Sign in to follow this  
Phoenix Aerospace

Launch Loops: A viable alternative to space elevators?

Recommended Posts

The LHC did actually blow apart a segment of it because of superconductor failure. And in worst case scenario can damage itself beyond repair in case of sudden catastrophic failure.

And fall into ocean per se is not a big deal. parachutes and stuff.

Neutrons flying out the side of a busted LHC will not cause a nuclear bomb scale explosion...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you have a viable plan for turning the LHC into a system capable of launching payloads into orbit, please let me know.

That was not the point. the point was, that all obstacles you mentioned apply equally to the LHC. So if they are insurmountable, then the LHC should also not exist.

.

Of course the launch loop has its own issues the LHC has not, but I think you are too pessimistic w/o a good reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Neutrons flying out the side of a busted LHC will not cause a nuclear bomb scale explosion...

particles flying off exploding LHC are not the most dangerous thing. Explosively evaporating helium and flying debris, can easily kill anyone in the tunnel in case of an accident. But if you are outside of the tunnel you are safe. and so you are few dozens of kilometers away from an exploding launch loop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the point was, that all obstacles you mentioned apply equally to the LHC.

No. They don't. Really. They don't.

The LHC doesn't have to worry about operating continuously (and, indeed, it cannot operate continuously). The LHC doesn't have to worry about the weight of its equipment, as it is not planning to lift half of its length 80km into the air supported only by the angular momentum of its beam. The LHC doesn't have to worry about the power load, because the beam it is firing is considerably less energetic than the interior chain of a launch loop. The LHC doesn't have to worry about its track flexing, because it is buried in rock. The LHC does not have to worry about spontaneous violent disassembly of its entire structure should a single component fail.

Point in fact, the engineering challenges involved in constructing the LHC are nothing compared to the engineering challenges involved in constructing a launch loop, even if the physical designs are somewhat similar. What you are saying is akin to claiming that because Farnsworth Fusors produce neutrons the Tokamak is a viable reactor design. Which simply means that it's obvious that you haven't put any real thought into the nature of the challenges involved, and are relying on your sheer faith that "science will triumph over all" to support a cool sounding but totally impractical design.

Now, if you think that what I have explicitly mentioned aren't "good reasons for pessimism," feel free to disagree - but the burden of evidence is now firmly on your shoulders, not mine.

Edited by Stochasty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this