Posted on 10/21/2017 5:21:41 PM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
You have to land on an asteroid first, and who’s to say there isn’t miles of dust on it, too? And, you might not be traveling in the same direction as the Earth. On the moon you can build your refinery and ship pure product instead of ore.
The moon has what is it 1/6th? the gravity of the earth? How much weight can a dirigible lift? 1K? 6K? Think about commercial fishermen - they will haul nets all day, and then dump their catch into a tender ship, which collects a bunch of ships’ catches, and takes it into dock. Think futuristic and you can have dirigibles lifting all day and all night on a tether to a recipient craft, in much the same way.
Lifting material off the moon with balloons would not work on the moon because the moon does not have an atmosphere. Balloons work on Earth because the Earth has an atmosphere. The balloon’s internal gas is less dense than the surrounding atmosphere thus pushing the less dense gas bag higher. The moon having no atmosphere has nothing to push a gas bag higher. The balloon would just sit on the surface or pop.
If you are to process your ore on the moon you need fuel and chemicals for the processing all of which require fuel for the rockets for that lift and then the fuel for the return trip all of which has to be lifted out of Earth orbit and to the moon. Even at 1/6 of Earth gravity we are talking a substantial cost to lift material off of the moon and return it to Earth.
Now if you want to consider futuristic ideas, think of Space Elevators which could considerably reduce the cost of lifting materials to geosynchronous orbit.
Well, you’re right. My dirigible theory wasn’t thought thru very well, was it? But I’m not so hot on changing orbits of asteroids, Murphy’s Law and all.
I’ve read about space elevators but wouldn’t that interfere with the (don’t know how many) satellites roaming around - like a rope across a road?
Helium-3 is supposed to be in abundance on the moon - that’s lazer tech. It was volcanic, so there’s other gases that might be in abundance. And, the moon is a really good place to test the theory that the mantle creates hydrocarbons independent of carbonized life forms. So maybe the cost of transport has at least three or four potential solutions?
I have read about the possibilities of finding fuel on the moon and none I have read seemed convincing. Apparently, there is the possibility of water ice in craters at the poles but I have yet to see confirmation of this.
If we are to spend hundreds of billions of dollars putting a space station in orbit around the moon I would hope that we have more than remote possibilities of it paying for itself.
Cool visual.
You didn't understand the logic: If they discovered a giant tube, then there are probably also lesser tubes (too small to directly detect) in the vicinity.
Regards,
There, fixed it.
Regards,
Regards,
Are you seriously proposing the use of dirigibles, in space?!
Regards,
P.S.: A dirigible in use on a planet with the same atmospheric composition and air pressure as Earth but, say, only one-sixth the gravity (if that were possible) would still be able to lift only the same amount of payload.
I guess I am too old school for all of the Cool Kids.
That's akin to the argument of:
But all of these new-fangled horseless carriages... Wouldn't they frighten all of the horses on the road? And wouldn't these horseless carriages become mired in all the horse manure?
ANSWER: If you had a space elevator - you wouldn't need satellites. (And satellites would have to be banned / all the old satellites rounded up and disposed of. 'Course, natural micrometeors would still pose a problem, but that could be managed.)
Regards,
I think you will still need satellites. You will still need communication satellites and weather satellites and the Space Elevator will launch them.
You will have a great view of Earth from the top of the Space Elevator but you won’t be able to see everything.
Capturing old satellites and space junk is a major problem that needs to be addressed soon but until someone figures out how to make it pay not much will be done I fear.
“We can’t pay the bills now, how can we afford the huge expense of lifting that kind of weight out of Earth orbit? ... ect.”
Much the same was said in a slightly different context to Columbus by nobles opposed to Isabella’s willingness to spend the royal treasury on a fool’s errand ...
“The moon... Been there, done that... It’s barren, empty and full of rocks and dust. No need to revisit and discover the same rocks and dust again.”
And that was just the image painted by the popular press, and as such completely false. There is far more on the moon that we imagine from that popular image. Not to mention the myriad of unanswered questions surrounding all the lunar oddities.
Corrected:
Think about commercial fishermen - they will haul nets as long as the regulations permit, and then pump their catch into a tender or processor, which collects other boats’ catches, and takes the fish to an onshore processing plant or directly to another country for processing.
dirigibles?
You must imagine that the moon has an atmosphere to hold the dirigibles up ... perhaps you’ve seen one too many scifi shows?
Well if you know that you must also know that Columbus had private investors as well.
You will have a great view of Earth from the top of the Space Elevator but you won’t be able to see everything.
There will eventually be many, many Space Elevators - so one would have almost complete "coverage" of the Earth.
Of course, that does not exclude the possibility that there might still be a need for a small number of satellites performing very specific tasks - but the mood might be "Come on! Space Elevators are so important! Let's phase out satellites wherever possible, so as to minimize the risk they pose to our wonderful Sky Towers!"
Regards,
You think private investors won't be among the first to get onboard the Space Elevators?!
They may even be leading the way!
Regards,
There will be observation platforms, labs, etc. at numerous stops along the way to the top.
What purpose can you envisage for a satellite that couldn't be performed just as well by a similar piece of equipment either fixed in place on or at least tethered to a Space Elevator?
Regards,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.