Author Topic: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest  (Read 13340 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline FlamingCobra

  • An Experiment In Weaponised Annoyance
  • 28
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
Why the **** would you make a space elevator tether out of diamond? Holy ****.

because only diamond, carbon nanotubes, and graphene have the breaking lengths necessary to make the tether. If it were made of any other material it would collapse under its own weight.

Notice that all of the materials mentioned are made purely of carbon.

 

Offline Polpolion

  • The sizzle, it thinks!
  • 211
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
Why the **** would you make a space elevator tether out of diamond? Holy ****.

because only diamond, carbon nanotubes, and graphene have the breaking lengths necessary to make the tether. If it were made of any other material it would collapse under its own weight.

Notice that all of the materials mentioned are made purely of carbon.

I believe redsniper knows what he's talking about.

 

Offline Flipside

  • əp!sd!l£
  • 212
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
I still like Nukes idea of throwing a couple of Ion jets onto Apothis as it goes by, coaxing it into orbit and using it as a geostationary locking point for an elevator :)

 

Offline deathfun

  • 210
  • Hey man. Peace. *Car hits them* Frakking hippies
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
We build this

Why put a colony on a moon/planet, when you can put a colony in a ship?
"No"

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • 213
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
Please read some science on the subject before posting crap.
If I'm just aching this can't go on
I came from chasing dreams to feel alone
There must be changes, miss to feel strong
I really need lifе to touch me
--Evergrey, Where August Mourns

 

Offline Flipside

  • əp!sd!l£
  • 212
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
This is HLP you know, we do have some standards to maintain :p ;)

  

Offline Nuke

  • Ka-Boom!
  • 212
  • Mutants Worship Me
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
-snip-

no, at least not a traditional ship. mobile mining outpost, perhaps. but dead mass is a killjoy in space. you'd need big reactor and a lot of propellant mass just to move it from asteroid to asteroid. its probably the way to to mine asteroids actually. leave all the slag in place and move the processed materials. some materials may need to be processed under gravity, unless you can come up with a zero g bessemer process or have a rotating section to provide gravity. you need a lot of heavy hardware to do this though, and a lot of power. definately need megawatt range mpd thrusters to move it around. a reactor that can power those engines would also be able to power the forge while the ship is stationary. its cost to move unrefined ore to the refinery base vs the cost to move the refinery to the ore and the materials back. another approach might be to bring the asteroids to the refinery. set up base on ceres, drop the asteroids onto a pre-designated spot on the surface, and once cool, stripmine the area till its depleted, then go fetch another asteroid, wash rinse repeat.

I still like Nukes idea of throwing a couple of Ion jets onto Apothis as it goes by, coaxing it into orbit and using it as a geostationary locking point for an elevator :)

its really the most viable meathod of getting a counterweight. some requirements need to be met however.

1. the object cannot be a rubble pile, a solid metal core asteroid is needed.
2. it needs to cross close to geosync, to save the fuel cost of orbital re-positioning.
3. it needs to be big enough to hold up the cable, but light enough to not snap the cable or do any major damage should it re enter.

it does not do anything for actually making or deploying the cable. lower it from the counter weight, and youd need to place temporary thrusters at various points in the cable to keep it under control as you thread it down to the anchor point. once attached and the cable tensioned (by slightly rasing the asteroid to provide constant centrifugal force on the tether) you could start detaching the control thrusters and attatch your elevator. you might actually favor a multi-tether system, where multiple tethers string to a single object to provide multiple travel paths, you could have low speed cargo haulers and high speed personel transfer lines in both directions to speed up transport.

of course the fact remains, you are gonna need to build it in space. to do that you will need to already have some industrial infrastructure up in space. it would be a money saving endeavor and will only be viable if it can compete with launch vehicles, which will be much cheaper in the future.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2011, 04:14:49 pm by Nuke »
I can no longer sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

Nuke's Scripting SVN

 

Offline deathfun

  • 210
  • Hey man. Peace. *Car hits them* Frakking hippies
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
Please read some science on the subject before posting crap.

D:
Was that directed at me D:

Quote
no, at least not a traditional ship. mobile mining outpost, perhaps
Funny you said that since that IS the USG Ishimura... a planet cracker class vessel designed to mine and process it at the same time
As for going from one asteroid to the next, no need. Afterall, those asteroids do move on their own yes? Wait for it to come to you, then grab onto it

"No"

 

Offline Polpolion

  • The sizzle, it thinks!
  • 211
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
Quote
As for going from one asteroid to the next, no need. Afterall, those asteroids do move on their own yes? Wait for it to come to you, then grab onto it

wait what

 

Offline deathfun

  • 210
  • Hey man. Peace. *Car hits them* Frakking hippies
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
Quote
As for going from one asteroid to the next, no need. Afterall, those asteroids do move on their own yes? Wait for it to come to you, then grab onto it

wait what

They move at 10m/s don't they? Or was it 25m/s...
I just know they're bracketed in white on collision courses so knowing which to pickup should be easy
"No"

 

Offline Flipside

  • əp!sd!l£
  • 212
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
Heh, if the asteroid belt were as dense as most Sci-fi depictions of asteroid belts, it would probably be heavier than the Sun ;)

 

