It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: EarthPilgrim
originally posted by: Nibbles
Hoping with 4 hours getting to the moon that the first vessels will not be manned???
Just a quick calculation here : If the average distance from the Earth to the moon is around 384,403 km (semi-major axis)
Then that means that the speed for travelling would be roughly 96,000 km per hour.... Thats a hell of a lot of G force?
But then again, maybe I am wrong?
Plus, I am wondering how the craft would actually land without crashing flying at those speeds?
a reply to: neoholographic
Hey Nibbs, I might be wrong but gravitational forces are only relevant when near planetary bodies no? I'm not an expert by any means and I probably should have looked this up before posting (I'm feeling lazy) but I believe - perhaps wrongly, that in the dead of space, G forces would not apply.
originally posted by: windlass34
to get to the Moon in 4 hours would require a constant acceleration of at least 7.3 G for two hours and then constant deceleration -7.3 G for two hours, maximum speed achieved would be around 53 km/s (33 miles per second) which is roughly 190,000 km/h (177,500 miles per hour). Nothing like this was ever achieved.
well you could put the thing in a gimbal and rotate it and thus the thrust direction around. or assuming you could miniaturize them enough (operating frequency would have to go up as dimensions went down which presents materials engineering problems) you could have arrays pointed in X Y and Z axis for directional control.
originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: neoholographic
I read this on another site and one commenter asked a very good question:
"how do you slow it down?"
Does this EM drive have some kind of 'retro thrusters' that counteracts inertia or would conventional rockets still be needed to slow it down?
if it is heat; there is no point because there are numerous ways to do that which have better trust.if it is simply a standard rocket in disguise there is no reason to pursue it. the various EM drive camps (pro side) beilve it is not a standard known force and is reactionless though they all have their theories of why it works. the NSF DIYers (engineers, Physicists, and just talented fabricators) are swarming all over it with thier own theories and more importantly thier own equipment builds.
originally posted by: BlackmoonJester
If I understand this correctly, NASA is testing this engine out to see if it creates thrust, and they have detected some, but the thrust it may be creating is possibly due to heat. My question is, so what? If it's getting thrust from heat, yet it's using no fuel source, isn't that pretty good? So we're using solar energy to get it started, which in turn kicks on the microwaves, which gives us thrust and heat. Awesome. Another question I have is what keeps the microwaves going once you get away from a solar source?