A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Micro Gravity and A Space Elevator?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #20  
Old June 12th 20, 12:08 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Niklas Holsti
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 168
Default Micro Gravity and A Space Elevator?

On 2020-06-11 21:16, Scott Kozel wrote:
On Thursday, June 11, 2020 at 1:24:46 PM UTC-4, David Spain wrote:

Another feature not to be discounted are stops along the cable that
remain in the atmosphere. You could have observation stations in both
lower and upper troposphere, stratosphere and ionosphere. Something that
is exceedingly difficult to do today, even with balloons.


Something that I haven't heard addressed, is how to protect the cable from
aircraft collisions. No matter how well marked and lighted, sooner or later an
aircraft will hit it, resulting in the severing of the cable and the crashing of
the aircraft.


Perhaps the fixed part of the cable (the orbital tower) should end high
up, higher than planes fly and significant storms blow. The small hop
from and to the ground could be handled by winched cables, no big
problem if one of them gets hit, although the load/cab being winched up
or down may be lost, of course.

The only important reason for anchoring the cable to the Earth's surface
arises if the cable is used to accelerate significant amounts of _net_
mass (upwards mass flow downwards mass flow) to orbital or escape
velocity, in which case the cable has to bend to the west (along the
rising direction) and extract momentum from the Earth's rotation through
its connection to the surface. This connection could of course also be
designed to tolerate isolated airplane strikes, for example it could
consist of many thinner cables that connect to widely separated points
on the ground but converge to the central, main cable high up. The
failure of one or two of the thin cables could be tolerated, and the
cables could be replaced.

Another comment: accelerating a cab outwards along the cable by
"centrifugal" force at altitudes above the geosynchronous is not really
a "free ride", because the momentum has to come from somewhe either
from rocket propulsion, or from the cable's orbital momentum (which is
not suistainable), or from the Earth's rotation, via tension in an
inclined cable.

--
Niklas Holsti

niklas holsti tidorum fi
. @ .
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gravity = mass-gravity + positron-space-gravity; superfluid heliumbehaviour #368 Atom Totality 4th ed Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] Astronomy Misc 0 March 12th 11 08:08 AM
Gravity = mass-gravity + positron-space-gravity; Ida & Dactyl #367Atom Totality 4th ed Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] Astronomy Misc 0 March 11th 11 08:10 PM
Micro gravity and long duration flights. Brian Gaff Space Station 1 April 21st 09 12:22 PM
Trying to fit gravity in the Micro G=EMC^2 Glazier[_1_] Misc 4 July 22nd 07 01:04 PM
Article: Macro, not micro: modified theories of gravity [Dark troubles?] Robert Karl Stonjek Astronomy Misc 1 February 18th 07 01:48 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.