By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Discovery of water on moon boosts prospects for permanent lunar base

outlawauron on 28 September 2009
Reasonable said:
JaggedSac said:
mrstickball said:
Manus -

Yes, the space elevator would have an ending point, about 100,000km 'up'. At that point, you'd have a counterweight that would ensure the tether stayed at it's desired location, as well as be the first 'real' space base. At this point, the supplies could be distributed to wherever their destination would want to take them.

Also, concerning the pricing:
There are many quotes as to what it could cost, depending on source. The Japanese have quoted that they can do it for $5b USD (1 trillion yen). Some US studies put it at $6.2B. Still other studies put it at $20-$40B for the first elevator, with massively reducing costs afterwards.

I don't really think NASA has the capability to do this, honestly. They barely can fund the ISS and some piecemeal missions, so I doubt such a serious project should be run by a federal program.

Personally, if I were the governor of California, or any south-western state, I would consider working with private businesses and try to build a spaceport with the elevator. I know that New Mexico has a spaceport - maybe it could be put there?

http://www.spaceportamerica.com/

Is California a valid location for a space elevator?  I read(Arthur C Clarke book) that the location is key and closer to the equator is best. 

You would indeed want to be right on the equator I believe, most of the more recent designs I've seen in science articles, etc. consider a water based location - i.e. something akin to an oil rig right in the equator with the elevator ascending from there.

So why not somewhere off of Louisiana in the Gulf?



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Around the Network
mrstickball on 28 September 2009

I wasn't suggesting that California be the actual location of the elevator, but utilize an ocean-based elevator from California.

Whomever deploys the elevator is going to have a huge boon to their economy. So the question is 'who pony's up the cash?' - I stated CA because of their proximity to the ocean, their economy, and other reasons.

Another great place (still favoring the US) would be Hawaii - it's close(r) to the equator, and certainly has the infrastructure to handle a sea-based or land-based tether.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

mrstickball on 28 September 2009
outlawauron said:
Reasonable said:
JaggedSac said:
mrstickball said:
Manus -

Yes, the space elevator would have an ending point, about 100,000km 'up'. At that point, you'd have a counterweight that would ensure the tether stayed at it's desired location, as well as be the first 'real' space base. At this point, the supplies could be distributed to wherever their destination would want to take them.

Also, concerning the pricing:
There are many quotes as to what it could cost, depending on source. The Japanese have quoted that they can do it for $5b USD (1 trillion yen). Some US studies put it at $6.2B. Still other studies put it at $20-$40B for the first elevator, with massively reducing costs afterwards.

I don't really think NASA has the capability to do this, honestly. They barely can fund the ISS and some piecemeal missions, so I doubt such a serious project should be run by a federal program.

Personally, if I were the governor of California, or any south-western state, I would consider working with private businesses and try to build a spaceport with the elevator. I know that New Mexico has a spaceport - maybe it could be put there?

http://www.spaceportamerica.com/

Is California a valid location for a space elevator?  I read(Arthur C Clarke book) that the location is key and closer to the equator is best. 

You would indeed want to be right on the equator I believe, most of the more recent designs I've seen in science articles, etc. consider a water based location - i.e. something akin to an oil rig right in the equator with the elevator ascending from there.

So why not somewhere off of Louisiana in the Gulf?

Hurricanes. That's why I suggested something closer to the pacific.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

highwaystar101 on 28 September 2009

Surely between the ESA and NASA the money can be stumped up and a suitable location can be found.



Reasonable on 28 September 2009
mrstickball said:
outlawauron said:
Reasonable said:
JaggedSac said:
mrstickball said:
Manus -

Yes, the space elevator would have an ending point, about 100,000km 'up'. At that point, you'd have a counterweight that would ensure the tether stayed at it's desired location, as well as be the first 'real' space base. At this point, the supplies could be distributed to wherever their destination would want to take them.

Also, concerning the pricing:
There are many quotes as to what it could cost, depending on source. The Japanese have quoted that they can do it for $5b USD (1 trillion yen). Some US studies put it at $6.2B. Still other studies put it at $20-$40B for the first elevator, with massively reducing costs afterwards.

