Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

No One Wins NASA Space Elevator Contest

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the get-out-and-push dept.

volts writes "According to New Scientist no one was able to grab the two $50,000 top prizes in the recent NASA 'Beam Power Challenge'. The biggest limiting factor seemed to be that no team was able to meet the speed requirement, although a group from the University of Saskatchewan in Canada set the height record at 12 meters. Not quite geosynchronous..."

8 of 240 comments (clear)

  1. Re:The biggest limiting factor seemed to be... by georgewilliamherbert · · Score: 5, Informative
    The biggest limiting factor seemed to be that NASA didn't offer enough money to get any remotely reasonable solution to the problem. Fifty thousand dollars is chump change to the kind of money needed to develop any of this technology.
    These challenges typically cost more to compete in than you can win. DARPA autonomous vehicles teams typically spent 2-3 times the prize. The X-prize was won by a team spending $26 million on a $10 million prize.

    What you "win" is prestige and advancing the state of the art.

    Also, at least one elevator climber team was only 3 people part-time. That's not a huge budget...

  2. Geosynchronous by ornil · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not quite geosynchronous...

    Oh, it's quite geosynchronous (i.e. above the same point on the Earth surface). It's just not in orbit.

  3. Not quite geosynchronous... by aengblom · · Score: 5, Funny
    Not quite geosynchronous...


    We didn't have enough money to put a man in a track suit up a ladder! I mean, I would've been there,

    "Go man, go!" "

    I'm going, I'm going! 'Ang on!"

    "Just hang on to the ladder!"

    "Hello, Swindon, I am here. Swindon, can you hear me?"

    "Swindon here, we are monitoring you on our instruments at the moment, we've got you on a tuba." "There should be a bigger laugh for that joke, I think."

    "Yeah, I can't quite understand it; I thought it was really funny. Swindon, a knackered, kind of Fresno town."

    "They don't seem to be going for it."

    "They're obviously bastards."

    "Anyway, Swindon, I'm nearly at the Moon... actually, that's a bit of an understatement, that one.

    Have you got another big ladder, another bit of ladder? I don't think we're quite at the Moon yet, but I can see right over the top of the houses! Fantastic!"
    --


    So close and yet so far from the world's perfect ID number
  4. Here's an idea by eyal · · Score: 5, Funny
    ...although a group from the University of Saskatchewan in Canada set the height record at 12 meters

    Maybe if we stacked them...

  5. Re:Too bad by qbwiz · · Score: 5, Informative

    The problem was apparently that the spotlight they were using had too diffuse of a beam. Next year, when the teams provide their own beaming systems, it might turn out better.

    --
    Ewige Blumenkraft.
  6. Re:Top Speed by georgewilliamherbert · · Score: 5, Informative
    The minimum speed was 1 meter/s = 3.6km/h = 2.2369 miles/h. I can walk faster than that. Geosynch is 35,786 km above sealeve according to wiki. At 3.6 km/h it would take over a year to get up to geosynch. They really should increase the minimum speed.
    There were a number of factors arguing for slower speed initial prize goals.

    Power source this time was limited to a single high-power searchlight... faster requires a whole lot more power, and it simply wasn't going to be available in time.

    Most teams didn't have the chance to test at their own facility with their own searchlight, nor at the competition site. If you can't really test, you shouldn't assume highly efficient operations...

    The tether in use wasn't that tall, and accellerating and decellerating a whole lot within the available vertical distance was a nonstarter.

    This was a introduction to parts of the problem set, not a realistic attempt to engineer production grade tether climbers. Everyone involved knows that...

  7. Re:Top Speed by Chirs · · Score: 5, Informative

    You've missed a major point to the space elevator scenario--controlled descent.

    In a standard descent, all the excess kinetic energy is wasted as heat. In a space-elevator scenario, you can use the energy of the descending cars to assist in powering the ascending cars. Net overall energy expenditure required is just enough to start the system and overcome the inevitable inefficiencies. Your average energy-per-car can be much lower than the rocket scenario.

  8. Re:Top Speed by Mikkeles · · Score: 5, Informative
    Your wish has been granted (FTA):
    He adds that teams were restricted to using NASA's searchlight as the power source this year, but says they will be able to design their own in 2006. "They can use lasers, microwaves, whatever they like," he says.
    --
    Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.