Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Space Elevator Gets FAA Clearance

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the hot-off-the-high-wire dept.

lonesome phreak writes "Techzonez has a short piece about the recent FAA waiver received by the LiftPort Group allowing them to conduct preliminary tests or their high altitude robotic lifters. The lifters are early prototypes of the technology that the company is developing for use in its commercial space elevator to ferry cargo back and forth into space."

45 of 546 comments (clear)

  1. Wow can you imagine by bryan986 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just imagine the massive migranes you are going to get when you have to listen to musak for some tens of thousands of miles

    --
    There is no sig
    1. Re:Wow can you imagine by Seumas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course, there's a massive waste of time, effort and money in the meantime. And who is to say that by the time this "space elevator" comes around and is usable to launch space vehicles, we won't have developed a more efficient, cheap, powerful fuel to launch shuttles?

      It's like high power computing. Sometimes waiting is the best solution. You could start computing in 1980 with whatever power is available and it could take - what - 30 years for the computing to finish on that power? Or we could wait until 2005, toss a couple of cheap boxes together and achieve the same computing in a few months - coming out ahead of if we had just started in 1980. Saving time, power and money.

      I don't think we'd ever use the elevator. At best, it'd just be a technology that comes and goes without being useful to anyone - except that in the process of creating and building it, we'd probably have acquired some useful degree of scientific discovery and experience that would help with future endeavors in other areas... The question is, will what we gain from it be worth the money invested in it?

    2. Re:Wow can you imagine by JabberWokky · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Rocket fuel is already (relatively) cheap. Even if you come up with a more efficient fuel, you're still screwed with having to lift your fuel tank as you climb and go to mach 25. You're questioning why you might not want to have the vast majority of your launch mass being fuel.

      Increasing computing power is easy, the laws of thermodynamics are a bitch. That's why we have yesterday's supercomputers in most houses, but flying cars don't exist.

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    3. Re:Wow can you imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While I agree with your response in principal, your example of the flying cars is a poor choice.

      The difficulties with flying cars aren't rooted so much in technology (fuel source) but rather in the inherent problems created revolving around traffic monitoring/control, the necessity for a pilot's license, the stupidity of the average driver, reduced control leading to an increased number of collisions, issues of collateral damage from an accident/auto-failure, the drastically increased mortality rate for such incidents, etc.

      The problem of finding a cost-effective fuel source is almost a moot point as nobody would vote to allow people to fly over their houses/cars with them with all of the potential complications. The concept of the everyday man zooming around in a flying car is a grand concept of the future planted in our minds by fantastical books and movies, but it isn't really a realistic notion in today's civilized society.

  2. An elevator... by xpeeblix · · Score: 5, Funny

    ..all the way to space.

    What could possibly go wrong?

  3. and she's buying a... by Digitus1337 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Take THAT Led Zeppelin!

  4. Why bother with the FAA? by JediLow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wouldn't it be best to launch from somewhere outside the United States - say from the equator? It just makes more sense to me if they used something like Sea Launch.

    1. Re:Why bother with the FAA? by qbwiz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you're a US citizen/company, you still need FAA approval, no matter where in the world you're launching from. No, I don't know why.

      --
      Ewige Blumenkraft.
    2. Re:Why bother with the FAA? by kentmartin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh, c'mon - the grandparent here must be bollocks... an unqualified ridiculous statement.

      By that logic, a US citizen, couldn't come to say, the UK, get a CAA issued license and fly with it coz they don't have permission from the FAA?

      I know the Seppo's have been going a bit nuts lately, but, how do you imagine they'd enforce these sort of rules, arrest folks on re-entry into the US? /me hums a song about Cuba.

    3. Re:Why bother with the FAA? by cwebster · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can register an aircraft anywhere, but you have do abide by the regs of the country in which it is registered. ie, flying an N registered aircraft still requires a properly qualified FAA certified pilot, regardless of where it is, and a C certified aircraft with a properly certified canadian pilot can fly into the us without an FAA cert, but he cant fly an N aircraft in the US or canada (though it is easy to get private privledges in another country, just a paperwork issue)

      And nations do not inform other nations of aircraft movements, that is handled by Oceanic ATC or by the domestic ATC of whatever country you are overflying (assuming the airspace you are in is even controlled). As far as airspace to avoid, we have charts and notams to tell us that.

      And to take your scenario with an aircraft collision, attatched to an aircraft registration number and serial number is a registration and airworthyness certificate. On this certificate is the name and address of the registered owner, and various governments keep databases of this information. Generally though the pilots are held responsible, and since they are often dead its pretty much a non-issue.

