[geoschmo]

Originally posted by Arkcon:
I got a friend who's always taking about this, and I just don't get it. How is it better that launching things.

I may be a dense old chemist, dregeing up high school physics but, isn't the energy needed the same no matter how you achieve orbit? How do you adapt the terrestrial end to things like chanes in the earth's surface due to tidal forces. How do you maintain something that long. Doesn't air resistance still affect things on their way up?

I want simple questions like this answered before I wand through a bunch of plans.

It's quite simple actually. The amount of energy to get X tons into space is the same, but the energy can be generated on the planet, or in orbit, and transfered to the elevator through the cable itself. The elevator can have a realatively small and simple electric motor and receive joice form the cable. So you don't have to carry the fuel in the vehicle going up.

The weight of the fuel in a conventional orbital launch vehicle is a great majority of the total weight of the vehicle. And the more fuel you have, the more you need to carry the fuel, and so on.

Tidal stresses, air resistance, and other things are serious problems. Coming up with materials and designs that can handle those loads is the main stumbling block to acheiving something like this.

Originally posted by TerranC:
What happens if the Space end of the ribbon breaks Geosynchronus orbit by whatever unknown reason even for a second?

And what happens if the Ribbon breaks?

And will it be accesable to everyone?

Three reasons Why I don't like the idea of a space elevator.

It won't go flying off into deep space if that's what you are asking. The cable doesn't hold the orbital vehicle down. In effect the sattelite/cable combo beceoms a verry long sattelite circling the earth over one spot, which it just happens to touch.

If it breaks, it would likely be a bad day for anyone that happens to be where it decides to land. That danger would likely be lessened greatly by the location chosen. They would put it where if it did fall it wouldn't land on populated areas. It wouldn't even have to be over water, although that would be safest. Given a likely altitude of the orbital end of 250 to 300 miles. There are some over land areas that would be safe.

And is any space travel accesable to anyone? But the costs invovled in this would be so low it would make orbit within reach of many that have no hope now.

Originally posted by Wardad:
Will it survive a colision with a fully laden 737?

Is that supposed to be a joke? No, it won't. But what will? Not much. But if it were the target of a terrorist attack it would likely be very expensive in terms of cost, but not nearly so in terms of lives lost as the World Trade Towers.

Geoschmo

[ October 09, 2002, 01:08: Message edited by: geoschmo ]