Offline Nuke

  • Ka-Boom!
  • 212
  • Mutants Worship Me
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
thing is they (the stable ones in low eccentricity orbits) all move at similar speeds. and to keep your orbit stable, you also need to move at similar velocity. 2 objects in similar but non-synchronus orbits will essentially circle each-other and never actually close in. you need to do a sync orbit and rendezvous maneuver and that means using fuel. you cant really base a mining buisness on getting lucky.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2011, 04:24:14 pm by Nuke »
I can no longer sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

Nuke's Scripting SVN

 

Offline deathfun

  • 210
  • Hey man. Peace. *Car hits them* Frakking hippies
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
thing is they (the stable ones in low eccentricity orbits) all move at similar speeds. and to keep your orbit stable, you also need to move at similar velocity. 2 objects in similar but non-synchronus orbits will essentially circle each-other and never actually close in. you need to do a sync orbit and rendezvous maneuver and that means using fuel.

On a serious note, this is true. However, one must also define what sort of fuel we'd be using (since this isn't exactly something we can pull off now). Currently, what we have just isn't sufficient enough to be able to make this happen. So, what sort of fuel do you think we'd be using at such time?

Not so serious (much like my previous comments): Gravity Tethers
"No"

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • 213
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
Quote
On a serious note, this is true. However, one must also define what sort of fuel we'd be using (since this isn't exactly something we can pull off now). Currently, what we have just isn't sufficient enough to be able to make this happen. So, what sort of fuel do you think we'd be using at such time?

It's more of a question what kind of propulsion system will be used. Standard Hydrogen/Oxygen thrusters are too inefficient, cold gas thrusters don't have the power. NSWR systems might work. VASIMR might work as well. Basically any propulsion system that can deliver usable thrust without having to carry both fuel and oxidizer around. See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrically_powered_spacecraft_propulsion
If I'm just aching this can't go on
I came from chasing dreams to feel alone
There must be changes, miss to feel strong
I really need lifе to touch me
--Evergrey, Where August Mourns

 

Offline Nuke

  • Ka-Boom!
  • 212
  • Mutants Worship Me
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
thing is they (the stable ones in low eccentricity orbits) all move at similar speeds. and to keep your orbit stable, you also need to move at similar velocity. 2 objects in similar but non-synchronus orbits will essentially circle each-other and never actually close in. you need to do a sync orbit and rendezvous maneuver and that means using fuel.

On a serious note, this is true. However, one must also define what sort of fuel we'd be using (since this isn't exactly something we can pull off now). Currently, what we have just isn't sufficient enough to be able to make this happen. So, what sort of fuel do you think we'd be using at such time?

Not so serious (much like my previous comments): Gravity Tethers

ive brought up mpd thrusters countless times in this thread. these can use xenon, neon, argon, hydrazine, or lithium as propellant (they also need a reactor or rtg for power). i just assumed you would parse the context :P
« Last Edit: December 02, 2011, 04:48:48 pm by Nuke »
I can no longer sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

Nuke's Scripting SVN

 

Offline deathfun

  • 210
  • Hey man. Peace. *Car hits them* Frakking hippies
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
I kinda scanned through the thread really only to come to conclusion I had to insert some sort of one liner.

What we'd need is something that can be easily produced within the ship, rather than having to be constantly refilled
On a sidenote: VASIMR rockets are awesome. Read up on those a while back.
"No"

 

Offline Nuke

  • Ka-Boom!
  • 212
  • Mutants Worship Me
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
VASIMR is good because we have working thrusters awaiting testing (installation on the iss). mpd still needs work, especially on power systems, but have the potential for higher thrust (but not necessarily efficiency) than VASMIR.
I can no longer sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

Nuke's Scripting SVN

 

Offline deathfun

  • 210
  • Hey man. Peace. *Car hits them* Frakking hippies
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
Key things here being efficiency, propulsion, and fuel
We need something highly efficient delivering enough propulsion to move something of that magnitude, and fuel that can either be easily obtained, or produced

Until such time, build a giant space installation. Docking is afterall, far easier than landing
"No"

 

Offline FlamingCobra

  • An Experiment In Weaponised Annoyance
  • 28
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
how cheap could sled assisted rocket launch actually go?

Quote
On a serious note, this is true. However, one must also define what sort of fuel we'd be using (since this isn't exactly something we can pull off now). Currently, what we have just isn't sufficient enough to be able to make this happen. So, what sort of fuel do you think we'd be using at such time?

It's more of a question what kind of propulsion system will be used. Standard Hydrogen/Oxygen thrusters are too inefficient, cold gas thrusters don't have the power. NSWR systems might work. VASIMR might work as well. Basically any propulsion system that can deliver usable thrust without having to carry both fuel and oxidizer around. See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrically_powered_spacecraft_propulsion

I personally think VASIMR is the best, though Helicon Double Layer would work well too. We'd pretty much always use nuclear electric rockets in all of those situations though, right?


Or we could always go with Project Orion
« Last Edit: December 02, 2011, 06:45:55 pm by FlamingCobra »

 
Re: On NASA's Annual Space Settlement Contest
What we'd need is something that can be easily produced within the ship, rather than having to be constantly refilled
wat

You'd still have to carry (and refill) the materials used to make the fuel. Conservation of mass kind of bites you on the ass here.

Unless I completely misunderstood what you're trying to say.