OT Discussion: Feasibility of an Orbital Elevator

[Shark7]

You see them in several sci-fi games, and the concept is certainly a possibility, but I'm more interested in discussing what would be needed to make it work.

A little on topic, but I see the starports in DW as orbital elevators. Able to move resources and goods up to waiting freighters that are orbiting the planet and docking with the elevators counterweight station.

Remember this is a friendly discussion guys. [:)]

So. As I see it, not only do you need a very strong cable, you must have an extremely reinforced anchor. Even with a Geo-synchronous orbit, there is something that could go wrong. What else would it need to actually work?

[Igard]

I remember reading quite a detailed description of an orbital elevator in the Mars trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson. They built it from an asteroid and lowered it down to the surface. Spoiler - In the second book they sabotage the elevator from the top (on the asteroid), resulting in the whole structure collapsing on the planet surface.

Can't remember too much about it, other than it had a good description, materials used, width and length was all detailed.

[J HG T]

Alastairs Chasm City books had also had quite good description of orbital elevators. From what I remember, the cable was made of some kind hyper-diamond (grown diamond?) and was tens of meters thick. The other end was connected to carousel type of space habitat.
It got cut somewhere near the middle by nuclear explosion, causing the upper half to hang from the space station and the lower end to crash on the city which was built around the lift.

[Shark7]

Right, and I might look up these books for the descriptions. But I'm looking at it more from a science fact perspective. Obviously we currently do not have the materials in the quantities needed to build such an endeavor, but how could a real one work some day? Obviously the building of a space station to tether it to above the planet is possibly the first step.

[adecoy95]

considering the cost to move goods from earth to space is going to be something around 6-10 times cheaper in the next 10 years, it will become exceedingly unlikely such a thing will ever be built.

if something like that absolutely had to be built, however, it would probably be built somewhere high above sea level but easily accessible. other than that, i got nothing, its a massive project, and with the costs of space travel going down so much soon, i doubt it will ever happen

[Data]

I've also read these books and one exceptional one by A.C. Clarke on the concept of orbital elevator. That one I think is the most "science fact" one, Shark.
Needless to say, I also definitly WANT it.

EDIT: the name of the book is....Space Elevator (Orbital Tower). Surprising, no? [:)]

[dazoline II]

Not only in science fiction but as a practical application:
http://www.itworld.com/193309/space-ele ... -questions

An almost decade old discussion on it:
http://news.slashdot.org/story/03/03/05 ... e-Elevator


It seems like fusion, space elevators are always 10 years from becoming an actual product.

[Facedrop]

It does definitely seem that with further development of carbon nano-tubes that a space elevator will be the way of the future.

On topic however, perhaps a space elevator structure could be added to the game. it could possibly give some colony development bonuses and could decrease ship build times.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Facedrop

It does definitely seem that with further development of carbon nano-tubes that a space elevator will be the way of the future.

On topic however, perhaps a space elevator structure could be added to the game. it could possibly give some colony development bonuses and could decrease ship build times.

For that matter, cargo handling times could decrease as well, since the resources could be loaded onto the elevator and shipped up to the orbiting spaceport.

[Simulation01]

One of the potential problems with Space Elevators in RL is that they are vulnerable to 'space junk'.  Also, it would represent a major target for terrorists....just like the WTC but much bigger considering the possible economic ramifications....it could potentially draw terrorists like flies to sugar.  It would also be a target for any nation or nations that did not participate in the project should conflict arise. 

Also, you should consider how risk averse modern society is.  How could one insure such a mammoth structure or guarantee other nations that they would not suffer should the thing collapse?  In as much as it would revolutionize the global economy it would also represent a huge risk and liability....meaning that investment may be hard to come by....a nation or group of nations would be reluctant to finance it for the same reason's I imagine.  I believe that we will relatively soon be able to build such a structure, but just because we can does not mean we will. 

[Kayoz]

Regardless of whether it's desirable or not- we don't have the materials technology to build one. You'd need super-strong cables for it to be even possible - beyond our technology at the moment.

adecoy95

if something like that absolutely had to be built, however, it would probably be built somewhere high above sea level but easily accessible. other than that, i got nothing, its a massive project, and with the costs of space travel going down so much soon, i doubt it will ever happen

Height above sea level is pretty much irrelevant - if you're looking at where one would build a space elevator, you should look at the equator first.

