It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by DaSeitz
But still, this type of reactor would be suitable only for propulsion in space, not for lifting things into orbit?
Would you agree that Railguns/mass drivers are the best method to transport static things into space? (Humans would not survive the acceleration)
Would you agree that Railguns/mass drivers are the best method to transport static things into space?
Originally posted by DaSeitz
The technology is there. Time ins't the problem, funding is. Sad as it is, I don't think that space projects will recieve sufficient funding until earth's resources are finally depleted.
Originally posted by DaSeitz
So we need a Spacedock/Shipyard and a efficient transport system. Space elevators seem to be the most cost efficient solution for cargo transport to space. Considering the rapid developement in carbon nano fibers around the world such elevators should be realizeable within a few years, Shipyards in space pose some problems (complicated montage work without gravity) but no big problems in their own construction.
I guess a robotic assembly line (like today mainly with cars) would be the best solution. Building "cheap" efficient Freighters out of prefabricated modules (they don't have to look pretty). Modules for cargo, fuel or personal transport could then be inserted into the standard chassis, making the system more flexible and the overall system cost smaller.
Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
I think it will be a long while before Space elevators become a reality, or become remotely useful.
Shattered OUT...
Carbon nanotubes (a material that was first fabricated in the 1950s) appear to have a theoretical tensile strength and density that is well above the desired minimum for space elevator structures. The technology to manufacture bulk quantities[4] of this material and fabricate them into a cable is in early stages of development. While theoretically carbon nanotubes can have tensile strengths beyond 120 GPa, in practice the highest tensile strength ever observed in a single-walled tube is 52 GPa, and such tubes averaged breaking between 30 and 50 GPa.[5] Even the strongest fiber made of nanotubes is likely to have notably less strength than its components. Improving tensile strength depends on further research on purity and different types of nanotubes
en.wikipedia.org...
Note that as of 2006, carbon nanotubes have an approximate price of $25/gram, and 20,000 kg - twenty million times that much - would be necessary to form even a seed elevator. This price is decreasing rapidly, and large-scale production would reduce it further, but the price of suitable carbon nanotube cable is anyone's guess at this time.
en.wikipedia.org...
Economics
Main article: Space elevator economics
With a space elevator, materials might be sent into orbit at a fraction of the current cost. Modern rocketry gives prices that are on the order of thousands of U.S. dollars per kilogram for transfer to low earth orbit, and roughly twenty thousand dollars per kilogram for transfer to geosynchronous orbit. For a space elevator, the price could be on the order of a few hundred dollars per kilogram, or possibly much less.
Space elevators have high capital cost but low operating expenses, so they make the most economic sense in a situation where it would be used over a long period of time to handle very large amounts of payload. The current launch market may not be large enough to make a compelling case for a space elevator, but a dramatic drop in the price of launching material to orbit would likely result in new types of space activities becoming economically feasible. In this regard they share similarities with other transportation infrastructure projects such as highways or railroads.
Development costs might be roughly equivalent, in modern dollars, to the cost of developing the shuttle system. A question subject to speculation is whether a space elevator would return the investment, or if it would be more beneficial to instead spend the money on developing rocketry further. If the elevator did indeed cost roughly the same as the shuttle program, recovering the development costs would take less than about a hundred thousand tons launched to low earth orbit or five thousand tons launched to geosynchronous orbit.
Political issues
One potential problem with a space elevator would be the issue of ownership and control. Such an elevator would require significant investment (estimates start at about US$5 billion for a very primitive tether), and it could take at least a decade to recoup such expenses. At present, few entities are able to spend in the space industry at that magnitude
en.wikipedia.org...
Originally posted by DaSeitz
Could you provide a reason for why you do not think that space elevators are possible within the next decade?