There has been quite a bit of news about trying to rethink the goals of NASA and the time lines. The future budget has also been under some scrutiny with the political changes that have been going on in the US. In the 1960’s and 70’s NASA was one of the largest sources of pride for America, but recently that feeling has been somewhat diminished I believe. This is due to the lack of what we would call significant progress in the area of space exploration. Costs have not come down and budgets have not gone up. So the amount of exploration that can be done has not increased. Some of the less exciting things that have come about are use of satellites for Climate research as well as other areas of Earth Observation. Although they have been searching for new goals and restructuring details of their existing goals such as 1. Fly the shuttle safely until its retirement and 6. Re-establish a lunar return program, there has been little or no serious discussion of the Space Elevator. Although gaining some recognition from aeronautics engineers as being potentially feasible, this has not reached the political mainstream.
However the direction of NASA and it’s next generation vehicle should make it more than possible to carry an in-tact bootstrap ribbon to LEO, if not GEO. The specifications of the Ares V vehicle currently note a potential maximum 188 tons to LEO and 55 tons to GEO. Here is some more detailed specs. In order to achieve the goal of an SE bootstrap by 2030, we must have a launch vehicle, and at this point, this is the best potential vehicle. One significant hurdle is still the 8.8m diameter restriction and up to 18.7m in length. ESA’s Arian launch vehicles have a diameter of less than 5m and a potential payload of 9 tons. So the bootstrap ribbon will need to be flexible enough to wrap around at most a 8m spool. This is in addition to the 50GPa tensile strength requirement. However if we can send a completed bootstrap that requires no in-space manufacturing or adjustments, this is a very important operational advantage.
Of all the things in discussion between the administration and NASA, one thing we don’t want is a decrease in the dimensions of the Ares V rocket. At this point, this is one of the possibilities they are talking about, scrapping the Ares-I and down-sizing the Ares V. At this point the dimensions of the Ares V should make it possible to send an in-tact bootstrap ribbon. Low estimates on the ribbon weight are around 20 tons. But of course we do not yet know the final specifications or materials which will eventually be used. In any case we can only hope that the Heavy lifter Ares V will be able to transport the eventual ribbon. Although I do not have estimates on in-space construction or assembly cost, one can imagine that it could complicate the deployment quite a bit.
Perhaps there will be another satisfactory rocket in the future, but I think it is safe to say, this is our best bet of getting the bootstrap ribbon up in one piece if the materials science can make it available by 2025 or 2030.
Another well known group is the SSI or Space Studies Institute. They have had some trouble in the recent past and are possibly relocating away from Princeton University. They have generally held annual conferences on a variety of subjects. In addition there is the NSS or National Space Society which appears to be more active at the moment. They have recently tried to politically support NASA and to increase funding for NASA’s initiatives.
Even though NASA and the big Aeronautics companies have not come around yet, there has been some progress in the area of the Space Elevator. The groups focused completely on the Space Elevator are ISEC (International Space Elevator Consortium), Liftport Group, and Spaceward.
Here are the recent Space Elevator competitions funded by NASA:
1. The Spaceward Power Beaming prize for 2 m/s was claimed by LaserMotive in the beginning of November 2009. They were actually closer to 3.93 m/s and their Power Beaming technology was lauded by all. Details can be seen here. They made it into Yahoo News too. The competition itself was delayed multiple times (originally scheduled for 4/29/2009) and representatives from JSEA including myself had originally planned to go. The 5 m/s (18km/hour) prize is still up for grabs and the teams who participated, Saskatchewan, Laser Motive and Kansas City all plan to participate next year. Dates have not been made available yet. But if you are interested in receiving information about future competition dates, please let us know.
2. The Tether competition was a little less interesting, although I’m sure it was a fun weekend had by all involved. Shizuoka was unable to beat the “house” tether. It can be asked whether or not the prize money is enough stimulus to bring the heavy hitters of nanotubes into this competition. Although I don’t know the exact terms of publicizing the tethers that are involved in the competition, I imagine the cost of developing any tether which could beat the house tether would be orders of magnitude beyond the 1 million up for grabs.