Launch loop:
http://www.launchloop.com/
Basically, a big launch loop puts things into space for around $3/kg. With
current technology, it takes about 1000kg of (reusable) capsule to support
one person in space, so that's about $3000 to put you into space. There's
very few people that can't afford that. The launch g-force is 3g- anyone and
their grandmother can survive that.
There's some technical risk-nobody knows absolutely sure it can be built,
but only really because it's never been done before, there's no known show
stoppers (unlike the Space Elevator which has at least one total stoppage-
the lack of suitable cable; and then there's the radiation). And it can be
tested at fairly small scale before deploying the full system.
If you're really, really lucky somebody will build one to launch solar power
satellites, and then space settlement is right behind.
Oh yeah, and it's probably cheap enough that it could be used for suborbital
as well, so you could go to the opposite side of the Earth for less than it
costs at the moment, as well as it being more environmentally friendly (it
uses less energy than flying because it's above the atmosphere).
--
-Ian Woollard
We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. If we lived in a perfectly
imperfect world things would be a lot better.
This sounds cool enough. Indeed it sounds very cool.
Of course, he'll never know that I feel that way. I can't tell him.
He considers attaboys to be bad.
Nor does he seem aware of the fact that small amounts of money from
large amounts of people add up to large amounts of money.
Actually, the biggest technical hurdle seems to lie in what to do with
the dead weight of all that excess attitude. No way you're lifting
that off the ground.
just don't tell him about it.
On 05/12/2007, Xenophile wrote:
>
> This sounds cool enough. Indeed it sounds very cool.
> Of course, he'll never know that I feel that way. I can't tell him.
> He considers attaboys to be bad.
> Nor does he seem aware of the fact that small amounts of money from
> large amounts of people add up to large amounts of money.
> Actually, the biggest technical hurdle seems to lie in what to do with
> the dead weight of all that excess attitude. No way you're lifting
> that off the ground.
I don't think he's that bad; I read the bit you're referring to as mostly
'don't waste my time with dumb ideas that you just thought of, cos I get a
lot of trash sent at me, but *do* waste my time if you've thought about it a
*lot* and have sound engineering stuff'
Well, the idea itself seems workable. I wish him the best of luck...
> just don't tell him about it.
The problem is financial mostly; also a lot of people won't believe it can
be done unless they stand on a bridge held up by the principle that this
uses.
There's also the other issues- it kind of falls between stools, to a
mechanical engineer, it's an electrical engineering project, to an
electrical engineer, it's a structural engineering project or an aerospace
project... to a physicist it's low tech stuff... etc. etc.
I think they need to get llots of undergrads to build stuff and enthuse
about it, that way it will get done.
--
-Ian Woollard
We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. If we lived in a perfectly
imperfect world things would be a lot better.