Why can't they just drop a solar winch down from a shuttle and have planes fly up and clip things on?
$begingroup$
Why can't they just drop a solar winch down from a shuttle and have planes fly up and clip things on?
I know of the idea to have a space lift but the cable necessary is too expensive.
Why can't we just have a small cable hanging down to the edge of space though?
launch spacecraft design
edited 11 mins ago
peterh
1,60111429
asked 4 hours ago
SpaceMonkeySpaceMonkey
61
New contributor
SpaceMonkey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Why can't they just drop a solar winch down from a shuttle and have planes fly up and clip things on?
I know of the idea to have a space lift but the cable necessary is too expensive.
Why can't we just have a small cable hanging down to the edge of space though?
launch spacecraft design
edited 11 mins ago
peterh
1,60111429
asked 4 hours ago
SpaceMonkeySpaceMonkey
61
New contributor
SpaceMonkey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Why can't they just drop a solar winch down from a shuttle and have planes fly up and clip things on?
I know of the idea to have a space lift but the cable necessary is too expensive.
Why can't we just have a small cable hanging down to the edge of space though?
launch spacecraft design
edited 11 mins ago
peterh
1,60111429
asked 4 hours ago
SpaceMonkeySpaceMonkey
61
New contributor
SpaceMonkey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
Why can't they just drop a solar winch down from a shuttle and have planes fly up and clip things on?
I know of the idea to have a space lift but the cable necessary is too expensive.
Why can't we just have a small cable hanging down to the edge of space though?
launch spacecraft design
launch spacecraft design
edited 11 mins ago
peterh
1,60111429
asked 4 hours ago
SpaceMonkeySpaceMonkey
61
New contributor
SpaceMonkey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 11 mins ago
peterh
1,60111429
asked 4 hours ago
SpaceMonkeySpaceMonkey
61
New contributor
SpaceMonkey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 11 mins ago
peterh
1,60111429
edited 11 mins ago
peterh
1,60111429
edited 11 mins ago
peterh
1,60111429
1,60111429
asked 4 hours ago
SpaceMonkeySpaceMonkey
61
New contributor
SpaceMonkey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 4 hours ago
SpaceMonkeySpaceMonkey
61
asked 4 hours ago
SpaceMonkeySpaceMonkey
61
61
New contributor
SpaceMonkey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
SpaceMonkey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
SpaceMonkey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Because space isn't about going high, it's about going fast! For example, in a 400km orbit (like ISS) you need a speed of about 27,500 km/h or 7.66 km per second. So if you would extend a pole, winch or anything else into the lower parts of the atmosphere, it would also move at about 27,500 km/h (if we ignore atmospheric drag and all other influences). Try to catch that hook! If you can, you might as well go straight into orbit yourself.
answered 3 hours ago
DarkDustDarkDust
6,90432854
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Reminds old good what-if.xkcd.com/157
$endgroup$
– val
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
The "Rotating Skyhoook" concept en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyhook_(structure) seems relevant here
$endgroup$
– Steve Linton
44 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As an alternative to DarkDust's answer. If you start higher, at the classic altitude for space elevators the end of your cable is indeed stationary to the air but your cable needs to reach from Geostationary orbit to the upper atmosphere, something like 35,700km. The clipping off the last 20-60km does make a big difference in the overall monumental cost and complexity.
It is also worth noting that as you climb the cable, you will also pull the cable and station down. So your elevator will need to burn similar amounts of fuel to keep in orbit as if you had flown there (though possibly in a more efficient engine), unless you can balance things with loads coming down and being dropped as you go up.
answered 3 hours ago
GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger
2,073216
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
"does make a difference" or "doesn't make a difference" ?
$endgroup$
– JCRM
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The end of the cable would be destroyed by the heat of reentry from a low orbit when reaching the height where planes may fly.
But if you try to drop a cable from a low orbit it would not drop, it would stay in orbit. There is no droping of things in zero gravity.
Pulling up a load to the spacecraft in low orbit would slow down the spacecraft. It would loose height and fuel is needed to maintain orbit.
