Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Dragon Rocket Fizzles! 1960 all over again~
4 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted
Robert Clark
May 23, 2012, 9:39:45 AM5/23/12
to
On May 23, 4:24 am, "GordonD" <g.da...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> > There have been so many nay-sayers over the years saying how hard
> > spaceflight is and how it simply must be expensive because it's so hard.
> > These people thumbed their noses at the like of Orbital Sciences
> > (Pegasus) and poked fun at them when they had launch failures. The same
> > trend continued with SpaceX as they struggled to get a vehicle into
> > orbit successfully.
>
> > Where are the nay-sayers today?
>
> Arthur C. Clarke put it this way:
>
> Every revolutionary idea seems to evoke three stages of reaction. They may
> be summed up by the phrases:
> 1- It's completely impossible.
> 2- It's possible, but it's not worth doing.
> 3- I said it was a good idea all along.
> --
> Gordon Davie
> Edinburgh, Scotland
>
> "Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God."
Thanks for that. I feel SSTO's are at level 2 in Clarke's quote. Soon
they will be at level 3.
Bob Clark
> ...
>
> > There have been so many nay-sayers over the years saying how hard
> > spaceflight is and how it simply must be expensive because it's so hard.
> > These people thumbed their noses at the like of Orbital Sciences
> > (Pegasus) and poked fun at them when they had launch failures. The same
> > trend continued with SpaceX as they struggled to get a vehicle into
> > orbit successfully.
>
> > Where are the nay-sayers today?
>
> Arthur C. Clarke put it this way:
>
> Every revolutionary idea seems to evoke three stages of reaction. They may
> be summed up by the phrases:
> 1- It's completely impossible.
> 2- It's possible, but it's not worth doing.
> 3- I said it was a good idea all along.
> --
> Gordon Davie
> Edinburgh, Scotland
>
> "Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God."
Thanks for that. I feel SSTO's are at level 2 in Clarke's quote. Soon
they will be at level 3.
Bob Clark
Robert Clark
May 23, 2012, 12:25:34 PM5/23/12
to
On May 23, 9:02 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
...
>
> > The advisors below are the leaders in the field.
> > I've shown you my evidence, now show me yours
> > ...if you can!
>
> > Space Energy Inc Technical Consultantshttp://www.spaceenergy.com/s/TechnicalAdvisors.htm
>
> > Space Energy Inc Presentationhttp://www.spaceenergy.com/i/flash/ted_presentation
[re-post with formatting corrected.]
Thanks for that.
I had been doubtful about the economic viability of space solar power
based on the large amount of mass that had to be lofted to orbit and
the high cost of getting payload to orbit. However, some recent work
about reducing the mass of solar cells has convinced me it is doable.
This recent work suggest the weight of cells can be reduced by 1 to
perhaps 2 orders of magnitude:
Spray-on solar may be future for green energy.
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/sprayon-solar-may-be-future-for-green-energy-2343590.html
Scientists develop spider-silk solar batteries.
By Charlie Osborne | April 4, 2012, 4:22 AM PDT
"One gram of the solar battery produces 10 watts of energy. The
efficiency of conversion from solar power to electricity is 4.2
percent, substantially lower than typical solar panels. However, the
new battery can function without conversion rate drops when folded or
bent. According to the team, the spider-silk soar batteries can also
be made cheaply."
http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/smart-takes/scientists-develop-spider-silk-solar-batteries/25079
A specific power of 10 watts per gram is 10,000 watts per kg. This
is about a hundred times better than current space solar cells(!) If
they do get the conversion efficiency up to that of current cells at
about 20%, then the specific power would be 50,000 watts per kg. This
would mean, at least for the solar cells, a gigawatt of power could be
lofted by a single one of the current largest 20 mT launchers!
Clearly further investment should be made into these lightweight
solar power cells. One source of investment into such lightweight
cells and into space solar power ventures would be a country such as
Japan which does not have large supplies of oil and now because of
last years earthquake, tsunami and nuclear accident has great
uncertainty about nuclear power.
If such extreme reductions in the weight of solar cells do indeed
pan out, then there will be a great market for heavy lift launchers,
becoming another reason for routine spaceflight. I discuss on my blog
some possibilities for low cost HLV's:
http://exoscientist.blogspot.com
Bob Clark
...
>
> > The advisors below are the leaders in the field.
> > I've shown you my evidence, now show me yours
> > ...if you can!
>
> > Space Energy Inc Technical Consultantshttp://www.spaceenergy.com/s/TechnicalAdvisors.htm
>
> > Space Energy Inc Presentationhttp://www.spaceenergy.com/i/flash/ted_presentation
[re-post with formatting corrected.]
Thanks for that.
I had been doubtful about the economic viability of space solar power
based on the large amount of mass that had to be lofted to orbit and
the high cost of getting payload to orbit. However, some recent work
about reducing the mass of solar cells has convinced me it is doable.
This recent work suggest the weight of cells can be reduced by 1 to
perhaps 2 orders of magnitude:
Spray-on solar may be future for green energy.
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/sprayon-solar-may-be-future-for-green-energy-2343590.html
Scientists develop spider-silk solar batteries.
