That sounds good to me.



This would solve the bulk of the atomic oxygen problem. The mass at the end of the tether would have to weigh more than the cargo being delivered. Some retrorockets at the base of the car would be needed for a LEM-like landing in case of failure--but it would save on propellants and only need to be used once.  As rocket stages ascend they dock with and enlarge the weight--adding to its mass--allowing still heavier cargoes to be deposited. Eventually, factories on the moon send mass up--and you will have a bit of infrastucture.

My bad--I meant to say below the belts--within their radius--not actually within the belts themselves.

I don't know that I would want to release a load for a ballistic re-entry--at least not at first, seeing as that might impart a shock. Keep it nice and smooth--with very gradual starts and stops.

Think Barry White.

I think it has just scared people. I think it best to build stron space elevators with some assembly robots linked by telepresence for starters--until an SE of such mass can carry shielded cars with heat-shields and parachutes--just in case.

Unmanned cargo elevator cars for raw materials can do without such measures.

The election is out of the way--so you may be able to get some better coverage. Once again--the key to success is to entangle your own project with the projects of others.

Here is the link to the Norm Nixon supership project (Freedom):

www.freedomship.com

 And a page rather critical of it, but with some positive feedback:
http://patrifriedman.com/projects/independence/freedomship.html

I would suggest to you that a picture of SS1 or some other Rutan-like craft landing on that structure with a space elevator above it may excite interest in his otherwise waining dream. Nixon has a string of contacts--and could share them with you, since a space elevator could help him sell his product--and his dream may make yours possible. If such a craft also has huge turbines to generate electricity from below--you have an even broader base. Large naval structures are popular now.

Remember--have interests in more than just one area.

www.ship-world.com Take a look at the Freedom ship forums.

I seem to remember a large floating logistics base--a giant aircraft carrier of FREEDOM's size:

Give these guys a call--they may love to be remembered...
http://ctsm.umd.edu/pdf/technicalreports/99MobConstructionI.PDF
http://path.berkeley.edu/MOB/Docs/Workingpaper/OPTIONS.html

Dead Links:
http://www.bwxt.com/Products/mob-bwx.html
http://www.bwxt.com/Products/mob-bwx.html#JMOB
www.mtiresearch.com/mob-comp.html

This link is not dead--and has telephone numbers
http://www.ship-world.com/utbb/Forum2/HTML/000062.html

Don't forget these guys

www.kvaerner.com

If cables are what you need--you may try to contact these guys who do business for Kvaerner:  www.cordscable.com/customers.htm
If you can convince them nanocables will sell--they may use their pull to get the kvaerner folks to talk to you about a platform.

They are working on icebreakers as we speak. Just the thing to tow a SEA DRAGON super HLLV to launch point as well, I might add.

Here is my post at ship-world:

http://www.ship-world.com/utbb/Forum2/HTML/000082.html

Notice how one of the replies comes from an individual who uestions how space elevators are 'relevent' to large sea structures. Get overly focused--and you lose possible supporters.

The ITCZ is a zone of constant low pressure along the equator, so the weather is actually pretty stable there. That was why Ivan was quite the shock--forming so far south.

By and large, you would not have much but some thunderstorm winds near brief squalls. I don't know about a jet being in that region--so perhaps we dodge a bullet there at least.

BTW, ISS--like the shuttle, are still within the Van Allen belts.

Go much higher, and things get interesting.

In terms of the use of lasers, it might make some sense to see if you can entangle laser lightcraft tech. By combining interests, you may achieve together what either of you could not achieve individually. There are a lot of different ideas. If you can get everybody in the same room--under the same tent--you may broaden your contact base if nothing else.

Here is an elevator car concept--to reduce weight at the bottom of the tether initially--transfering more power to the SE and less to the lightcraft itself over time:

http://www.lightcrafttechnologies.com/newsletter.html

The big problem with this contraption is that if falls off the beam--impossible if the craft is the car itself. An SE may give stability--then too, loops of cable above may be severed by the laser if not watched. Some of the tech there that may seem unrelated may play a small part in some wise.

http://www.dogpile.com/info.dogpl/search/web/Leik%2BMyrabo%2Blaser%2Bpropulsion

The rotation of the moon may be too slow for the SE to work there in the usual sense.There is no Geosynch point for moon-orbit which does not pass well within Earth's influence.

But your suggestion is that a tether may be started at an L-point and moved towards the Earth on one side and the moon's surface on the other. This ribbon would be quite taut with two very massive bodies pulling at it on either end. No part of the ribbon would ever touch the lower atmosphere of Earth--being an orbiting docking target.  This should also generate tremendous electrical power if lower down.

In the same way that some have suggested Single-Stage-To-Tether spacecraft capture missions from Earth, the same might be done here, out of the atmosphere. But you would have to talk to the orbital dynamics boys on that one.

http://www.dogpile.com/info.dogpl/search/web/single-stage-to-tether
http://www.spacetethers.com/sstt.html

I think it would be best to focus on the construction of lunar cycler craft of great size.

Outside of structures--The Big Project is just not sexy anymore. I wonder if TVA and many of the other big projects we now enjoy could be built in today's climate--if we had to start all over again.

Even flying in jets will get you some radiation exposure, and will always be a risk. I don't think a SE will be paid for by ballistic jumps. Robots linked by telepresense to the ground can be sent up by the score to do work. Robots like the Boba-Fett look-alike to go on ISS. Once the cable is massive enough, you can send cars that are shielded capsules in their own right.

That is a good point. It might make for a good pilot tether demonstrator, or be useful in some wise--with a shorter tether not at ground level.

As far as keeping true space elevators from doing a 'galloping gertie,' I wonder if if would be possible to induce a counter vibration--much like noise cancellation technology. I wonder if a thin film of some type of "memory" material that will dampen some of this gallop out would be too heavy as well.

That is true.

You may have to put some shielding up on the cars for the travelers with longer transit times. No windows! Bummer--but it is probably best with out them. Shield the cars with solar panels.


A big solar panel will give you dual use--and help block sunlight away from the cars below. I wonder if you will have to rotate the elevator cars as was done with the Apollo capsules. They will be receiving an awful amount of sunlight. Collectors also make for good shields, and can be a source of back up power to the car if the cables break.

The heath aspects of nanotech will be a hot-button issue for the Greens. One more reason to place the CNTs in sheaths.

You might want to try British Petrolium. If you can influence a future TROLL type platform to be built in such a way so as to also be a SE base--provided the location is near the equator--a problem perhaps) you would have most of your construction/servicing problems licked. The very structure could even aid in oil extraction in some way.

 It would certainly give you a stable base, what with many anchors. Such a structure will also have a lot of the equipment you need.

Imagine the commercials oil companies would make, saying how their newer platforms could be of multi-use--with turbines below the surface extracting energy from wave action; some pilot wind-generators along the surface structure(s); and a space-elevator above hooked to a large solar collector--all using one base as an alternative energy power-tower paid for by more typical oil proceeds over time. Such multi-use structures may loosen regulations upon off-shore drilling, seeing that such structures would not be abandoned--left to rot after the oil has been depleted.

Resistance to off shore oil may soften--making such sites more attractive and politically correct. Even the greens may be sold on the idea.

Neville Marzwell at JPL has an interest in space-based solar power. Gene Meyers of www.spaceislandgroup.com is in contact with him.