As written in the other answers, a plane is much to slow to catch the hook. Without a heatshield, the plane would be destroyed by the neccessary speed. With heatshield the plane would need a lot of fuel to maintain that speed.
answered 1 hour ago
UweUwe
9,94322954
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "508"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
SpaceMonkey is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f33718%2fwhy-cant-they-just-drop-a-solar-winch-down-from-a-shuttle-and-have-planes-fly-u%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Because space isn't about going high, it's about going fast! For example, in a 400km orbit (like ISS) you need a speed of about 27,500 km/h or 7.66 km per second. So if you would extend a pole, winch or anything else into the lower parts of the atmosphere, it would also move at about 27,500 km/h (if we ignore atmospheric drag and all other influences). Try to catch that hook! If you can, you might as well go straight into orbit yourself.
answered 3 hours ago
DarkDustDarkDust
6,90432854
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Reminds old good what-if.xkcd.com/157
$endgroup$
– val
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
The "Rotating Skyhoook" concept en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyhook_(structure) seems relevant here
$endgroup$
– Steve Linton
44 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Because space isn't about going high, it's about going fast! For example, in a 400km orbit (like ISS) you need a speed of about 27,500 km/h or 7.66 km per second. So if you would extend a pole, winch or anything else into the lower parts of the atmosphere, it would also move at about 27,500 km/h (if we ignore atmospheric drag and all other influences). Try to catch that hook! If you can, you might as well go straight into orbit yourself.
answered 3 hours ago
DarkDustDarkDust
6,90432854
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Reminds old good what-if.xkcd.com/157
$endgroup$
– val
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
The "Rotating Skyhoook" concept en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyhook_(structure) seems relevant here
$endgroup$
– Steve Linton
44 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Because space isn't about going high, it's about going fast! For example, in a 400km orbit (like ISS) you need a speed of about 27,500 km/h or 7.66 km per second. So if you would extend a pole, winch or anything else into the lower parts of the atmosphere, it would also move at about 27,500 km/h (if we ignore atmospheric drag and all other influences). Try to catch that hook! If you can, you might as well go straight into orbit yourself.
answered 3 hours ago
DarkDustDarkDust
6,90432854
$endgroup$
Because space isn't about going high, it's about going fast! For example, in a 400km orbit (like ISS) you need a speed of about 27,500 km/h or 7.66 km per second. So if you would extend a pole, winch or anything else into the lower parts of the atmosphere, it would also move at about 27,500 km/h (if we ignore atmospheric drag and all other influences). Try to catch that hook! If you can, you might as well go straight into orbit yourself.
answered 3 hours ago
DarkDustDarkDust
6,90432854
answered 3 hours ago
DarkDustDarkDust
6,90432854
answered 3 hours ago
DarkDustDarkDust
6,90432854
answered 3 hours ago
DarkDustDarkDust
6,90432854
6,90432854
2
$begingroup$
Reminds old good what-if.xkcd.com/157
$endgroup$
– val
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
The "Rotating Skyhoook" concept en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyhook_(structure) seems relevant here
$endgroup$
– Steve Linton
44 mins ago
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
Reminds old good what-if.xkcd.com/157
$endgroup$
– val
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
The "Rotating Skyhoook" concept en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyhook_(structure) seems relevant here
$endgroup$
– Steve Linton
44 mins ago
2
2
$begingroup$
Reminds old good what-if.xkcd.com/157
$endgroup$
– val
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
Reminds old good what-if.xkcd.com/157
$endgroup$
– val
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
The "Rotating Skyhoook" concept en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyhook_(structure) seems relevant here
$endgroup$
– Steve Linton
44 mins ago
$begingroup$
The "Rotating Skyhoook" concept en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyhook_(structure) seems relevant here
$endgroup$
– Steve Linton
44 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As an alternative to DarkDust's answer. If you start higher, at the classic altitude for space elevators the end of your cable is indeed stationary to the air but your cable needs to reach from Geostationary orbit to the upper atmosphere, something like 35,700km. The clipping off the last 20-60km does make a big difference in the overall monumental cost and complexity.
It is also worth noting that as you climb the cable, you will also pull the cable and station down. So your elevator will need to burn similar amounts of fuel to keep in orbit as if you had flown there (though possibly in a more efficient engine), unless you can balance things with loads coming down and being dropped as you go up.
answered 3 hours ago
GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger
2,073216
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
"does make a difference" or "doesn't make a difference" ?
$endgroup$
– JCRM
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As an alternative to DarkDust's answer. If you start higher, at the classic altitude for space elevators the end of your cable is indeed stationary to the air but your cable needs to reach from Geostationary orbit to the upper atmosphere, something like 35,700km. The clipping off the last 20-60km does make a big difference in the overall monumental cost and complexity.
It is also worth noting that as you climb the cable, you will also pull the cable and station down. So your elevator will need to burn similar amounts of fuel to keep in orbit as if you had flown there (though possibly in a more efficient engine), unless you can balance things with loads coming down and being dropped as you go up.
answered 3 hours ago
GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger
2,073216
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
"does make a difference" or "doesn't make a difference" ?