    4. Re:Why bother with the FAA? by qbwiz · · Score: 5, Informative

      For example, according to Chapter 14 of Federal Regulations Part 47, all trustees of a plane registered in the US must be legal residents or citizens. Since this flight is rather unconventional, something like plane (or balloon + long tether) registration would be required. This isn't just a pilot's license.
      Considering that corporations can't become legal residents (AFAIK, IANAL), whatever country they're incorporated in is where they register their planes. This, of course, assumes a certain universality of laws, but I'm sure the FAA and most other countries have laws in place to ensure that unregistered people don't go flying planes around, even in the middle of the ocean.

      --
      Ewige Blumenkraft.
    5. Re:Why bother with the FAA? by spitefulcrow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Uh, no? Geosynchronous/geostationary orbit means that the whole thing will rotate at the same speed as the point it's attached to. Besides, think about what you just said. Man-made structures are infinitesimal against the scale of an entire planet. I don't have numbers on it, but rest assured that even a big space station with a tether going all the way down to the surface of the planet would not have anything close to the mass needed to exert any real force against Earth's rotation.

      --
      Sorry, my karma just ran over your dogma.
  5. I for one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Welcome our heavly lifting space overlords by pressing all the buttons in the elevator before leaving.

    1. Re:I for one... by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why would there need to be more than one button? :-P

  6. A Space Elevator is like perpetual motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny


    great idea, all we need to do is invent the technology , im not holding my breath

    perhaps the bookies should be taking bets

    Fusion Power
    Space Elevator
    Perpetual Motion
    Duke Nukem Forever
    Microsoft Linux

  7. But..... by Hydraulix · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hate to be the person that gets stuck on the 900,304,564,282,012,373 floor. :(

  8. A Business Run by Beauraucrats.. by lorelorn · · Score: 4, Funny
    We don't have a business plan,

    We don't have any investors,

    We don't have a product,

    But we do have in-principle government approval!

    Woooo!

    1. Re:A Business Run by Beauraucrats.. by TinyManCan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why start investing in a project when you don't even know if you will legally be able to do it? Get approval first.

  9. Re:Obligatory Comments by Dest581 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But would we be able to hold miles of it together, without anything going wrong? That's the challenge.

    That, and the money needed to build and maintain it.

  10. Thoughts on Space Elevators by treebeard77 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Thoughts on Space Elevators by Blaise Gassend has a lot of good info & links on space elevators

  11. Here's my bets by backslashdot · · Score: 4, Funny


    I'd be betting the following anounts that it'll come to fruition within 100 years..

    Fusion Power: $1000
    Space Elevator: $10
    Microsoft Linux: $3
    Perpetual Motion: $2
    Duke Nukem Forever: 1 cent

  12. Another sci-fi idea coming true? by aktzin · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Maybe Sir Arthur will live to see parts of "The fountains of paradise" coming true.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fountains_of_Paradise

    --
    Quantum mechanics: the dreams that stuff is made of.
  13. Not the first test of the technology, actually by GroeFaZ · · Score: 5, Informative

    FTA:

    marking the first-ever test of this technology in the development of the space elevator concept.

    It may be the first test of the technology that actually requires a federal permit because of the altitude, but here are pictures and a video of an earlier test in November 2004.

    --
    The grass is always greener on the other side of the light cone.
  14. Tower of Babel by 88NoSoup4U88 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    When I read about those space elevators, I somehow always have to think about the Tower of Babel (and I'm not even religious) :

    From Gen 11:1-9

    1. Now the entire earth was of one language and uniform words.
    2. And it came to pass when they traveled from the east, that they found a valley in the land of Shinar and settled there.
    3. And they said to one another, "Come, let us make bricks and fire them thoroughly"; so the bricks were to them for stones, and the clay was to them for mortar.
    4. And they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make ourselves a name, lest we be scattered upon the face of the entire earth."
    5. And the Lord descended to see the city and the tower that the sons of man had built.
    6. And the Lord said, "Lo! [they are] one people, and they all have one language, and this is what they have commenced to do. Now, will it not be withheld from them, all that they have planned to do?
    7. Come, let us descend and confuse their language, so that one will not understand the language of his companion."
    8. And the Lord scattered them from there upon the face of the entire earth, and they ceased building the city.
    9. Therefore, He named it Babel, for there the Lord confused the language of the entire earth, and from there the Lord scattered them upon the face of the entire earth.

    So let's hope Liftport Group has their translators ready ;)

    1. Re:Tower of Babel by TheGavster · · Score: 4, Funny

      This just in: Dayton, TN has ruled that no dictionary showing the developmental history of words may be used in its schools, as this violates biblical doctrine that God caused all languages to spring into being at once.