By Charlie Osborne | April 4, 2012, 4:22 AM PDT
"One gram of the solar battery produces 10 watts of energy. The
efficiency of conversion from solar power to electricity is 4.2
percent, substantially lower than typical solar panels. However, the
new battery can function without conversion rate drops when folded or
bent. According to the team, the spider-silk soar batteries can also
be made cheaply."
http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/smart-takes/scientists-develop-spider-silk-solar-batteries/25079
A specific power of 10 watts per gram is 10,000 watts per kg. This
is about a hundred times better than current space solar cells(!) If
they do get the conversion efficiency up to that of current cells at
about 20%, then the specific power would be 50,000 watts per kg. This
would mean, at least for the solar cells, a gigawatt of power could be
lofted by a single one of the current largest 20 mT launchers!
Clearly further investment should be made into these lightweight
solar power cells. One source of investment into such lightweight
cells and into space solar power ventures would be a country such as
Japan which does not have large supplies of oil and now because of
last years earthquake, tsunami and nuclear accident has great
uncertainty about nuclear power.
If such extreme reductions in the weight of solar cells do indeed
pan out, then there will be a great market for heavy lift launchers,
becoming another reason for routine spaceflight. I discuss on my blog
some possibilities for low cost HLV's:
http://exoscientist.blogspot.com
Bob Clark
Jeff Findley
May 24, 2012, 9:05:40 AM5/24/12
to
In article <73bbaafa-74f6-47d2-8161-a8a809321aa7
@dg7g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, rgrego...@yahoo.com says...
Still sounds like a research topic. There are still lots of questions
in my mind, like how can you mass produce this type of cell. How fast
would such a cell degrade in LEO? Also, how do you deploy an array in
LEO made of this stuff? I know a guy who used to work for Harris (large
deployable things like antennas) and his take is that large deployable
structures are not cheap.
So it might be possible to do, in theory. But fact is quite often
different than theory.
Jeff
--
" Ares 1 is a prime example of the fact that NASA just can't get it
up anymore... and when they can, it doesn't stay up long. ;) "
- tinker
@dg7g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, rgrego...@yahoo.com says...
in my mind, like how can you mass produce this type of cell. How fast
would such a cell degrade in LEO? Also, how do you deploy an array in
LEO made of this stuff? I know a guy who used to work for Harris (large
deployable things like antennas) and his take is that large deployable
structures are not cheap.
So it might be possible to do, in theory. But fact is quite often
different than theory.
Jeff
--
" Ares 1 is a prime example of the fact that NASA just can't get it
up anymore... and when they can, it doesn't stay up long. ;) "
- tinker
Brad Guth
May 24, 2012, 9:11:57 AM5/24/12
to
On May 24, 6:05 am, Jeff Findley <jeff.find...@nospam.ugs.com> wrote:
> In article <73bbaafa-74f6-47d2-8161-a8a809321aa7
> @dg7g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, rgregorycl...@yahoo.com says...
> In article <73bbaafa-74f6-47d2-8161-a8a809321aa7
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 23, 9:02 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > ...
>
> > > > The advisors below are the leaders in the field.
> > > > I've shown you my evidence, now show me yours
> > > > ...if you can!
>
> > > > Space Energy Inc Technical Consultantshttp://www.spaceenergy.com/s/TechnicalAdvisors.htm
>
> > > > Space Energy Inc Presentationhttp://www.spaceenergy.com/i/flash/ted_presentation
>
> > [re-post with formatting corrected.]
> > Thanks for that.
> > I had been doubtful about the economic viability of space solar power
> > based on the large amount of mass that had to be lofted to orbit and
> > the high cost of getting payload to orbit. However, some recent work
> > about reducing the mass of solar cells has convinced me it is doable.
> > This recent work suggest the weight of cells can be reduced by 1 to
> > perhaps 2 orders of magnitude:
>
> > Spray-on solar may be future for green energy.
> >http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/sprayon-solar-may-be-future-...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 23, 9:02 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > ...
>
> > > > The advisors below are the leaders in the field.
> > > > I've shown you my evidence, now show me yours
> > > > ...if you can!
>
> > > > Space Energy Inc Technical Consultantshttp://www.spaceenergy.com/s/TechnicalAdvisors.htm
>
> > > > Space Energy Inc Presentationhttp://www.spaceenergy.com/i/flash/ted_presentation
>
> > [re-post with formatting corrected.]
> > Thanks for that.
> > I had been doubtful about the economic viability of space solar power
> > based on the large amount of mass that had to be lofted to orbit and
> > the high cost of getting payload to orbit. However, some recent work
> > about reducing the mass of solar cells has convinced me it is doable.
> > This recent work suggest the weight of cells can be reduced by 1 to
> > perhaps 2 orders of magnitude:
>
> > Spray-on solar may be future for green energy.
>
> > Scientists develop spider-silk solar batteries.
> > By Charlie Osborne | April 4, 2012, 4:22 AM PDT
> > "One gram of the solar battery produces 10 watts of energy. The
> > efficiency of conversion from solar power to electricity is 4.2
> > percent, substantially lower than typical solar panels. However, the
> > new battery can function without conversion rate drops when folded or
> > bent. According to the team, the spider-silk soar batteries can also
> > be made cheaply."
> >http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/smart-takes/scientists-develop-spider...
> > Scientists develop spider-silk solar batteries.
> > By Charlie Osborne | April 4, 2012, 4:22 AM PDT
> > "One gram of the solar battery produces 10 watts of energy. The
> > efficiency of conversion from solar power to electricity is 4.2
> > percent, substantially lower than typical solar panels. However, the
> > new battery can function without conversion rate drops when folded or
> > bent. According to the team, the spider-silk soar batteries can also
> > be made cheaply."
anything that might benefit us, such as for assembling very massively
large items.
http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
0 new messages