Re: Stern - Nonsense and dangerous nonsense
- From: Monte Davis <monte.davis@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2006 15:10:11 GMT
"Ian Parker" <ianparker2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
There are people out
there who talk about elevators. They convenienly forget that if you
could build an elevator you could lift a light aircraft (empty) onto
your back, and building an SSTO would be trivial
Umm.. some may forget that, but the idea that the same light/strong
materials which would permit a SE *might* also permit lighter rockets
can be found at least as far back as McCarthy and Moravec some decades
ago; your "a-ha!" is a little dusty. Some people have reflected that
while dramatically lower dry structure weight would be a very good
thing -- and a huge step forward compared to the tiny increments we've
been used to over the last 70 years -- it wouldn't make all the other
costs and constraints of rocketry go away.
I say "might" because a hypothetical CNT material that offers the
strength *in one-directional tension* required for a SE does not
automatically translate into a suitably strong, rigid and
temperature-stable material for all the components of a rocket. The SE
fans are already dependent on one miracle from materials science; your
argument assumes several more.
Monte Davis
http://montedavis.livejournal.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Stern - Nonsense and dangerous nonsense
- From: Lee Valentine
- Re: Stern - Nonsense and dangerous nonsense
- Prev by Date: Re: Lunar Volcano
- Next by Date: Re: Naive questions about a space elevator
- Previous by thread: Space Access'07 March 22-24 in Phoenix
- Next by thread: Re: Stern - Nonsense and dangerous nonsense
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