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
    2. Re:Tower of Babel by aussie_a · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Son of a bitch! What sort of asshole would do something that like? "Oh look, there's some people acting peacefully in a joint operation. Well I better fix their little red wagon! Haha! They'll surely worship me after this."

      If there is a Christian god, he is a DICK! The only person whose more of a dick then him, is superman.

    3. Re:Tower of Babel by flyingsquid · · Score: 4, Funny
      6. And the Lord said, "Lo! [they are] one people, and they all have one language, and this is what they have commenced to do. Now, will it not be withheld from them, all that they have planned to do?

      7. Come, let us descend and confuse their language, so that one will not understand the language of his companion."

      Man, thank goodness nothing like that will happen when we try to build the space elevator! That would sure screw things up.

      I mean, if you consider the possible implications of hrejit nü hrønfar ngornbø hleptic i vrüdenik slahh! Hlah! Nrkramnü, egnem znepi znepi frafnuu fraarg. Ple, ple plehehahrmon!Nkramnu? Nkramnu. Vrreedonfarnu o slan wethnip nkri nar franfor. (n'ktuthnish omo san wanaroomh!)

  15. Simple tests, not actual elevator by j1m+5n0w · · Score: 4, Informative

    According to the article, they just want to try out some climbers by letting them climb up and down a cable tethered to a mile-high balloon. They're not getting aproval to launch an actual space elevator. (You are correct though that a space elevator would optimally be tethered near the equator.)

    1. Re:Simple tests, not actual elevator by QuantumG · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Optimally from a technical point of view. Definitely not from a political point of view.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
  16. Here we go again.. by Mr2cents · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It could become a terrorist target.

    Sigh, could you please shut up about terrorist threats? What makes a space elevator more a threat than a space shuttle, or a Golden Gate bridge? BTW: space shuttles are full of highly explosive fuels!

    This is a good moment to ask yourself if you're not affected by propaganda too much..

    --
    "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
  17. About linking to sources... by irrision · · Score: 5, Informative

    Does anyone else think that perhaps this article should be linked to the actual source instead of a link to a link that links to another site with a quote from the original source and no link to it? I mean at what point does this become a rumor when it's so far from the original source? Oh here's the link to the companies website: http://www.liftport.com/ And here's one to their staff blog which is much more interesting reading then this quote: http://www.liftport.com/progress/wp/ And heres a link to their september newsletter posted on their forums that talks about the FAA approval among other things: http://www.liftport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25 3

  18. Re:Obligatory Comments by dbIII · · Score: 4, Informative
    Last time I checked we do have materials that can handle the stresses of hanging around from orbit. At least thats what I remember from /.'s last article about super strength diamnond nano-tubes.
    You'll need a slightly more authorative source even if it was modded insightful.

    Remember that you are really talking about a constuction similar to a railgun wrapped twice around the equator then stood on it's end - the extra length is due to having to have a counterweight to keep it up there, and the railgun is the linear motor idea to move things up. Climbers like the machines proposed in the article would cut the mass per unit length and the strength required, but we are still talking about getting in incredible amount of mass up to geostationary orbit by conventional means to build the thing before we can start using it.

    It's a chicken and egg thing, one we get the materials we need to have a need to more vast amounts of mass into orbit and beyond before it is useful - and we won't really be seriously considering moving vast amounts of mass into orbit without something like this. It becomes more feasable if we can use some mass doesn't take so much fuel to get it there in the first place - hence the idea of having a great big rock as a counterweight.

  19. Terrorism? maybe - Space junk? hell yes by calidoscope · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The biggest problems are keeping it together, and keeping it protected from harm, like accidently hitting it in a plane, or lightning strikes. It could become a terrorist target.

    What just about everybody forgets about the spece elevator is that every orbit lower than geosynchronous will eventually intersect the elevator (assuming the elevator is anchored on the equator). A particle too small to track from earth can still have quite an impact.

    One possible solution would be a much better tracking system combined with some method for deflecting/destroying objects that come too close.

    --
    A Shadeless room is a brighter room.
  20. Bashers out of context by electrosoccertux · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you take that section in context instead of just reading it itself, you would find that the problem was not that they built a tower, but their motives for building it. They wanted to get closer to God. Theres nothing wrong with that except for when you do it outside of how he tells us to. He didn't tell us to build a tower to him to get to him, he told us to let him come to us. He was disgusted with the Babylonians because of their pride, not because of their tower building prowess.

