Just thought you might be interested
--MikeD - 20:49, 10 March 2007 (GMT)
cost due to gravity
This statement is questionable: "The cost of building such a structure compared to earth is greatly reduced due to the 1/6 Gravity" Building infrastructure on the Moon will be extremely expensive compared to Earth. 1/6 gravity helps a little, but does not make it cheaper than Earth. Please reword this sentence. thanks.Charles F. Radley 14:14, 10 March 2007 (PST)
Restructure of Bulk/cargo/passenger and addition of new section
I've tried to restructure the proposed progression from bulk to passenger and add a section on types, but I still find the organizational structure of this article to be unsatisfactory. -- Strangelv 08:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Railroads on MArs and asteroids
"Mars With such a thin atmosphere and no oxygen, Mars has essentially the same dynamics as the moon only with more gravity (better cornering)."
Don't compare Mars to the Moon. Mars has windblown dust, etc. "More gravity" means more materials to construct the railroad.
"Asteroids All asteroid like objects have a gravitational force insufficient for traditional railways. The modifications necessary are two fold. An upper track must be added like roller coaster to be able to go a reasonable speed without jumping the track. All materials must be securely fastened with either lids or binding clamps."
A railroad is definatly not neccesary on an asteroid. Maybe a tether an pully system between two spacecraft hovering above the surface. I would not really bother attaching something to any asteroid, especially a rubble pile, since it would just float away. T.Neo 07:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- It is certainly possible that things could be rigidly attached to an asteroid, even it does happen to be a rubble pile. Ceres for example has an escape velocity of 1140  miles per hour. So things do not just drift away. With a gravity of only 1/36th of a g, things that are dislodged might fly a ways before coming back to ground, but it would be hard to get them into orbit. If it were desired to move something from one point on Ceres equator to the opposite point, it would have to be moved 1500 kilometers. So it is conceivable that a railroad could someday be useful.
- http://en.wikipedia.org article on “Ceres (dwarf planet)”
--FARTHERRED 11:57AM Central Standard Time 17 September 20008
Ceres is an exeptionally big asteroid, if it can be called one at all. I am talking about much smaller objects, like NEOs and the martian moons. Here, railroad is not necessary, but some other system of propellantless goods transfer would be ideal. T.Neo 07:28, 18 September 2008 (UTC)