(Henry J. Cobb) wrote in message . com...
Would a Space Elevator
http://flightprojects.msfc.nasa.gov/fd02_elev.html be a greater risk
to human life per mission than the current space shuttle?

While the risk of failure on any one trip would be less, when the rope
breaks it'll wrap around the Earth and strike several cities rather
than burning up a half dozen astronauts.

-HJC

There's actually darn little contest here. Since the first prototype
ESE isn't likely for a couple of decades, then mostly for continuing
tether repairs and of delivering a few expendable robotic missions, as
otherwise shuttle like craft will have to do the task of moving folks
to/from space. Perhaps 5 decades from now we'll have those spendy
(multi-trillion dollar) ESE(s) capable of doing the task instead of a
shuttle craft. Thanks but no thanks, I'll pass.

Though instead of focusing upon such a rather spendy ESE, or even the
likes of a relatively cheap rotovator technology, how about
reconsidering as a compromise upon a Lunar Space Elevator (LSE), that
which could have been initially developed and deployed a decade ago?

If the moon is mostly of basalt, as it perhaps should be, then of
whatever bulk is required for sustaining humans in space, whether
that's of simply mass for spacecraft shielding (abating radiation as
well as improving impact resistance) or of EMPD propulsion fuel
considerations, I believe this substance is in fact available from the
moon, and of affordably accommodating such within the LSE-CM/ISS is
perhaps just the ticket, as in right here and now, not of some
horrifically spendy day decades from now and solely dependent upon
those CNT fibers taking the heat as well as the radiation as well as
whatever other solar flak, not to forget about the year after year of
dodging a few hundred thousand other not so insignificant objects in
it's path (add up the total ESE tether surface exposure and do the
math).

We can get ourselves to/from the moon rather quickly these days, thus
a timeline of potentially lethal exposure to the mostly solar
radiation has become somewhat limited, and thereby survivable within
minimal shielding, as in terms of hours to perhaps a few days worth,
unless of course you've got 341 g/cm of something surrounding your
butt, as then you can tolerate some extended mission related travel
time without having all of your DNA/RNA chopped into bits by various
TBI worthy radiation issues, that's not even to mention significant
erosion if not through-holes as a result of your impacting with a
grain of sand, of which without sufficient shielding density is
exactly where life as we know it becomes downright difficult, and/or
subsequently where your own immune system proceeds to further
irradicate yourself from within, whereas I believe there are known
limits to what having banked bone marrow can achieve.

I've learned that sending technology efficient robotic missions off
into a lunar orbit is apparently a whole lot easier if not more energy
efficient than establishing most any Earth GSO, of which I suppose
that includes the likes of Earth L2 or L1, as those positions being
more complicated and more energy and/or time consuming in order to
establish, whereas as sending robotics off to visit a LSE-CM/ISS is
not only efficiently doable but highly beneficial, especially once
docked and/or snagged by the LSE-CM/ISS robotics and/or crew, as this
is obviously where the final mission configuration outfitting could
take place, as well as applied shielding of mostly moon dirt and/or
basalt rock, and whatever refuel.

What we can't seem to afford to deliver directly into space from
Earth, at least not without creating great amounts of global warming
CO2 for Earth, is that of any sufficient mass of radiation shielding,
and/or of just offering sufficient physical shield density for
surviving micro impacts that are more than a wee bit testy issues for
human space flights, along with there being anything leftover for the
likes of spare fuel, beer and pizza. Eventually, decades from now,
after spending perhaps trillions, the ESE(s) will most likely become
capable of accommodating those deliveries of such mass. Though most
any ESE should be more efficient than rockets, the overall process
still offers a significant CO2 impact for Earth, not to mention an
ongoing maintenance, defense of and logistics fiasco along with a list
of "what if's" that should keep all of us on our toes.

This latest ESE/LSE report/argument needs a whole lot of work, as well
as it could use your input plus lots more expertise, as well as
medications on my behalf. Within this delivery, I'm discussing or at
least attempting to convey upon the pro/con issues of the ESE/LSE,
though obviously I'm thoroughly confused and disorientated as usual,
as I can actually foresee others and even myself being snookered
again, just like those grand old Apollo cold-war days, along with all
the dog wagging on steroids, plus all of that being so nicely packaged
into the sorts of top notch NASA/NOVA produced and/or moderated
infomercials that'll knock your socks off.

Since I'm no good at telling my stories, I may have to get myself back
into this one, polish it up and otherwise continue to share in
whatever I've learned, as well as sharing whatever warm and fuzzy
favor returning that I can think of, as I'm certain of those opposing
or silently playing along, or perhaps they're pretending at their
playing "hide and seek" because, in reality these folks may actually
be dumber than dumb (that's merely arrogance without being smart
enough for realizing it), but obviously those folks would otherwise
expect nothing less from my perspective. So, I'll keep trying to
oblige.

I've accomplished this effort as yet another of my poor deliveries on
the PRO/CON issues of the ESE/LSE. Have yourself a look-see, a few
laughs at the expense of humanity, then give me some of that "all
knowing" feedback and even flak if that's all you've got. Of course,
what's mostly in need are specific numbers, of doable "what ifs" and
of whatever inventions you can devise upon, applicable for either the
ESE or LSE. Actually the ESE needs a whole lot more help and of
trillions more of your hard earned money than my LSE, but I'll
certainly take whatever you've got, even if it's just ESE leftovers.
PRO/CON ESE/LSE: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-ese-lse.htm

Regards, Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA / the discovery of other LIFE on Venus
Besides way too many other topics, here's other ongoing LSE UPDATES:
Basalt tether update: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-lse-gpa.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-cm-ccm-01.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-edwards-se.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-se-flywheels.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-cm-ccm-elevator.htm