« first day (615 days earlier)   

4:02 AM
you mean cable catapult?
 
yeah. it looks like it is meant to achieve the same thing but be a lot smaller.
i suppose it comes with different problems, but it seems simpler at first look
of course, they make a passing reference to it only. i wonder if one can find that Robert Forward paper.
 
I keep in mind similar approach(or the same but with different material, which is kinda undefined future stuff, and it makes it kinda significantly different)

but a 1m thick beam, at let's say 100-1000km length can be considered like a rope by any means, so all that is not that much different
What I would like to see(and it is a problem for different types of climbers) the mechanism which do actually that cable gripping and moving on it. As an example, nasa had a competition between devices which climb that flat band/cable, and the problem isn't that simple easy as particular implementation
here, they say about 30 times of characteristic speed of the material, wow, tempting, very excited, but I would like to see on the magic, take look at behind the scene even in theory.
 
yeah. maybe i'll see if i can find the paper.
but it is something i might do after other things are looked after
they have it behind a paywall. written in 1992.
 
4:20 AM
I would google by myself if I were more interested in those and have believed in a higher probability of success of such search.
But keep as note if you see some meaty enough ideas about what such a mechanism may be in other cases could be, less handwavium and more drawings, keep in mind it is interesting topic
 
4:33 AM
https://sci-hub.io
is not working correctly at the moment, have some troubles with domain, and there seems to be other prblems too
 
try that one
 
eh, seems to be useless in the sense I'm used to )
yeah, somethin is defintly broken. Someone needs punishment, I hope they will disclose info what happened and who to blame ...
'll take look later when they fix things
 
5:03 AM
ok, superconductive hexagonal cable desighn, in a similar fashion as the link you posted on the topic recently.
>Since a Cable Catapult is not rotating, it is
not obvious t h a t a Cable Catapult w i l l have t h e
same t y p e o f p r o b l e m s a s a r o t a t i n g c a b l e .
However, it would be reasonable t o expect t h a t
something similar might happen, and it would be
prudent to c a r r y o u t d e t a i l e d analyses and s c a l e
model t e s t s on any Cable Catapult design before
using it to launch payloads a t v e l o c i t i e s near o r
above the velocity of sound in t h e cable material.
yeah, great, - we do not know and we didn't any simulations whatsoever to determine something about that.
 
 
10 hours later…
2:46 PM
yeah, scihub isn't nearly as ambitious as i thought it would be when it started. i suppose it will gain ground over time.
so you got the paper? that's it?
because i'd like to have it too...
the paper written in 1992 probably couldn't have simulated this without access to an expensive mainframe
 
 
2 hours later…
4:20 PM
yes I got it. the problems seems to develop further, so the link does not work for me now, so check email, send it.
 
:) Thanks
 
ah, yes, true 1990, sweet 90's, poor time
stone age
 

« first day (615 days earlier)