A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Space Elevator



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 14th 04, 10:10 PM
Richard Lamb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

pacplyer wrote:

Richard Lamb was right: "He's dead Jim, dead Jim,
dead."

So I guess we would have augered in with a stock 747-200.
As Clint Eastwood used to say: "A man's just gotta-know his
limitations."

pacplyer


Not THAT'S something that doesn't happen every day!


The problem here is that the 747 was designed to LIFT stuff, not
pull it.

How about let's get a fresh napkin and work out what's really needed
for the job?

Richard
  #2  
Old July 15th 04, 07:33 PM
pacplyer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Richard Lamb wrote in message ...
pacplyer wrote:

Richard Lamb was right: "He's dead Jim, dead Jim,
dead."

So I guess we would have augered in with a stock 747-200.
As Clint Eastwood used to say: "A man's just gotta-know his
limitations."

pacplyer


Not THAT'S something that doesn't happen every day!


The problem here is that the 747 was designed to LIFT stuff, not
pull it.


True enough. Even the NASA carrier transport, is a misapplication of
the original design. What's attractive is that 747's are plentifully
available and rather cheap compared to the cost of engineering a whole
new machine of that size, or plunking down 20mil each launch over at
Vandenberg. Buying an old 747-100 for 30 million and re-engining for
another 60mil breaks even in about five launches. Also Burt and Co.
could focus more on building the Orbiter itself. My guess is Burt may
wind up building a massive "Black Knight" in the next couple of years
(but what's that going to cost?) He could use the existing White
Knight Cockpit design, but if he uses the same type of construction,
the thing might be bigger than the Voyager! The 747 is about 199
lbs/ft wing loading IIRC. It has a massive Titanium spar that can do
amazing lifting feats: and that's initially what we are after, to lift
the thing to FL500. Turning it into a towplane after we get up there
has never been done before, and that's why we will get bragging rights
and free launch passes when it is done. ;-)

One thing is for su the ability to escape all the costs and weight
of the conventional first stage renting a government facility is the
name of the game here. It costs Burt virtually NOTHING to use Mojave,
since it is a public airport with no landing fees.


How about let's get a fresh napkin and work out what's really needed
for the job?

Richard


I was just doing a super wag (wild ass guess) exercise to convince
myself that it was worth further inquiry. I think my friend at
Scaled is right though. We cannot exceed a half inch average line
width or we're doomed. In my mind we need to find something that
average width that has a 200,000lb tensile strength. So Richard,
here's a new stack of napkins, all I ask is that you explain the math
to me. :-) Meanwhile, I'm on a search for unobtanium tether cable.

pac
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SoCal hangar space? nauga Home Built 1 May 6th 04 07:13 AM
Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Air and Space Museum Errol Groff Home Built 1 February 26th 04 06:01 AM
Xprize and tethered space station Ray Toews Home Built 18 December 16th 03 06:52 PM
Rounded elevator counterbalance leading edges Ed Wischmeyer Home Built 3 October 16th 03 12:40 PM
Air and Space Museum Home Built 1 July 7th 03 06:58 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.