Lockheed says makes breakthrough on Fusion Energy project

One thing I'd like to add, is the significance of the press release from THE SKUNK WORKS.
They don't talk about what they do, so for them to make a statement about what they are doing is a clue as to just how important it really is.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Can I get one of these for my Delorean?

Homesick, mighty chisler? Have I got a cam for you :
Actually that would be thread drift, and drifting is counter
productive to drag racing. I'm sorry... but you should have
seen that 801ci Buck, it'd probably fit too....

Back to reality (?)--
I had a feeling with most here the disclosure would be in
line with the commercial potential of the rollout.
Ergo, the little cat got stuffed back in the bag, and Big Oil
will likely not feel much of a bite in profit margin. It just smells
too much like that jet that replaced the China Clipper.
Cheaper tickets, not really...

originally posted by: punkinworks10
One thing I'd like to add, is the significance of the press release from THE SKUNK WORKS.
They don't talk about what they do, so for them to make a statement about what they are doing is a clue as to just how important it really is.

As I lamented to Augustus in so many words, it sounds too
much like "The Doctor will see you now." Hope I'm wrong.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Don't they already have a portable laser system that could be combined with this engine on there smss?
I

I may have mis-interpereted what he said, but I had never thought of that. I always wondered exactly HOW fusion would create power, by which method, but if I understand this guy right, you can use the fusion/plasma itself to drive a sort of gas (or plasma?) turbine? Quite innovative. Let us hope this can happen before his projected timelines.

a reply to: Thorneblood

The rail gun, airborne laser, MTHEL, just to name a couple.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I found a video interview with the team here from an article on aviation week. High hopes

Is it me or is that the engine they are working on in the video?

I ve been thinkin that the x 37 has been carrying a test model reactor, and it has been running for nearly the whole time.
Think about it, they had a theory, and the engineering to try it, but how can you hide it if it fails
catastrophically failed.
Put it in orbit and light it up , if it blows you can make up something to explain it.
From it's size it just same size as the cargo bay on the x37.
I'll also wager that another fundamental discovery has been proven, like direct generation of electricity from heat, without a mechanical conversion, such turbines or steam generation.
Like Zaphod said it's the size of a smallish jet engine, and a 100 megawatts is 134 102.209 horsepower, that's a lot of umph.

a reply to: Thorneblood

Videos don't work well on my phone but if its the same as the pic I saw earlier that's the current reactor.

originally posted by: chuck258
I may have mis-interpereted what he said, but I had never thought of that. I always wondered exactly HOW fusion would create power, by which method, but if I understand this guy right, you can use the fusion/plasma itself to drive a sort of gas (or plasma?) turbine? Quite innovative. Let us hope this can happen before his projected timelines.

The issue is not the fusion itself.

You can achieve fusion in a variety of ways.

The problem is deriving any useful power out of it.

To make a turbine run from fusion, you need a controllable and repeatable process that gives significant net energy.

a reply to: punkinworks10

He specifically says just that in the video I linked. Fusion powered turbine engines plugging directly into the current system exchanging heat for other fuel sources.....

It is the engine they are working on but there are a couple smaller looking devices laying around they dont really acknowledge. They also state, flatly, they can design and produce one engine a year for the next five years. 20 years to wide commercial use. I'm betting its closer to ten years til market.

a reply to: GargIndia

Who said it will run an engine though? I can think of several uses besides engines. The B-1 is a great example. They had to remove a generator to save weight to reach its top speed. So it can't run everything it needs to.

If it carried a pocket reactor it would have almost unlimited power for onboard systems.

a reply to: Nicorette

Funny - ITER is a multi-billion project, mainly European, which gradually makes progress. Now, America had a very small share in that projject, but Senate proposed to withdraw from the project entirely. Than suddenly the Americans present this, and this after they already presented a cheaper and better alternative for ITER on October 13th. Coincidence, of course... and surely has nothing to do with the fact ITER is partially run by China and Russia, which, as we all know, have booming economies and will spent billions on ITER in the future. When you see China, Europe and Russia develop fusion and don't want them to know you don't have zilch - what do you do? You do what Americans do: set up a nice show.

I'm not so sure about the Skunkworks claim. If you listen carefully to what is being said you'll notice that there are a lot of assumptions and no proof. Maybe Skunkworks was overclassed by humble Washington University, or maybe they heard their bosses say "ITER is doing fine, they'll get there in 20 years time." - and decided to get a piece of the funding themselves by promising a 10 year deadline.