I don't really think NASA has the capability to do this, honestly. They barely can fund the ISS and some piecemeal missions, so I doubt such a serious project should be run by a federal program.

Personally, if I were the governor of California, or any south-western state, I would consider working with private businesses and try to build a spaceport with the elevator. I know that New Mexico has a spaceport - maybe it could be put there?

http://www.spaceportamerica.com/

Is California a valid location for a space elevator?  I read(Arthur C Clarke book) that the location is key and closer to the equator is best. 

You would indeed want to be right on the equator I believe, most of the more recent designs I've seen in science articles, etc. consider a water based location - i.e. something akin to an oil rig right in the equator with the elevator ascending from there.

So why not somewhere off of Louisiana in the Gulf?

Hurricanes. That's why I suggested something closer to the pacific.

Yeah, you wouldn't want to be in a Space Elevator going through a Hurricane!



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Around the Network
outlawauron on 28 September 2009
mrstickball said:
outlawauron said:
Reasonable said:
JaggedSac said:
mrstickball said:
Manus -

Yes, the space elevator would have an ending point, about 100,000km 'up'. At that point, you'd have a counterweight that would ensure the tether stayed at it's desired location, as well as be the first 'real' space base. At this point, the supplies could be distributed to wherever their destination would want to take them.

Also, concerning the pricing:
There are many quotes as to what it could cost, depending on source. The Japanese have quoted that they can do it for $5b USD (1 trillion yen). Some US studies put it at $6.2B. Still other studies put it at $20-$40B for the first elevator, with massively reducing costs afterwards.

I don't really think NASA has the capability to do this, honestly. They barely can fund the ISS and some piecemeal missions, so I doubt such a serious project should be run by a federal program.

Personally, if I were the governor of California, or any south-western state, I would consider working with private businesses and try to build a spaceport with the elevator. I know that New Mexico has a spaceport - maybe it could be put there?

http://www.spaceportamerica.com/

Is California a valid location for a space elevator?  I read(Arthur C Clarke book) that the location is key and closer to the equator is best. 

You would indeed want to be right on the equator I believe, most of the more recent designs I've seen in science articles, etc. consider a water based location - i.e. something akin to an oil rig right in the equator with the elevator ascending from there.

So why not somewhere off of Louisiana in the Gulf?

Hurricanes. That's why I suggested something closer to the pacific.

You're right. That's just the most ideal location in safe weather conditions.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

ManusJustus on 28 September 2009

I was wrong about my idea of a space elevator, but perhaps a space gun would be a lot cheaper than a space elevator and more efficient than a conventional rocket.

Concerning the location of space elevators, I believe that a space elevator should be located at the equator and be perpindicular to the spin of the Earth's axis. The rotation of the Earth will push the space elevators cable to be perpindicular with the axis, so a space elevator on the equator would have the shortest cable distance from Earth while a space elevator in, say, California would have a longer cable distance since it would protrude from the Earth at an angle.

Think about a rotating a string around your arm.  The string will be perpindicular to the spin of your arm.  Now think about a string attached to a rotating sphere.  The string has the largest distance from the sphere when it is attached at the equator, and as you move the string away from the equator the distance, which is measured directly above sphere's surface to the end of the string, decreases since the string is at an angle.  If anything, a space elevator would need to be at the equator to be more economical.



dtewi on 28 September 2009

Is a space elevator even practical? You would be on it for MONTHS.



Kimi wa ne tashika ni ano toki watashi no soba ni ita

Itsudatte itsudatte itsudatte

Sugu yoko de waratteita

Nakushitemo torimodosu kimi wo

I will never leave you

mrstickball on 28 September 2009

dtwei -

Why would you be on it for months? Everything I've seen puts it at a few days.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

dtewi on 28 September 2009
mrstickball said:
dtwei -

Why would you be on it for months? Everything I've seen puts it at a few days.

If it takes months to fly to the moon, why a few days on an elevator?



Kimi wa ne tashika ni ano toki watashi no soba ni ita

Itsudatte itsudatte itsudatte

Sugu yoko de waratteita

Nakushitemo torimodosu kimi wo

I will never leave you