Slashdot Mirror


Obayashi To Build Space Elevator By 2050

mattr writes "Japan's Obayashi Corp. has announced plans to build a space elevator by 2050. They are famous for wrecking skylines with the over-sized bullet train station in Kyoto, the world's tallest self-supporting tower Tokyo Sky Tree and just recently, the beginnings of the Taipei Dome. It will take a week at 200 kph for your party of 30 to reach the 36,000-km-high terminal station, while the counterweight [swings along at] 96 km high, a quarter of the way to the Moon."

14 of 488 comments (clear)

  1. gotta love the attitude by korpique · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It probably won't hurt your corporate image too much to bolster some idealism every once in a while.

    --
    I was the real korpiq until I woke up clowned.
  2. Not going to end well... by XDirtypunkX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's bad enough sharing a lift with 5 or 6 people for 30 seconds, let alone sharing one with 30 people for a week.

    1. Re:Not going to end well... by DrXym · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The concept of a space elevator is so out there but I expect if one did come into existence that people would be carried up in something more resembling a submarine than a box. It'd have to be pressurized, radiation shielding, temperature control, powered in some way to climb, have sleeping area, food preparation area, sanitation etc. All designed to work in gravity and zero gravity.

      If people can live on a sub for months at a time they'd be able to live on an elevator for a week. I assume these people wouldn't be randomly plucked off the street and would undergo some form of training resembling existing astronaut programs.

  3. Good luck and I want the 13th ride up by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wish them luck and hope the technology is ready before I'm too old to ride the thing.

    Forecast for this thread. 56% never gonna happen. 10% certain it will happen. 18% about how impossible it is. and the rest finding a way to blame MS for the failure.

    --
    Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
    1. Re:Good luck and I want the 13th ride up by maxwell+demon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Usually step 2 is get investors believe you and give you lots of money. Note that to profit, you don't need to actually manage to build the space elevator. You just must make sure that it doesn't look like fraud.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:Good luck and I want the 13th ride up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even if they don't do it, I'm pretty sure in the process they're gonna find/invent some cool stuff that will probably make them a shitload of money. They are doing exactly what all technology companies should be doing: push the limits and try the impossible. It's always a win-win idea.

  4. English? by zakkie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    WTF does that last sentence even mean?

  5. Counterpoint by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The fact that we don't have the necessary structural materials yet to actually make a space elevator.

    And we'll continue not having them until someone pays to build a space elevator and does the needed research. By 2050 it's not impossible to think materials will be around to make this feasible.

    Neither Japan nor any Japanese company has the financial solvency to undertake such an effort

    Possibly, hard to say. They put up some really large buildings. They could get a huge loan.

    No one wants to spend a week in an elevator even if it means you get to go into orbit.

    I would happily pay 20k to go to said stationary station for a few days. Even if it took a week to get there in cramped quarters.

    By then there may be a number of cheaper options to visit pace though, Virgin Galactic is making a go at it. I really only want to go up if I can spend a day or two though, so mere flights up and down do not interest me much...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Counterpoint by TheTurtlesMoves · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And we'll continue not having them until someone pays to build a space elevator and does the needed research. By 2050 it's not impossible to think materials will be around to make this feasible.

      Not true. The utility of a 63GPa material with the density in the 3000-2000kg/m3 department is so ridiculously awesome that its is indistinguishable from magic compared to today's materials. Think *easy* to build SSTO RV rockets for starters. Even if expensive its just plain awesome. You don't need space elevators for motivation.

      However it is not a given such a material is even possible. Bulk material strength is always far less that perfect theoretical strength. There has already been a paper suggesting that SWCN may not be up to the task due to "dislocations".

      Also it may not be economical even if you have the material. The same material makes alternatives much cheaper too, such as plain old boring rockets. Or more exotic ideas such as launch loops or tethers.

      Finally there is the problem with transit time. If you spend too long in the radiation belts, this is probably the last thing you would do..... A week sounds too slow.

      --
      The Grey Goo disaster happened 3 billion years ago. This rock is covered in self replicating machines!
    2. Re:Counterpoint by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Space elevator : Initial cost is very very high but once built the running costs are negligible

      Rockets : Initial cost is high but not that high, running costs are high forever, economy of scale will never kick in to any reasonable degree

      Once you have built a space elevator, all rocketry for lifting will be obsolete - most of a rocket is there to lift the rocket into orbit not the payload ... a space elevator will be externally powered so will not need to be any heavier than needed to climb the cable ..and you might be able to drive it and fund it with materials coming down (mining the asteroids)

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
  6. Re:Great concept except for .... by ray_nicov · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No no wants to spend a week in an elevator even if it means you get to go into orbit. Christ I can barely make it to the 15th floor without some jackass farting. A whole week. Don't think so.

    To get from Vladivostok to Moscow on the train you would need 9 days. It used to take a couple of weeks or more. One train carriage carry approximately 30 people and the either share cabins with 3 other travellers or the whole carriage is one big cabin. People used to travel this way all the time before flying started to be an option. I suppose with our iPads etc the journey will be even less difficult

  7. Re:Great concept except for .... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No no wants to spend a week in an elevator even if it means you get to go into orbit.

    Cargo doesn't care. One of the main attractions of a space elevator is that you can lift very heavy loads into space very cheaply and at little risk.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  8. Re:Great concept except for .... by TheTurtlesMoves · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We do not in fact have the materials. No matter how much money you spend you cannot get even a foot of +6GPa strength cable. Not only have we not ever made such a material, but we don't know how yet either. It is a R&D project. It is also not a given that it is even possible.

    --
    The Grey Goo disaster happened 3 billion years ago. This rock is covered in self replicating machines!
  9. Re: Rotating cables by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Aerospace engineer who has worked on orbital tether design speaking here.

    A cable with a tip velocity of 30% of orbital speed is feasible with existing materials. Since the center of the cable is at orbital velocity by definition, the tip is then at 70% of orbital velocity at the bottom of it's rotation. A vehicle coming from the ground then needs half the kinetic energy as a full ground-to-orbit one does (Kinetic energy goes as 0.5 times velocity squared). That makes single stage launch vehicles very feasible. If the tip is at 1 gravity, then the cable radius is 516 km, and the center would be at an altitude of 750 km or thereabouts, so it does not see too much drag at the low point. Half a rotation later (12 minutes) at top of the rotation, you can let go, and now be going at 130% of orbit velocity, which is nearly GEO transfer or escape. Escape is 141% of orbit velocity.

    If you wanted to get to zero g, then it's a 516 km ride, which beats the fuck out of a stationary elevator. The elevator will be heavy relative to the vehicles coming up and down, but you need onboard propulsion to make up for traffic differences. Anything going up tends to lower the elevator orbit, anything going down tends to raise it. Whatever is left over you need to make up, preferably with an efficient electric thruster. Arrival means landing on a platform that is at one gee. With modern GPS and laser navigation, that should be fairly easy. Make the platform hundreds of meters wide if you need a bigger target. Missed landings just means the vehicle heads back down sooner than it was supposed to. It should not present a safety problem.

    Building something like this is a bootstrapping task. Start with a small rotating station, and extend cables from it. Keep adding sections of cable one at a time. Get your cable from near earth asteroids which have carbon, so you don't have to launch the whole thing from Earth. As the thing grows, the velocity to reach it from the ground goes down, so the payload a vehicle can carry goes up.