Fancy clips don't mean anything. Back in the day I used to closely follow Steorn (Ireland). They said they found "Free energy" (something to do with rotating magnets). They had an ad in the Economist. They had fantastic clips like the one we now have from LM - but they even went further: they promised to deliver and set themselves a deadline. Never delivered anything - unless you think that a bathtub fawcett with built-in heater is something that creates unlimited free energy..

a reply to: ForteanOrg

Russia doesn't have what i would call a booming economy, amd China hacks us so much they easily could have gotten their info in other ways.....
As for this project, well it sounds like your jsut kicking up dust for no other reason then to be on the negative side of this breakthrough. I guess its just not possible that various groups in the US would be working on similar technological paths before one came out as a fore runner...especially considering both of your alternatives aren't even built yet! Your big ITER project was full of delays and cost over runs.


The uw thing is neat, a small proto type engine is impressive but their focus seems to be power plants and not engines...

After the horse has bolted isn't it.... they have discovered nothing that wasn't already known France Fusion Reactor A bit like America inventing the car...

a reply to: DreamerOracle

Lol again...ok
Explain to me, please, how an article from 2005 about a power plant that has yet to appear is comparable to a compact fusion drive the size of a jet engine....

a reply to: MysterX

Two TOTALLY DIFFERENT technologies but that is obviously LOST on you!!!

originally posted by: ArcAngel
This is both fascinating and incredible! I was reading about this and thinking that the greatest source of H3 is on the moon. Bombarded billions of years with cosmic rays. Incredible power density.

And then I remembered the great work Zorgon did (old timers on ATS will remember him) about the US space force. Run by the air force. He had done also some research on patents for Lunar mining.

And then I thought it was odd that an aircraft company develops a fusion reactor? Why I thought. Why?

So I thought a little more and remembered that the X37B had returned from a long, long mission in space. So what does this have to do with Lockheed Martin who had the fusion break through? After all, Boeing made the X-37B. And then I researched that and I came to find out that the X-37B was a JOINT development with Lockheed Martin.
www.space.com...

So, here's a thought. The X-37B went to the moon, picked up some H3 for fusion fuel, returned to earth with a full payload (that could power the USA for 6 months). Lockheed Martin confirms the mission was a success and coincidently (not) makes a press release about nuclear fusion.

So why, why would Lockheed Martin develop a fusion reactor? What's really behind the curtain?

No way the X-37B has the capability to even break earths orbit let alone get to the moon, LAND then get home again.

a reply to: Thorneblood

Aren't you a bit gullible?

Deny ignorance - wasn't that our motto? Isn't it fairly ignorant to think that the US of A suddenly developed technology "on it's own" that it also tried to obtain by participation in an international project? Why spent good money on trying to develop a car if you have a prototype in the barn? Nope, I don't believe it for a second.

A break through is a break through. Show me the working fusion reactor. Oh, yeah, right: that will still take years - if it ever happens. But certainly, if we finally have safe unlimited energy, we'll celebrate.

I have seen way too many promotional videos from various commercial companies to believe they actually reflect the truth. What most probably happened is that the news that the Senate wants to withdraw from ITER triggered Lockheed Martin to set up this commercial to try to get funding from the Government for their proprietary project.

BTW: I'm not a big fan of ITER: it swallows money like a whale plankton. It promised to deliver way back in 2013 and still hasn't shown us a working prototype. I'm not part of a pro- or contra tribe, FYI.

originally posted by: Thorneblood
a reply to: ForteanOrg

Russia doesn't have what i would call a booming economy,

Are you American, by any chance? For you seem to have a bias.

Wikipedia:

Russian economy is the sixth largest in the world by PPP. Between 2000 and 2012, Russia's energy exports fuelled a rapid growth in living standards, with real disposable income rising by 160%. In dollar-denominated terms this amounted to more than sevenfold increase in disposable incomes since 2000. However, these gains have been distributed unevenly as 110 wealthiest individuals were found to own 35% of all financial assets held by Russian households. Since 2008 Moscow has been repeatedly named the "billionaire capital of the world" by Forbes.

According to the IMF, the Russian economy was already in recession from early 2014 mainly as a result of the 2014 Crimean crisis and the subsequent capital flight. But this turned out to be false and the IMF revised it's rhetoric to close to being in recession and a forecast of 0.2% growth in 2014 and 1.0% through 2015.