Great links.

Perhaps this would be useful in avoiding twists:
http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/060329_spider_twist.html
Some memory metal brackets along the length might also have a part to play--then too there is the weight issue.

This may be yet another reason to locate the SE close to 0 lat and 0 long--near Sao Tome. The hump of Africa will be nearby, (to the immediate north)  and the oil-rich resources of its mainland can be used to feed power plants that will aid the local population and beam power to the SE from a distance.

In this manner, the costs power generation activities needed for SE can be spread around. SE would be seen under a better light in advocating more electrical power to the masses. The SE would far enough away to prevent sabotage from the mainland--but close enough to receive the power beams.

If the SE is located on Sao Tome itself--then advocates of development there would add their voices to your own in wanting better logistics for the masses. The key is to have SE development and engineering coupled with local needs.

Fuel leaked atop the powerhead. Some talk about the blanket striking the craft--but it may have buckled on its own.



Space X

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=1924&posts=302#M27136
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=1949&start=1

EURO SPACE NEWS---------------------------

From the web:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=1901&start=31&posts=40

Nice quote from there:

There's a pdf from 2004 that discusses lunar exploration with current and slightly enhanced Ariane 5 variants:

http://www.astron.nl/p/news/LO/Iranzo_Ariane5_LOFARworkshop.ppt

The currently flying Ariane 5 ECA can only put 2.2 tonnes of payload on the moon's surface (this number doesn't include the descent stage mass). Ariane 5 ECB could put over 3 t with direct lunar transfer injection (no stop in LEO) but the upper stage Vinci engine is currently on hold. (It's an expander engine, like RL-10 but more thrust and slightly better ISP, compared to the current ECA HM7B gas-generator engine.) They assume storable propellant stages for lunar orbit insertion and descent.

The rockets are currently designed for GTO launch, and can put only 20 to 23 t in LEO. They discuss some enhancements, like increasing Vinci thrust, composite casing for the solid boosters and making a Vulcain III main engine with 13s better ISP. This would make the LEO payload 27 t, but there'd be dynamic pressure issues.

Then there's a brief mention of a 1991 study "Ariane Super Lourd", with 4 solids, 5 Vulcain II main engines, one Vulcain II second stage and 35 t lunar transfer orbit mass. It tapers up like a Saturn V.

I don't dare copy-paste any pictures from it...

I personally don't endorse building rockets from ground up for just some lunar missions that are performed less than ten times.

More from the web:
http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4479&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

You've all forgotten another launcher they are looking at its called Ariane-2010 or Ariane-BeyondPluto, it would be 30,000 kg plus to LEO.
Europe has its eyes on the outer-planets but after NASA started considering cuts to Voyager and CRAF the ESA started look at using Ariane to launch its own missions such as Rosetta and 'Beyond Pluto'.

http://www2.dlr.de/lido/EN-RA/2000/1803582000.html
Ariane 2010 and RLV 2020
http://www.esa.int/gsp/ACT/doc/paperAAS03_210Pluto.pdf
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/arie2010.htm
Ariane-TwentyTen ( Vulcan 3 and the Vinci 200 ) would lift some of the largest payloads into orbit its GTO is about 16,000 kg and LEO might be about 29,000kg or 38,000 kg to LEO depending how much they want out of it.
Ariane-2010 might be used for the IHP or Interstellar Heliopause Probe.

IHP info
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/object/index.cfm?fobjectid=36022
The main focus is on heliospheric physics in the outer heliosphere and local interstellar medium. This requires that the IHP travel a distance of 200 AU from the Sun. This challenging mission profile will require a set of enabling technologies that are not only of benefit for this type of mission, but also for outer planetary missions.[/quote]

The first users' manual for Soyuz launcher missions from French Guiana is now available
http://www.arianespace.com/site/documents/soyuz_man_csg_index.html
http://www.arianespace.com/site/documents/Soyuz_Users_Manual_CSG.pdf
Information on operations of the workhorse Russian launcher from Europe's Spaceport.

Has anyone at Liftport spoken with the folks at Kvaerner? They are known for their oil platforms. I think similar designs to their were to go to the floating JMOB Naval base. The new X-Band radar is on such a platform.

I know that Liftport has some Air Force contacts--or did--but it seems to me that the US Navy might prove to be a better partner.

Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone:

It is a band of Low pressure along the equator--known for calms. Refered to as the Doldrums--with the calm "Horse Latitudes" in two bands to the North and South. Often it took downbursts from the popcorn storm band along this zone to push ships out into the trade winds.

Hurricanes usually form above or below the ITCZ--so the SE will be safe from those.

Cloud tops can be taller in the tropics than at the poles--which presents the icing porblems aloft due to greater exposure to ice along the SE at the equator.

Icing will be your chief concern I fear. The SE will all but have to be somewhere within the ITCZ.

The Dark Sky station could serve as a way station for the SE, and also help keep its lower portions a bit more taut than otherwise. ATO and SE may complement each other.

I just wish we could get more Republicans and Democrats interested in space.

I was hoping for something better. Many Futurists disagree with each other. The Green "sustainability" crowd that wants us to live in sackcloth and ashes vs. pro-heavy industry technocrats that I favor.

I have spoken with Gene Meyers quite often. He is avoiding all the useless suborbital prizes, and continues to make contacts. He is about where Liftport is now--and has the support of the SPS advocates like Glasier and Neville Marzwell at JPL. Unlike the anti-HLLV types like Gump and the frauds at SFF, he supports CaLV and wishes to have an SPS demonstrator atop one. The material used for this would also be a good solar sail--unlike the parasol or two that The Planetary Society flushed into the ocean with two Volnas.

The idea of the Trans-Atlantic cable once seemed to reek of fantasy--as did the concept of large metal ships like The Great Eastern which laid down the cable back when most folks were still using horses. A modest SE as detailed here really isn't that much more fantastic--once you wrap your head around it. At first glance I had the same reaction you did--but I was fair enough to take a second look.

That is from this March issue of Business 2.0
I need to pick that up.

It would seem to keep weight down in SE cars.

The cubesat/nanosat/small LV folks will be SE's greatest enemy. They want to clog space with hundreds if not thousands of low, small, fast moving pieces of networked crap that will be a nightmare for SE. I would rather  have fewer, larger assets with shielding against increased solar output. Such assets would be higher up and more easily avoided than 1,000 cube sats that all go silent and missing after a goodly sized solar flare.