Space elevators?!?

Ideal for returning pancacks

But for A LEO ID that might work is by a airplane carrier Witch basicly is a airfield large plane that flighs in the high troposfere... I don't believe in it

http://www.affordablespaceflight.com/SEf04.jpg

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Its a greate pic, seems like things can be flung out in space with it without need of any elevators,
or may be i got confused.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The above image is not what i am talking about , but a similar design can be used to create a giant AirShip that can go near space and release a JetCraft from inside its belly.

Janus58 , then we may be able to quickly match the speed of the LEO elevator orbit and so on as it climbs upper elevators.

Hope so !

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

atmospheric drag is overrated You still need a whole lot of power (meaning heavy fuelmass) to reach orbit even when your launches from a 100 km high. Besides no ramjets or scramjets is ever going to reach speeds that would actualy place it in orbit. Besides you got the same problem with the canon ones in space you still have to rely on rockets for manauvring and the orbit circular or ellips is always going to move trought he earth so you get a space hopper at best unable to complete 1 orbit

 

The two concerpts which Singularity is referring to are the Rotovator and the Skyhook; described here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tether_propulsion#Rotovators
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tether_propulsion#Skyhooks

We might see either or both of these concepts before we see the full-length geostationary space elevator.
But it must be borne in mind that these concepts involve matching speeds with a moving tether, sometimes with a high relative speed.

One advantage of the Rotovator concept is that it can gain momentum by lowering mass to Earth. Elsewhere we have discussed the disadvantages of mining material in space, which would be expensive to lower to the Earth's surface; with a rotovator the incoming mass provides lift for for payload coming up from the Earth.

 

Sorry TigerMan, dont try to distort ideas here, OK.

I wasnt talking about above things at all.

I was referring in my last post to create a Airship (Let call it AirCarrier)

The helium/hydrogen filled AirCarrier will take a JetPlane with it near the edge of atmosphere.

At the right place where its near the SkyHook ( Lets call it the SkyArrestingHook) attached to the end of the LEO elevator.

Thus when the JetPlane takes off from the AirCarrier , it has to travel very few miles near the SkyArrestingHook (which is hanging in space just above the atmosphere ).

Did u get it, Humans ?

 

So it's a skyhook :bugeye:

Note that the term airplane carrier or aircarrier like you use it is not in use. I yust riped the ID from a potential Venusian space elevator. Because a day takes over 200 days it might not be possible to build a conventional one (who nows it's even possible here). So they could make a sort of flooting city that the winds would take around the planet in 4 or so days.

So the space elevator would be attached to this carrier and planes would land on this carrier, it a way to make it shorter but it might not be economical because even if a plane travels at mach 1 it still wouldn't double the rotation speed. And building such a vast craft would be a little bid nuts.

 

Good idea so far; I like the floating aircraft carrier concept very much.

But you have to calculate the velocity of the lower end of the SkyArresting Hook, so that you know how fast your Balloon-launched transfer craft needs to go in order to match speeds with the Hook.

Here's a clue; the Sky Arresting Hook will be in Low Earth Orbit, so will be moving at orbital speed for its centre of gravity.

Unless you rotate it in the opposite direction to its orbital path, as described in the Rotovator concept, that speed probably will be quite a bit more than ten thousand kilometers per hour, depending on the length of the SkyArresting hook.

That is why I pointed you in the direction of these pre-existing concepts, Singularity, so that you can see that other people have already done the maths for these concepts and that should help you fine-tune your own idea.

 

so u mean even though the Rotovator throws the Climber in the upper orbit, it doesnt fall towards earth each time ?

 

Ok but we still need carbon nano-tubes for a space elevator, and this process is still being researched and tested.

