Project Orion Ground Launch.

I think you are mistaken. First, there is no way our carbon nanotube tech will be good enough to do that in ten years. Second, "only factor" I thought it had to be harnessed to an asteroid? Wouldn’t you need to somehow get an asteroid into orbit? Last I checked that would be a tall order for NASA, especially a large one.

p.s. how big of an asteroid would it need to be anchored to? (Just curious)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

In my original post, an asteroid would be needed. However, if you see the proposal I linked to earlier, the space elevator could be conterbalanced by the craft deploying the elevator.

Corrction: which is a reasonably safe bet to be developed in the next ten years, in my opinion.
In other words, I'm making a prediction based on the fact that:
a) There's a lot of carbon nanotube research going on
b) It's a topic with applications (other than space elevators), therefore it will receive greater funding.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

everything breaks, no matter how meticulously you build that carbon-nanotube cable, something will go wrong. where as when a rocket goes wrong, it plumets back into earth, and we try again. to try again after a 36,000 km long cable has collapsed onto earth's surface would be one hell of an economic struggle to just "try again". space elevators are not the way to go, rockets are. but I don't think using radioactive nuclear fuel is the wisest of moves, something better is bound come around within the next few decades.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

"The grapes planted near the Olkiluoto power station on the country's west coast are a resilient species that can withstand temperatures of minus 40 degrees Celsius (minus 40 degrees Fahrenheit)."

What a reliable site....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

lol, thats funny seeker.

I don’t think we will be able to make carbon nanotubes strong/long enough to make any major structures out of in the next 15-25 years. yes we will probably see nano tubes in industrial uses in the next 10, but to build a carbon nanotube chain/cable all the way out to geo-sync orbit would be a lot harder. I don’t think we will ever see a nanotube space elevator, by the time we are good enough at making nanotubes we would probably already have found a better way. (probably antimatter)

 

What's up with that? -40F is the same as -40C.

 

Oh! Ok... I didn't know that. That's a pretty strange coincidence. Celcius and Fahrenheit are so different....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Hurray!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Anyways.... I need holidays......

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

ohh, wow, you are right. -40c=-40f. regardless, a space elevator will be no easy task.

 

Different, yes, but both are straight line graphs at different gradients, so will intersect somewhere. That point is at a rather useless for comparison, -40degrees!

 

Cato:
How would antimatter be better, and in what way were you planning to manufacture enough of it?

 

Well... thank you for the information anyways...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

phlogistician,

Nothing.

It won't. But it only needs to succeed once down here. The developmental work won't go to waste because it will simply be applied in space for further Orions. There is no such thing as zero risk. The important thing is to ensure that the risk versus gain is worthy of the investment and we minimise the effects of a worst case scenario if it does happen.

Q,

http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/13763/story.htm

I'm sorry. It flows through plastic pipes. My bad. Vine growing is not one of my discussion strong points. If I had been more interested I would have read further.

So you've found one factual error related to farming and are seizing upon it as irrefutable proof that everything else I say must therefore be fallacy. That's almost as desperate as the name calling you're employing. But yes, I do like to use my imagination and I won't apologise for that.

Geodesic,

They said the same thing about fusion 50 years ago. For the moon and possibly even Mars it might be a possibility some day but Earths gravity well makes space elevators a ridiculous notion.

 

'risk versus gain' of detonating nuclear weapons near a stockpile of nuclear weapons at ground level, ..... when every single part is made by the lowest bidding contractor, and administered by a committee.

There are far more promising technologies, with lower risk.

 

how about He3-He3 fusion? supposed to not make any radiation but I don't know if we can make enough Helium-3 or if it's explosiveness is practically powerful.

 

Phlog,

I disagree. The risk is negligible and the potential rewards far from insignificant. There are no viable alternatives currently available with such a promising risk vs gain ratio.

weedeater,

Pipedream.

 

He3 fusion a "pipedream"?
Well.... at least it is better then nuclear waste falling from the sky....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

ProjectOrion:
You've dismissed two alternative suggestions to your proposed method, with no greater reasoning than "The technology is not there yet". Tell me, exactly how much research has gone into your proposed launch technology? Do you have any project proposals similar to the one I posted? And why don't you remind us of the number of nuclear test launches?

 

Shows how little you know about rocketry! There are plenty of things that could go wrong, be it O-Ring seals, insulation, or software. Just hand waving over the detail doesn't make your case any more plausible. Quite the opposite, it makes it look like exactly what it is, an ill thought out pipe dream!

 

Vine growing is not one of my discussion strong points.

Neither are a great many other topics, yet that does not stop you from obsessive opining.