    1. Re:Bashers out of context by tooth · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Theres nothing wrong with that except for when you do it outside of how he tells us to.

      Here Adam... here's a big brain... but don't use it! Just trust evrything you are told by those in power.

  21. what about mile high cities? regulations prevent.. by plasmacutter · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Current regulations (faa i think) prevent mile high cities.

    Already there are conglomerates in tokyo with plans and long term roadmaps laid out toward the construction of self contained mile high towers.. (one shaped like nested bowls actually has 7 or so large open air parks contained within.

    The US will never have one as long as these regulations continue to pose even a slight threat to what is already a daunting task in both engineering and financing.

    Truth be told.. i want to live in one of these towers before i'm middle aged, so get moving with the restriction removal!

    --
    VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
  22. Possible interpretation. by Jerk+City+Troll · · Score: 4, Insightful

    God has a tantrum because human beings are attempting to do something other than slaughter mindlessly in his name. Here, we see people attempting to accomplish a feat of engineering. In reprisal, God thwarts the effort by rewiring their brains to inhibit communication. This leads to the formation of diverse cultures and perspectives, which in turn leads to ignorance and intolerance in many cases. As a direct result, human kind engages in mindless slaughter in God's name.

    Eventually, however, our species ends up creating much taller towers a thousand years later anyway... Which people then destroy, causing mindless slaugher in the name of God.

    God is stupid.

    --
    Join Tor today!
  23. Space Elevator : 2010 by Xanlexian · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.elevator2010.org/site/ Has TONS of information on this. It is a contest site that has been mentioned here before a few times (I'm too lazy to look up previous articles). All of the materials are currently available to construct one. The movie on the site explains a space elevator in simple terms. I recommend watching it.

    --
    "Congratulations, Boots. Your robot has become self-aware. You're a daddy now." -- Dr. Rho Bowman
  24. I can't wait by nemik · · Score: 5, Funny

    to join the 19741974827320328 mile high club! ;)

    --
    Blog via SMS text messaging
  25. How stuff works: Space Elevators by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://science.howstuffworks.com/space-elevator.ht m

  26. Oh please... by Gorimek · · Score: 5, Funny

    I was really hoping we could keep the Mac/Windows flame wars out of this discussion for once...

  27. Re:Freaking simpletons should not have million$ by uberdave · · Score: 4, Informative

    Let's see, mach 20+ in the thickest part of the atmosphere... 300+ G acceleration... What's not to love?

    --
    "I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
  28. discharge ionisphere into earth by davidgrouchy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Great, lay a source of conduction across the natural insulation of our atmosphere and discharge the entire ionisphere into the earth. Wheeeee

  29. Why FAA Clearance? by DynaSoar · · Score: 4, Informative

    Because they're flying a tethered balloon in US airspace above the maximum altitude allowed without having to alert air traffic in the area.

    http://www.risingup.com/fars/info/101-index.shtml

    They have to get a waiver to operate outside the limits set by FAR 101. It's a fairly automatic process. Most rocketry clubs do it regularly. By doing this they get clearance and (somewhat) priority for the airspace, and a NOTAM (Notice To Airmen) is posted at air traffic control centers so anyone heading that way will be informed.

    According to the LiftPort blog, they've seen you coming:

    September 18th, 2005
    Welcome Slashdot readers.

    You're welcome to rummage around and see what we're up to.

    While you are here, sign up for our monthly announcement list. Toss barbed questions at space elevator enthusiasts at the Liftport Forums. Read our out-dated FAQ. Read Dr. Edwards NIAC study and free yourself from /. generated assumptions in the Phase II Study.

    --
    "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
  30. Re:Freaking simpletons should not have million$ by ThosLives · · Score: 4, Informative
    Even worse than you suggested. You don't even need to worry about time, if you use v^2 = 2*a*d formula. If you want an altitude of 200 km, you need a velocity of 1951 m/s to get up to that altitude (kinetic equivalent of gravitational potential at 200 km), and another 7786 m/s to reach orbital velocity. Add another 1000 m/s to account for drag effects (probably high, but it's a good estimate) and you see that a total delta-V of about 10700 m/s is required. Over 10km, this would require an average acceleration of a whopping 5724 m/s2, or about 585g. This kind of explains why the space shuttle averages its acceleration over about 8 minutes, which is only an average acceleration of 22.3 m/s2 (less than 3 g).

    Suffice it to say I don't want to ride in your mass driver unless someone comes up with an artifical gravity field to compensate for the G-loads. (Even at 1000 km long, that's still 5.8 g, not 2.4).

    --
    "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)