$endgroup$
– JCRM
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As an alternative to DarkDust's answer. If you start higher, at the classic altitude for space elevators the end of your cable is indeed stationary to the air but your cable needs to reach from Geostationary orbit to the upper atmosphere, something like 35,700km. The clipping off the last 20-60km does make a big difference in the overall monumental cost and complexity.
It is also worth noting that as you climb the cable, you will also pull the cable and station down. So your elevator will need to burn similar amounts of fuel to keep in orbit as if you had flown there (though possibly in a more efficient engine), unless you can balance things with loads coming down and being dropped as you go up.
answered 3 hours ago
GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger
2,073216
$endgroup$
As an alternative to DarkDust's answer. If you start higher, at the classic altitude for space elevators the end of your cable is indeed stationary to the air but your cable needs to reach from Geostationary orbit to the upper atmosphere, something like 35,700km. The clipping off the last 20-60km does make a big difference in the overall monumental cost and complexity.
It is also worth noting that as you climb the cable, you will also pull the cable and station down. So your elevator will need to burn similar amounts of fuel to keep in orbit as if you had flown there (though possibly in a more efficient engine), unless you can balance things with loads coming down and being dropped as you go up.
answered 3 hours ago
GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger
2,073216
answered 3 hours ago
GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger
2,073216
answered 3 hours ago
GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger
2,073216
answered 3 hours ago
GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger
2,073216
2,073216
1
$begingroup$
"does make a difference" or "doesn't make a difference" ?
$endgroup$
– JCRM
1 hour ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
"does make a difference" or "doesn't make a difference" ?
$endgroup$
– JCRM
1 hour ago
1
1
$begingroup$
"does make a difference" or "doesn't make a difference" ?
$endgroup$
– JCRM
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
"does make a difference" or "doesn't make a difference" ?
$endgroup$
– JCRM
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The end of the cable would be destroyed by the heat of reentry from a low orbit when reaching the height where planes may fly.
But if you try to drop a cable from a low orbit it would not drop, it would stay in orbit. There is no droping of things in zero gravity.
Pulling up a load to the spacecraft in low orbit would slow down the spacecraft. It would loose height and fuel is needed to maintain orbit.
As written in the other answers, a plane is much to slow to catch the hook. Without a heatshield, the plane would be destroyed by the neccessary speed. With heatshield the plane would need a lot of fuel to maintain that speed.
answered 1 hour ago
UweUwe
9,94322954
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The end of the cable would be destroyed by the heat of reentry from a low orbit when reaching the height where planes may fly.
But if you try to drop a cable from a low orbit it would not drop, it would stay in orbit. There is no droping of things in zero gravity.
Pulling up a load to the spacecraft in low orbit would slow down the spacecraft. It would loose height and fuel is needed to maintain orbit.
As written in the other answers, a plane is much to slow to catch the hook. Without a heatshield, the plane would be destroyed by the neccessary speed. With heatshield the plane would need a lot of fuel to maintain that speed.
answered 1 hour ago
UweUwe
9,94322954
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The end of the cable would be destroyed by the heat of reentry from a low orbit when reaching the height where planes may fly.
But if you try to drop a cable from a low orbit it would not drop, it would stay in orbit. There is no droping of things in zero gravity.
Pulling up a load to the spacecraft in low orbit would slow down the spacecraft. It would loose height and fuel is needed to maintain orbit.
As written in the other answers, a plane is much to slow to catch the hook. Without a heatshield, the plane would be destroyed by the neccessary speed. With heatshield the plane would need a lot of fuel to maintain that speed.
answered 1 hour ago
UweUwe
9,94322954
$endgroup$
The end of the cable would be destroyed by the heat of reentry from a low orbit when reaching the height where planes may fly.
But if you try to drop a cable from a low orbit it would not drop, it would stay in orbit. There is no droping of things in zero gravity.
Pulling up a load to the spacecraft in low orbit would slow down the spacecraft. It would loose height and fuel is needed to maintain orbit.
As written in the other answers, a plane is much to slow to catch the hook. Without a heatshield, the plane would be destroyed by the neccessary speed. With heatshield the plane would need a lot of fuel to maintain that speed.
answered 1 hour ago
UweUwe
9,94322954
answered 1 hour ago
UweUwe
9,94322954
answered 1 hour ago
UweUwe
9,94322954
answered 1 hour ago
UweUwe
9,94322954
9,94322954
add a comment |
add a comment |
SpaceMonkey is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
SpaceMonkey is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
SpaceMonkey is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
SpaceMonkey is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f33718%2fwhy-cant-they-just-drop-a-solar-winch-down-from-a-shuttle-and-have-planes-fly-u%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
