Re: steel cable as an alternative for the space elevator?

  Quoted Text Here  

I don't know enought to correct it, but it seems awfully Earth-centric. Natural perhaps but still...
Also, this statement caught my untrained eye:
Chemical energy storage (batteries, fuel cells or internal combustion engines) will not work- hydrogen/Oxygen is the chemical fuel with the best energy/mass ratio, but will not lift its own weight all the way to GEO.
rick jones

  Quoted Text Here  
Until I read further down... sigh.
rick jones

  Quoted Text Here  
Of course it's Earth centric, we're talking about a cable that extends to the surface of the earth who's center of mass (including counterweight) is at geosynchrynous altitude, so the end of the cable at the earth is stationary (obviously this assumes an orbit over the equator). Getting from the surface of the earth to GEO without using rockets would be a good thing.
  Quoted Text Here  
I've not done the math myself, but it sounds true since using rocket engines you can't create a LOX/LH2 SSTO that would take you all the way to GEO (even getting to LEO this way is a subject of intense debate). You'd surely want a way to transmit power to the climber from the ground, from GEO, or from both. I'd think that you'd want to beam power to the climber using lasers or microwaves.
Jeff

wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
centric;
whose
What about a Infinite or Integrate STO that sacrifices the rocket casing and tanks as the propellands burn?
  Quoted Text Here  
or neutròns? :)
-Aut

  Quoted Text Here  
That's an infinite stage to orbit vehicle. I haven't done the math for that one, but I'm sure it would make a good problem for an aerospace engineering class.
I picked the SSTO comparison since I figured a space elevator climber wouldn't be dropping parts on the way up.
Jeff

wrote:
message
  Quoted Text Here  
That is, the rocketbody would be the fuel as well.

Here's a puzzle for all you contributors to this debate: who started off the debate with soc.culture.zimbabwe in the crosspostings, and why have none of you checked where you have been sending your posts to? Please do not invade our Zimbabwean newsgroup with your irrelevant utterances.

Clearly, some people here still don't know how to stop crossposting to irrelevant groups. Or are just plain ignorant.
  Quoted Text Here  
of
  Quoted Text Here  
our
  Quoted Text Here  

It would appear that these people are either ignorant or have reading difficulties:
snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com
snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com snipped-for-privacy@org.trash (Rand Simberg)
They are still crossposting to soc.culture.zimbabwe despite appeals not to do so. Interestingly, four of them are using gmail.com addressess -- perhaps this is significant.

sid wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Some time ago, I began to simply ignore all postings from places like Hotmail.com and Gmail.com.
Life has been easier since then.
I may have missed a modest number of intelligent individuals, but don't regret that in the big picture.

  Quoted Text Here  
What exactly is your pretend dyslexic or whatever pretend atheist faith-based form of infomercial naysay spewing problem?
Why exactly is an efficient Lunar Space Elevator(LSE) and of utilizing the moon's L1 as offering such a terrific space depot/gateway (aka LSE- CM/ISS) being so continually taboo/nondisclosure rated? - Brad Guth -