space elevator by 2050?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
I

ichy

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2006
6,940
8
81
allenk09 said:
It would probably be more cost efficient to just develop a spacecraft that can make routine trips to space. We have the technology, it's just being put off by losers in government around the world.
Click to expand...

Chemical rockets will never be a cost effective way to lift lots of stuff out of Earth's gravity well.
 
JTsyo

JTsyo

Lifer
Nov 18, 2007
12,068
1,159
126
They can't do it in 40 years. It'll probably take longer than that to just build it. We probably need another 50 - 100 years just to get the right technology for it. One of the thing necessary is a anchor in space, I don't think we're to the point where we can tow a asteroid or other rock into the right orbit.
 
F

ForumMaster

Diamond Member
Feb 24, 2005
7,792
1
0
obligatory xkcd:

space_elevators.png

"If you think space elevators are good, but just too boring and practical, check out the 'space fountain'."
 
Fritzo

Fritzo

Lifer
Jan 3, 2001
41,920
2,162
126
allenk09 said:
It would probably be more cost efficient to just develop a spacecraft that can make routine trips to space. We have the technology, it's just being put off by losers in government around the world.
Click to expand...

Not really. It's high cost/high payoff situation. We'll never be able to get a launch vehicle that can put things into orbit for must less than $1000/lb. A space elevator could do it for as little as $10/lb.
 
S

-Slacker-

Golden Member
Feb 24, 2010
1,563
0
76
allenk09 said:
It would probably be more cost efficient to just develop a spacecraft that can make routine trips to space. We have the technology, it's just being put off by losers in government around the world.
Click to expand...

Fucking this times a bajillion hnnnnnnnnnnnnnggg!!! If Reaction Engines ltd. could just get a little bit more funding form the europe and maybe a little bit of international support, we'd have a fully functional space plane by now. No need to invest hundreds of billions in a dead end technology.

It would also have helped if that cow Margaret Thacher didn't cancel the hotol program.
 
R

rsutoratosu

Platinum Member
Feb 18, 2011
2,716
4
81
This has been cover widely in the mobile suit gundam 00, they even have episode about the elevator being destroyed and falling on the surface, etc.. pretty decent scifi.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mobile_Suit_Gundam_00_technology

Anyway, to my surprise, I interview 2 years ago at a private hedgefund and one of the billionaire guy that lives on his private island off cos cob in CT, wanted to build a space elevator also.. and during the interview i was like yeah I saw that in gundam 00 already.

It was funny because they didn't know what they want to do with it, they just have money to burn and maybe because they wanna be the first. but whatever the reason is, apparently a lot of people have this idea now
 
P

Pardus

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2000
8,197
21
81
Will it says "Otis" when you step in?
What if the elevator get's stuck?
Will there be an emergency phone?
Will you have to listen to elevator music for a whole week?
What is someone farts?

A 30-passenger car would travel along the cable from Earth's surface up to an altitude of 60,000 mile skyward at about 124 mph in a little more than a week.,
Click to expand...
 
B

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
allenk09 said:
It would probably be more cost efficient to just develop a spacecraft that can make routine trips to space. We have the technology, it's just being put off by losers in government around the world.
Click to expand...

actually the space elevator as silly as it sounds, is something we need.
 
R

rsutoratosu

Platinum Member
Feb 18, 2011
2,716
4
81
it be easier to "beam me up" crap from location to location.. :) one day... scotty will beam me up
 
D

Dman8777

Senior member
Mar 28, 2011
426
8
81
So the "anchor" would be at geo-stationary distance which means the centrifugal and gravitational forces cancel each other out? What's the problem then with the cable strength?
 
dawp

dawp

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
11,347
2,710
136
I just think it needs to go faster than 200km/h. 1 week just for the trip? maybe that's just the starting point and it will be ramped up after the bugs are worked out. and it needs to be bi-directional to be practical so technically it would have to be at least 2.

Dman8777 said:
So the "anchor" would be at geo-stationary distance which means the centrifugal and gravitational forces cancel each other out? What's the problem then with the cable strength?
Click to expand...

it will have to hold up it own weight. geostationary just means the anchor will be a satellite in geosynchronous orbit.
 
Last edited:
manimal

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,559
8
0
Alot of the energy required to take something up in a space elevator will be recaptured on the way down. Cant get cheaper than that with any solid propellent yet.
 
GagHalfrunt

GagHalfrunt

Lifer
Apr 19, 2001
25,284
1,998
126
DrPizza said:
The first company/country to build a space elevator will effectively own space.
Click to expand...

For the 30 seconds other nations allow them to own the elevator. That thing might work in some fictional Star Trek utopia where it's all one planet working together for the good of all mankind. But in this space-time continuum? Not bloody likely, even if the tech is invented to make it work nobody has the tech to protect it. A space elevator is just a giant soft target screaming "come and get me!!"
 
SlitheryDee

SlitheryDee

Lifer
Feb 2, 2005
17,252
19
81
Maybe by 2150. A space elevator would be the biggest undertaking in the history of mankind. We're not accomplishing that in 40 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom