waky waky

Well Pan, I'm not an engineer, and don't know how to use autocad (hell, I can't even draw something recognizable in Paint). But how about low tech. Say we utilize superpressure helium balloons (which maintain the same altitude day and night, unlike conventional types) in an array to hang a big platform at the top of the atmosphere. We use the platform as a spaceport/assembly structure to launch something on the order of the Bigelow Genesis modules (my early thoughts[before I learned of Bigelow] were to lift a cylinder made of alternating layers of kevlar and styrofoam} that has been lifted to the platform using more balloons. From that altitude it should be possible to attain a good orbit using strap on solid fuel boosters like on the shuttle. Hold on to the boosters rather than jettisoning them for further usage once in orbit. Drag from the atmosphere should be negligible at that altitude, so I see no major hurdles to doing it this way, though I'm certain there would be some problems to overcome. It seems to me that this methodology would be inexpensive enough that it could be undertaken by a private consortium. If we made the cylinder big enough, say 50'-60' diameter, we could probably spin it for gravity without experiencing too severe coriolus effects at the inner hull. As I've said, I'm not an engineer, it may not be feasible, but I'd be willing to give it a try if I had the money. Once we're out there, we could, perhaps start salvage operations, gathering some our orbiting halo of space junk. Shuttle main tanks salvaged could be ancillary habitats, perhaps set aside for manufacturing processes, other items could be either recycled for use or simply piled up around the habitat for additional shielding. It doesn't take much of a rocket to maneuver around once you're in orbit, we have several types that might suffice. I mean the reason we're not living in space already is that NASA has to make everything as complicated as possible with triple redundant systems out the yang. Well, that's fine if you happen to be a government beaurocracy with a big budget and a primary aim of self perpetuation, but for us plebes that are motivated to just get us into space in numbers, maybe we're willing to take a few more risks than NASA is in order to bootstrap ourselves to where we want to go.
Vic

From: pan p
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 3:46 AM
To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [spacesettlers] waky waky

"Any constructive suggestions?"

yes. somebody generae some paint sketches forme to take to autocad.

we need three main forms of craft.

spaceplanes, low energy small orbital habitats, and asteroid colonies,
in that order. Even lunar and martian colonization are expedited via that path.

I have posted some examples many f which are old and back when i barely knew how to use the program.

This should be an open source design process by now. Maybe you haven't had an engineer or draftsperson yet...i don't know what the hold up is.

I'm only here long enough to determine if this can get lucid.

It isn't. Nt by along shot.

waky waky.

Now. what should I draw?

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Victor Smith" wrote: