the world
will welcome such a definitive study that investigates new ways of
transportation with major changes associated with inexpensive routine access to
GEO and beyond," Nair writes in the new study's preface.
"There is no doubt that the Academy, due to
this study, will contribute to advancing international consensus and awareness
on the need to search and develop new ways of transportation in conducting space exploration while
preserving our universe in the same way we are now trying to preserve our
planet Earth," Nair adds.
Elevator operator
While it's always tricky to predict the future study
lead editor Peter Swan told Space.com that space elevators are more than just a
science-fiction fantasy. "The results of our study are
encouraging," he said.
Swan's view is fortified by the late science
fact/fiction soothsayer, Arthur
C. Clarke, who stated in 2003: "The space elevator will be built
ten years after they stop laughing…and they have stopped laughing!"
Swan is chief engineer at SouthWest Analytic
Network, Inc. in Paradise Valley, Ariz., and is focused on developing and
teaching innovative approaches to "new space" development. He's also
head elevator operator of the International Space Elevator Consortium (ISEC),
which has organizational members in the United States, Europe and Japan and
individual members from around the world.
ISEC's goal is nothing short of getting a lengthy
space elevator built.
"The question is when, of course," Swan
said. "But the point is that the technologies are progressing in a
positive manner, such that we who work in it believe that there will be space
elevators."
Pacing technologies
Swan said the giggle factor regarding space
elevators is "down significantly" given work carried out over the
last decade by a global network of individuals and groups. "Still, there
are many, many issues and I certainly would not want to say that it's not a
challenging project."
The IAA appraisal delves into a number of issues,
such as: Why build
a space elevator? Can it be done? How would all the elements fit together
to create a system of systems? And what are the technical feasibilities of each
major space elevator element?
Two technologies are pacing the development of the
space elevator, Swan said.
Producing an ultra-strong space tether and other
space elevator components, Swan said, has been advanced by the invention of carbon
nanotubes (CNTs) that are 1,000 times better in strength-to-weight
ratio than steel. The good news, he said, is that CNTs are being developed with
billions of dollars by nanotechnology, electronics, optics, and materials
specialists.
Similarly, lightweight solar
cells "are coming along nicely," Swan said. "That's an
industry that the space elevator people are watching, too. We're not going to
drive it, but we can certainly watch it and appreciate the advances."
Money, motivation and desire
Regarding who would erect a space elevator, Swan
said the study dives into details. A primarily commercial effort with some
government support is possible, as is a public-private enterprise, or an
entirely governmental project.
"All three are viable. Any one of them could
work. It's a matter of money, motivation and the desire to do it," Swan
said, though the study centers on commercial development of the space elevator.
"It's conceivable all three could be going on at the same time."
The study team was encouraged by the future, though
Swan and others acknowledge there are many questions left to be studied.
Indeed, another evaluation of the space elevator idea 10 years hence would be
worthwhile, Swan said.
Erasing the rocket equation
Are there any technical, political or policy
"showstoppers" that could prevent the space elevator from becoming a
reality?
"You're asking the wrong guy," Swan
responded. "I am an optimist. I have always had the attitude that good
people, motivated by good rationale working hard will make it work. My guess is
that space elevators are going to work, whether it's by 2035, 2060 or even
2100."
Swan said the rationale is moving beyond the
"rocket equation," which involves tossing away 94 percent of a
rocket's mass sitting on the launch pad.
"And it still costs a lot of stinking money to
get up there," he said.
The space elevator opens everything up, Swan said.
It's a soft ride, a week to GEO. There are no restrictions on the size or shape
of payloads.
"People will laugh and ask why did we ever do
space rockets…it's a dumb idea," Swan said. "Space elevators are the
answer if we can make them work. Why would you do anything else?"
A copy of "Space Elevators: An Assessment of
the Technological Feasibility and the Way Forward" is available through
Virginia Edition Publishing Company at: www.virginiaedition.com/sciencedeck
Leonard David has been reporting on the space
industry for more than five decades. He is former director of research for the
National Commission on Space and is co-author of Buzz Aldrin's new book
"Mission to Mars – My Vision for Space Exploration" published by
National Geographic. Follow us @Spacedotcom, Facebook or Google+. Originally
published on Space.com.
Visions
of the Future of Human Spaceflight The Top 10
Star Trek Technologies
Copyright 2014 SPACE.com,
a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be
published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
maglev&zipper for space elevator future
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete