Folks, Marshall Eubanks of Liftport is attending LEAG at LPI Houston Nov 7-9 where he will present this important paper on the lunar elevator...
I read the paper that was online. I didn't see anything exciting. What did you see that makes it important?
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/leag2011/pdf/2043.pdf
It will open up the lunar surface to space industry, a game changer.
> It will open up the lunar surface to space industry, a game changer.
thought a space elevator wouldn't work on the Moon due to its slow
rotation. A rotovator would work, though... is this something different?
Thanks,
- Joe
>
> > It will open up the lunar surface to space industry, a game changer.
>
> The link's not working for me. Can someone summarize the concept? I
if the URL does not work, try this alias:
http://bit.ly/pGH07j
> thought a space elevator wouldn't work on the Moon due to its slow
Elevator works fine at the Moon, and can be built with existing materials.
> rotation. A rotovator would work, though... is this something different?
>
Rotovator would work, and would actually be eaiser to build.
>
> you're not talking about something physical from the surface of the earth
> to the surface of the moon are you?
that is ridiculous, the total weight
> and the issue of the rotation of the earth taking the base away > from
For the baseline design we need 11,000 tons of M9 fiber. This is within feasible manufacturing capability of the supplier.
> facing the moon would destroy it in one day or less. if it survived it would
> simply wrap around and around the earth and be a mess. not to mention
> property and life loss and lawsuits.
>
No that is not how it is set up.
Take a look at the abstract:
if the URL does not work, try this alias:
http://bit.ly/pGH07j
The tether goes from the surface of the Moon to the L-1 lagrange point which is staitonary with respect to the lunar surface. A counterweight cable extends from L-1 about half-way to the Earth.
ooops my mistake, it does not require 11,000 tons, it is 11,000 kg, here is quote:
in a single Discovery class mission, starting with the
delivery of 11,000 kg of Zylon HM fiber plus associated
equipment to the L1 Lagrange site."
>
> oh, so the ladder begins at the Lagrange site? why have a ladder at all,
> just land the whole damn shebang on the moon and have done with it.
>
It is designed to soft-land payloads on the lunar surface, and to lift payloads off the lunar surface into space.
It is much cheaper to use the elevator than to use rockets, by a couple of orders of magnitude.
Soft landing payloads on to the Moon today with rockets is extremely expensive.
After reflecting on it for several days, what I got out of this paper was:
"We have a really neat science experiment but we need someone else to come up with a even neater use for it and funding for both experiments."
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/leag2011/pdf/2043.pdf
Err Mitchell... it is exactly the same as the SSI vision ... except that we replace the mass driver with an elevator.
You remember that this is an SSI group, and the original SSI vision is to build space habitats using lunar resources.
The lunar elevator facilitates that vision.
>
> okay, let's try this in theory. use an orbiter seated at Lagrange points,
> and the landers are to drift in, using either a rolling land on a strip
> and/or retro rockets fired from projections like helo blades in
No rockets are involved. The payloads are delivered to the lunar surface using crawlers which climb up and down the elevator tether to-from L1.
Yes,yes. The vision part I am fine with and personally I am much more in favor of elevators than mass drivers. The problem has always been lack of an impelling need (which translates to money) which is all that I was commenting on. I was hoping that somebody had figured out a impelling need sell-able to the United States Congress or anybody else that might pay for it.
The elevator has the advantage over a mass driver in that it can not only launch payloads off the surface of luna, but it can also soft land payloads on to the surface of luna, which a mass driver cannot.
You remember that this is an SSI group, and the original SSI vision is to build space habitats using lunar resources.
The lunar elevator facilitates that vision.
this is a slightly edited version of a private post.
I certainly find the idea of a lunar elevator/"beanstalk" intriguing and am in favour of anything that facilitates the establishment andsupport of a moon colony, through to the tipping point of economic and ecological sustainability, as i maintain that keeping all humanity's eggs in one ecological basket, while simultaneously kicking that basket tosmithereens, in the name of business as usual and short term economic gain, truly adds dimensions, colour, and compelling imagery to the definition of abysmal stupidity. By comparison, sustainable colonies on the moon, nearer asteroids, Lagrange points, other free orbits,or anywhere else that is possible, seem to me the greatest bargains of all time, at ANY price.
I certainly find the idea of a lunar elevator/"beanstalk" intriguing and am in favour of anything that facilitates the establishment andsupport of a moon colony, through to the tipping point of economic and ecological sustainability, as i maintain that keeping all humanity's eggs in one ecological basket, while simultaneously kicking that basket tosmithereens, in the name of business as usual and short term economic gain, truly adds dimensions, colour, and compelling imagery to the definition of abysmal stupidity. By comparison, sustainable colonies on the moon, nearer asteroids, Lagrange points, other free orbits,or anywhere else that is possible, seem to me the greatest bargains of all time, at ANY price.
UP TO THE STARS, OR DOWN WITH THE DINOSAURS. THERE IS NO THIRD ALTERNATIVE.
COLONIZE THE SOLAR SYSTEM. IT'S A DOWN TO EARTH SOLUTION.
>
> Yes,yes. The vision part I am fine with and personally I am much more
> in favor of elevators than mass drivers. The problem has always been
> lack of an impelling need (which translates to money) which is all that
> I was commenting on. I was hoping that somebody had figured out a
> impelling need sell-able to the United States Congress or anybody else
> that might pay for it.
>
Also, some are starting to realize that orbital propellant depots supplied from lunar resources are much cheaper than building a huge heavy lift launch vehicle.
Actually, a mass driver CAN land a payload just as easily as launching it. You just need to land on the magnetically supported "bucket" and then use that kinetic energy to generate electricity, rather than consume electricity.
O'Neille proposed that 40 years ago,,,
Gary 7
The elevator has the advantage over a mass driver in that it can not only launch payloads off the surface of luna, but it can also soft land payloads on to the surface of luna, which a mass driver cannot.
You remember that this is an SSI group, and the original SSI vision is to build space habitats using lunar resources.
The lunar elevator facilitates that vision.
>
> After reflecting on it for several days, what I got out of this paper was:
> "We have a really neat science experiment but we need someone else to
> come up with a even neater use for it and funding for both experiments."
>
> > Folks, Marshall Eubanks of Liftport is attending LEAG at LPI Houston
> > Nov 7-9 where he will present this important paper on the lunar
> > elevator...
> >
> > http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/leag2011/pdf/2043.pdf
> > http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/leag2011/pdf/2043.pdf>
> >
Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
To change settings online go to:
To change settings via email:
ssi_list-digest@...
ssi_list-fullfeatured@...
>
> Actually, a mass driver CAN land a payload just as easily as launching it. You just need to land on the magnetically supported "bucket" and then use that kinetic energy to generate electricity, rather than consume electricity.
>
> O'Neille proposed that 40 years ago,,,
>
> Gary 7
>
Lunar elevator is easier and much cheaper to build than mass drivers and gives gentler ride.
Building a mass driver on the lunar surface requires lots of rockets to soft land the heavy components. Lunar elevator can be built in space with no need to soft land anything on to the surface of the Moon.
Soft landing material on the Moon with rockets is extremely expensive.