Re: Lunar Space Elevator simply isn't for everyone

William Mook,
Thanks for all the interesting numbers and even a touch of prosay on
behalf of accomplishing LL-1 and usage of the LSE alternative. It
makes you almost human, up until the point that you have to continually
support the mindset and actions of our resident warlord(GW Bush) and
otherwise keep insisting by way of your mindset of infomercial-science
that's we've walked on the moon.

You obviously still don't have a clue as to the positive worth of the
LSE-CM/ISS, but then you have to support whatever it is that you
believe in, which excludes the truth as to what we should have been
accomplishing as of more than a decade ago, if not from the very get-go
since accomplishing LL-1 via the Saturn-V would have been absolutely
impressive, entirely doable and proof-positive believable to boot.

To travel from Earth's surface to LEO requres that you accelerate an
object to about 7 km/sec. When you add in gravity losses and air drag
losses during ascent, of 2 km/sec, you need a vehicle capable of at
least 9 km/sec.
So what?
Are you saying that our extremely inert massive Saturn-V did not have
"the right stuff" of what was needed?

Unlike those bogus Apollo missions, we're not having to zoom past LL-1
or even having to get there any too fast, just for gently coasting the
payload into the mutual nullification zone so that damn little if any
retrothrust is necessary. We're talking about parallel parking, not
per say going to the moon, and thus nearly 100% fuel/payload and least
inert mass efficient.

The trek of getting substantial tonnage to LL-1 should have the rather
significant advantage of a two-body alignment of using the sun and the
moon, not to mention having tidal forces on the side of most
efficiently getting a great deal of tonnage efficiently to LL-1
because, if need be the effort can take all of 29.5 days and there's
nothing that has to return home or thereby having the impact of
demanding spare tonnage of rocket energy and the associated machinery
for retro-thrusting itself into such a gentle halo/elliptical
station-keeping management of this interactive gravity-well orbit.

Basically, once you get into LEO, a single chemical kick stage can be
used to bring you to any of these points in cislunar space. So, going
from LEO to LL1 doesn't do a whole lot for you.
What the freaking sam hell are you talking about this time?
"going from LEO to LL1 doesn't do a whole lot for you" means exactly
what the hell is with your naysayism kicking in again?
I've never really considered it because its obvious to me that LL1
is pretty much useless.
As I've said before, "its obvious to me" that your dumbfounded
naysayism is pretty much stuck in a very brown-nosed and status quo or
bust rut.

Obviously of taking the fullest advantage of a much longer/extended
shot of using Earth itself, plus the sun and moon alignments as for the
gravity boosted velocity gain of getting the most tonnage with the
least energy as headed for parking at LL-1 is going to involve some
form of initial elliptical LEO.

We can double the payload per trip with a space station at LL1 equipped
with a tether to the surface - if we use chemical rockets, which is
worthwhile. We change the payload by less than 2% with a laser
rocket.
I believe you're somewhat underestimating the greater potential and
subsequent worth of not having to utilize those fly-by-rocket landers
that'll need to get invented plus R&D created in the first place.
However, I'll have to get back to a few other points, along with having
a few more questions, that is once I get my three dyslexic brain cells
up to snuff on what you've contributed.

I do otherwise appreciate those notions on "fusion propulsion", however
that's for another day and another time or planet whenever we're not
too busy at pillaging and raping the likes of mother Earth while
exterminating every other Muslim on Earth for the blood-sport of taking
their oil.
-
Brad Guth

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Lunar Space Elevator simply isnt for everyone
    ... the moon dirt depot in the sky that's worth having because it's ... of utilizing LL-1, or especially that of the LSE-CM/ISS, but then ... The task of getting substantial tonnage into LL-1 should have the ... tonnage of rocket energy and the associated machinery for ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
    ... of an atmosphere our moon has to work with, ... there's so much less gravity per radius distances that are involved. ... Without so much as a basis of LL-1 science, ... never set a moonsuit naked foot on our physically dark and nasty moon. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
    ... LL-1, at roughly or exactly 1 m/s, as being intentionally directed not ... final impact velocity as based upon whatever's given and/or selected as ... the LL-1 distance from the moon that you'd like to utilize. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Lunar Space Elevator simply isnt for everyone
    ... lol. ... thrill at Jack Kennedy's Rice University Moon speech when it was ... In fact you could shoot payloads arriving there ... of utilizing LL-1, or especially that of the LSE-CM/ISS, ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Parking Orbit
    ... But all significant missions (other than on behalf of our nuking Earth) ... are of those supposedly going far beyond our moon, ... deployments as headed to getting parked within LL-1 is whatever little ...
    (sci.space.policy)