 

researched and tested and applied not? I believe their in the most recents flatscreens and might replace plasma screens... might


link

 

Well spotted! Yes, it does, so it needs to be lifted back into a higher orbit before it can be used again. This can be done in one of two ways- the tether can be lifted by running an electric charge through it, which causes the Earth's magnetic field to accelerate it; this leads to the rotovator achieving a higher orbit (A process known as tether propulsion). The electric charge can come from solar panels.
Or;
the rotovator can be lifted by lowering material from space into orbit. Thus allowing commodities mined in space (if any) to be lowered to Earth very cheaply.

 

Ok , all this sounds greate. And now a very funny question that i resisted for years or didnt find the right people to ask.

When we see videos of Astronauts in freefall/space they can move any heavy weight with greate ease, ie. pushing throwing or pulling. And they can do this in any direction.

So the question is, If i am doing space walking being in orbit around earth and i have 1KG weight in my hand. And i throw it up with quite a force (humanly possible).

How far will it rise above the earth ?

Since its weight is zero for the Astronaut it seems it will go on forever up away from her.

 

Asuming their is no air resistance it's orbit would become more ellips and would proberly pass the same point afther each orbit. Don't forget the weight might chance but the mass doesn't

 

but the weight should always go away from me in a straight line, and i have thrown it in the opposite direction to earth.

 

It won't, as it is under the influence of Earth's gravity.
From the Astronaut's viewpoint, It will start moving directly away from the Earth and then start to fall further and further behind the Astronaut in her orbit. At some point it will reach a maximum distance from the Earth and start moving back towards the Earth. At that time, the rate at which it is falling behind the Astronaut will begin to decrease. It will eventually cross the astronaut's orbit and will start getting closer to the Earth than the astronaut. It will now start to gain on the astronaut. It will reach a low point and then start climbing back up again. eventually crossing the astronaut's orbit at the same point at which it was thrown. However, it will cross behind the Astronaut, as its orbital period will be slightly longer.

From the Earth's view, it will enter a new orbit with a higher perigee and lower apogee than the astronaut's.

 

Thats really hard to digest, but thanks anyways, Janus58.

 

The object has mass. The Earth pulls on this mass. It won't go away in a straight line.

This is correct. However, that "slightly longer" is very slight indeed. If the astronaut throws the 1kg mass "straight up", the change in orbital energy is very, very small. Much more interesting things happen if the astronaut throws the object forwards, backwards, or sideways relative to the astronauts motion around the Earth. In all cases, the object starts moving in the direction it was thrown but then some very counterintuitive things happen. Assuming the astronaut is in a circular orbit, here is what will happen:

• Forwards. The object will start moving up shortly after being thrown. As it rises, it will slow down with respect to the astronaut. Eventually, the astronaut will overtake the object. Half an orbit later, the object will reach its maximum height above the astronaut. It will start to descend, just touching the astronaut's orbit after another half rev (where it will begin to rise again). At this point (one rev after being thrown), the ball will be well behind the astronaut. It will move progressively further from the astronaut as time passes.
• Backwards. The reverse happens when the ball is thrown backwards. It reverses direction, eventually passing the astronaut.
• Sideways. Denote vbar as the unit vector along the astronaut's velocity vector direction (This unit vector rotates with the astronaut's orbit). The object will start rising slightly and turning toward the -vbar direction. The object will be above and behind the astronaut 1/2 rev later, where it will start falling and turning toward the plus vbar. The object will come very close but very slightly behind to the astronaut after another 1/2 rev, at which point it will repeat this behavior. The object will move very slowly away from the astronaut over time. By adding just a little backwards velocity to the initial throw, the astronaut can make the mass come right back to him.

 

All this info has long been rechearged for NASA's secret space programe to built a space golf course.

 

Along with the 'MARS MISSIONS', once again...NASA is used to distract everybody from the military politics down here on earth. Same thing happened during the JFK administration. You would be quite foolish to assume that any government money spent on a space program is used "for mans further exploration of the cosmos". It's called Intelligence. And the guys in charge know how to get what they want. NO, there will never be a space elevator. There's nothing in space for man. We are just in denial that we were meant to stay here, beneath the bands of deadly radiation. And there will never be flying cars or any of that whooy.