[Awaras]

If I recall correctly, all current space elevator concepts involve using an extremely thin 3-5 meter wide ribbon of carbon nanotubes for the elevator body. The lift cars would crawl up this ribbon powered by solar power or by lasers beamed from the ground.

I remember reading somewhere that the ribbon would be so thin the entire 40 thousand kilometer length of it could be rolled up and packed in a single Space Shuttle payload (I read this before the space shuttles were retired). The ribbon would be oriented with its thin edge facing East-West, so the odds of it being hit by any space debris would be very small.

Should the ribbon be cut (by accident or in a terrorist attack) the parts that fall to earth would flutter down harmlessly. Cargo falling from the broken elevator could be a problem, but they could install emergency parachutes for cargo that has not made it very high up, or explosive charges to blow up cargo that was higher up at the moment of breakdown.

The anchor facility would most likely be floating at sea, somewhere at or very near the equator.

[Facedrop]

On the subject of terrorism being an issue, I could see the space elevator as being very heavily guarded by the military. I doubt that such a large investment would go unprotected enough to be sabotaged by anything but a nuclear weapon.

[Canute0]

a single carbon nanotubes wouldnt be enough , even it can hold all the weight of the cargo, because its too thin.
Its just the base to create a bigger carbon nanotubes stucture.
And dont forget you need another anchor at the space. A simple Spacestation like the ISS wouldnt work, it need to be bigger then this.

[Simulation01]

ORIGINAL: Awaras

If I recall correctly, all current space elevator concepts involve using an extremely thin 3-5 meter wide ribbon of carbon nanotubes for the elevator body. The lift cars would crawl up this ribbon powered by solar power or by lasers beamed from the ground.

I remember reading somewhere that the ribbon would be so thin the entire 40 thousand kilometer length of it could be rolled up and packed in a single Space Shuttle payload (I read this before the space shuttles were retired). The ribbon would be oriented with its thin edge facing East-West, so the odds of it being hit by any space debris would be very small.

Should the ribbon be cut (by accident or in a terrorist attack) the parts that fall to earth would flutter down harmlessly. Cargo falling from the broken elevator could be a problem, but they could install emergency parachutes for cargo that has not made it very high up, or explosive charges to blow up cargo that was higher up at the moment of breakdown.

The anchor facility would most likely be floating at sea, somewhere at or very near the equator.

I had heard the ribbon would actually wrap around the Earth....not, simply flutter down. Yes, it would be thin, but the cargo moving up would not be....also, eventually it would be hit by something though small.

However, another problem with it was the issue of powering the cargo all the way to the top. One concept to get around this is the idea of 'beaming' power to the cargo lifters using a laser.

Also, yes it would be guarded by whomever built it, but in the event of a full on war it would be vulnerable to a cheap sub with a nuclear tipped torpedo ( North Korea or anyone with an axe to grind ).

It would take a lot of investment and the risks would be huge. I would love to see it though, but I think humanity has become a bunch of ******.

[Simulation01]

ORIGINAL: Canute

a single carbon nanotubes wouldnt be enough , even it can hold all the weight of the cargo, because its too thin.
Its just the base to create a bigger carbon nanotubes stucture.
And dont forget you need another anchor at the space. A simple Spacestation like the ISS wouldnt work, it need to be bigger then this.

Bring in a small Asteroid.....also the ribbon could be tapering in length....bigger at the bottom and tapering toward the top.

[Awaras]

ORIGINAL: Simulation01
I had heard the ribbon would actually wrap around the Earth....not, simply flutter down.

That depends on where the ribbon gets cut. The total length of the elevator (around 40 thousand kilometers) would wrap around the earth once, but it would be thinner than paper and I don't see how it could do too much damage. Granted, you could get one hell of a papercut.

