You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/sit … ewsLang=en
Got this from Google. What is your prediction on success of this technology?
I think it is great that there all these competitions for space developing technologies. Good things will come of these.
Offline
Not much.
Offline
Wow pub, you shouldn't be so verbose, I barely had enough time to read that response. LOL
Offline
Premature. We are still some ways off from making a cable with enough strength for a space elevator. This kind of thing might be good some time down the line, but holding such contests now seems to be an expensive and hypocritical PR stunt, most likly to "prove" that NASA isn't "stuck in the old ways."
[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]
[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]
Offline
Well I'm in no position to really tell how far they are and yes, I agree, the space elvator will need a lot more basic reasearch. But they have made a lot of progress recently. They have greatly improved the technology to produce nanotubes. They can make them quite a lot bigger now. They know so much more about fullerenes and the whole physics behind it. Sure they are nowhere near what it would take to build a space elevater 100000 km in length, but it's promising.
We should spend a lot more on these CATS enabling technologies. Maybe going to Mars the Mars Direct way is wrong???
Pete
Archimedes to Mars!
[url]http://archimedes.marssociety.de[/url]
Offline
If there were a sudden unforseen ground-shift breakthrough and it looked like tubes of sufficent quality would be available by decades' end or something, then yes NASA should forget all this "rocket" business and think elevators...
...but that probobly isn't going to happen. Since material of sufficent strength is a ways off, then it doesn't make sense to be throwing away money even in $0.1-0.3M lots when NASA needs it most for VSE right now.
[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]
[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]
Offline
I think it is good that the Centennial Challenges is including something for space elevator technologies. Space elevators may not be the immediate future, but ultimately, I think, they will be the answer to getting lots of people and stuff into space cheaply and reliably.
Far out in the uncharted backwaters of the unfashionable end of the Western Spiral arm of the Galaxy lies a small unregarded yellow sun.
-The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
by Douglas Adams
Offline
I think it is very positive that NASA is stimulating development of this technology though prizes. Developing supper strong cables and laser transmission systems will be useful technology for earth and space and thus deserves funding.
Dig into the [url=http://child-civilization.blogspot.com/2006/12/political-grab-bag.html]political grab bag[/url] at [url=http://child-civilization.blogspot.com/]Child Civilization[/url]
Offline
"Developing supper strong cables and laser transmission systems will be useful technology for earth"
This is not in NASA's job description. If it doesn't help us explore space or assist in aeronautical technology, then these prizes should be funded from NIST or NSF or something.
[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]
[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]
Offline
"Developing supper strong cables and laser transmission systems will be useful technology for earth"
This is not in NASA's job description. If it doesn't help us explore space or assist in aeronautical technology, then these prizes should be funded from NIST or NSF or something.
Actually it is part of NASA’s job description to look for ways to apply space technology for the benefit of earth. Super strong cables used for space elevators are such a technology. Also it is important for NASA to be on the leading edge of research and spend some money on futuristic technologies. The NSF I believe gets half the budget NASA does and that is suppose to be enough money for all other science and engineering research?
Given the large budget of NASA in comparison to other areas of scientific research it is no wonder that half of NASA’s budget goes to science. But NASA also has a vision for space exploration. Therefore, the science and engineering can be chosen to best enhance that vision. Because space elevators will dramatically lower the launch cost and the technologies developed will be beneficial for use on earth, it seem totally reasonable for NASA to devote a small amount of money to stimulate this important area of research.
Dig into the [url=http://child-civilization.blogspot.com/2006/12/political-grab-bag.html]political grab bag[/url] at [url=http://child-civilization.blogspot.com/]Child Civilization[/url]
Offline
"Developing supper strong cables and laser transmission systems will be useful technology for earth"
This is not in NASA's job description. If it doesn't help us explore space or assist in aeronautical technology, then these prizes should be funded from NIST or NSF or something.
As you noted problems to overcome once the tower is built would be providing power to the climber. This article ends with the new Beam Power Challenge.
Space Geeks Seek Wireless Power
Space elevators need power beaming," said Brant Sponberg, manager of NASA's Centennial Challenges project. "They can't carry an extension cord all the way down to the ground."
As a result, NASA has created the 2005 "Beam Power Challenge" to award $50,000 to the team whose climbing bot can lift the most mass in three minutes by most efficiently converting beam power into electricity. Second and third place will receive $20,000 and $10,000, respectively.
At this year’s Oct. 21 competition, all teams will receive power from the same photonic source: a 10-kilowatt Xenon searchlight. But next year’s competition will allow each team to also build their own beam-power device, which could use photons, lasers or microwaves. Sponberg said the purse for the 2006 competition will be $150,000 ($100,000, $40,000 and $10,000 to the three best teams).
But Sponberg also pointed out that "NASA has no plans to build a space elevator in the near future," which means that such power-beaming innovations may not be applied for years, if ever.
Offline
NASA Announces Results From Beam and Tether Challenges
Best climber: University of Saskatchewan's solar cell powered climber reached 40 ft of a target 200 ft using the energy from a 10 kW xenon searchlight. Two teams went with Sterling Engines instead of solar cells because their theoretical efficiency is ~40% vs. ~20%.
Best tether: NASA's house tether broke at 1300 pounds of force, which is about 50% higher than Spectra 2000 nominal. Runner up was Centaurus Aerospace with 1260 lbs. Space elevator grade test tether target: 22500 lbs.
No prizes won this year. $200,000 prizes next year.
.
Fan of [url=http://www.red-oasis.com/]Red Oasis[/url]
Offline
Here are some more Centennial Challenges NASA Announces Telerobotic Construction Competition
The competition awards $250,000 to teams to develop technologies enabling robots to perform complex tasks with minimal human intervention.
"The Telerobotic Construction Challenge is directly linked to NASA's focus on lunar exploration
Offline
A different twist on beamed power use.
Offline
Pages: 1