*edit* Depending on the design of the elevator, the total lenght of the ribbon might be up to twice the height of the geostationary orbit (35,786 km) so let's say it could wrap around the Earth twice, although it would be difficult to achieve - depending on its location, a break might not cause the ribbon to fall to earth at all but fly off into space instead... */edit*

ORIGINAL: Simulation01

Yes, it would be thin, but the cargo moving up would not be....also, eventually it would be hit by something though small.

However, another problem with it was the issue of powering the cargo all the way to the top. One concept to get around this is the idea of 'beaming' power to the cargo lifters using a laser.

Did you even read my entire post? I mentioned lasers from the ground powering the elevator carts, and also said that the cargo could be lowered down safely using parachutes for example or blown up by embedded explosive charges to prevent damage if it falls. The elevator would probably be in the middle of the ocean somewhere so any falling cargo would splash down where it can't do too much damage anyway.

ORIGINAL: Simulation01
Also, yes it would be guarded by whomever built it, but in the event of a full on war it would be vulnerable to a cheap sub with a nuclear tipped torpedo ( North Korea or anyone with an axe to grind ).

If a big war starts, the elevator ribbon could probably be wound back up and kept in geostationary orbit until it is safe to use it again, and anyway, if nuclear weapons come into play, what happens to a space elevator will be the least of our worries.

[Simulation01]

I was posting quickly and I forgot your mentioning of the lasers.


Well, I don't suppose you'd blow up human cargo. Also, if the human cargo is at a certain point on the ribbon when it snaps...wouldn't they be flung off into the void?

At any rate, my comments are not meant to oppose a space elevator or incite ill will....they are meant to promote constructive debate and thought.


As for nukes....eventually they'll be used again anyway so it's best to get used to the idea.


It'll probably never be built anyway.

[Awaras]

ORIGINAL: Simulation01

I was posting quickly and I forgot your mentioning of the lasers.


Well, I don't suppose you'd blow up human cargo. Also, if the human cargo is at a certain point on the ribbon when it snaps...wouldn't they be flung off into the void?

At any rate, my comments are not meant to oppose a space elevator or incite ill will....they are meant to promote constructive debate and thought.


As for nukes....eventually they'll be used again anyway so it's best to get used to the idea.


It'll probably never be built anyway.

Sorry, didn't mean to sound confrontational...
I forgot to mention in my earlier posts - this elevator would be used for cargo only. It would take WEEKS for the cars to get up to geostationary orbit and it would not be very practical for transporting people.

As for the other thing... I don't know what to say. China/N.Korea/Pakistan/Iran/Whoever will probably have the means to shoot down the international space station in a couple of years, so why build it anyway? It'll just be destroyed. Why build any new skyscrapers when a terrorist is just going to fly a plane into it anyway? If everyone in the world starts thinking this way, I believe we are doomed as a species. [:(]

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Awaras

ORIGINAL: Simulation01

I was posting quickly and I forgot your mentioning of the lasers.


Well, I don't suppose you'd blow up human cargo. Also, if the human cargo is at a certain point on the ribbon when it snaps...wouldn't they be flung off into the void?

At any rate, my comments are not meant to oppose a space elevator or incite ill will....they are meant to promote constructive debate and thought.


As for nukes....eventually they'll be used again anyway so it's best to get used to the idea.


It'll probably never be built anyway.

Sorry, didn't mean to sound confrontational...
I forgot to mention in my earlier posts - this elevator would be used for cargo only. It would take WEEKS for the cars to get up to geostationary orbit and it would not be very practical for transporting people.

As for the other thing... I don't know what to say. China/N.Korea/Pakistan/Iran/Whoever will probably have the means to shoot down the international space station in a couple of years, so why build it anyway? It'll just be destroyed. Why build any new skyscrapers when a terrorist is just going to fly a plane into it anyway? If everyone in the world starts thinking this way, I believe we are doomed as a species. [:(]

Perhaps someday it will be feasible after we all learn to live together in peace. Of course, if we don't start learning from history we are doomed to repeat it, just like we've done for the last 5000 years.

I will say this, I think that it is likely that the first step to successfully colonizing another world or moon is getting a working orbital elevator, it would be a more efficient way to move the supplies needed to the surface. The second step is getting some form of high speed transport from the ground to the orbital station so it doesn't take weeks to move the cargo and people.