It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Nuclear fusion for space propulsion

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 05:24 PM
link   
If this EmDrive works out we are on our way.

www.digitaltrends.com...




posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 07:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: DonVoigt
I don't know enough about this myself to know if it is realistic. So I'm posing this question to the ATS community to learn more. It is to my understanding that a nuclear power plant is like essentially a high pressure steam engine in where high pressure steam is sent through a turbine which spins electrical generators. Well what if you take the spinning turbines out of the equation and have straight pipes coming out of the back of the spacecraft using that high pressure steam as the propulsion system for the space craft. Would that or would that not be a workable system to propel you through space.


It would not be, as steam requires water.. Think about how much water is required, stored on a spaceship.

However, what I am wondering is what other uses of nuclear power could be used on spaceships beyond electricity and so on?



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: DonVoigt


That would work perfectly.

But how much water do ya think it would take to get to mars? If you need to carry that much water you might as well carry a more efficient fuel.


I don't think that steam from a nuclear reactor has enough lift to get the spaceship out of the gravitational pull of the Earth, beyond the problems with water storage requirements.



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

I agree that it would not be enough to get you out of the atmosphere, gravity and drag would inhibit that, however in space there is no gravity or drag



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: DonVoigt
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

I agree that it would not be enough to get you out of the atmosphere, gravity and drag would inhibit that, however in space there is no gravity or drag
so then you mean once out in space. Still, the amount of water you would need would be space/weight prohibitive.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: DonVoigt

There is gravity on everything everywhere....technically a star a billion light years still exerts 'some' force on you, technically virtually zero to a rather large point but it still exerts some force.

Drag could still be a factor as small particles traveling the opposite way hit your craft it will make a very small change due to impact.

The numbers normally are very low but over a long distance its going to cause problems.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: DonVoigt

Here is the Wikipedia entry on electric powered space flight: Electrically powered spacecraft propulsion.

Not all of them have been actualized as a prototype. The Hull drive has though. They are going to add a small one to a CubeSat to test it out. As noted in the entry, this type of drive is nice for puttering around short distances (like the solar system). For interstellar travel another mode of movement will be needed (at which point you would really need mass reduction).

Have fun making your brain hurt thinking of the impossible!



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Well, how about "slow" fusion?

Instead of detonating all the fuel at once in a fusion explosion, how about we just fuse a little bit of material at a time and let it stream out the back of the rocket? Kind of like the way a bomb and a chemical rocket are basically the same things but detonated differently. Blast the fuel out the back (maybe even from a web of smaller guns so it won't build to critical mass too early, hit it with a massive laser, and "burn" it, rather than detonate it. You wouldn't have to carry all that water.

My other plan is to create a "phantom mass" at the front of the spacecraft by lens focusing gravity waves so that the spacecraft continuously "falls" toward it. The problems with that one, of course, are fairly obvious, including carrying a power plant large and powerful enough to generate and focus gravity waves.
edit on 29-9-2016 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 09:30 AM
link   
Essentially, you are describing a fission fragment rocket of which there are several designs. There have been various concepts to produce a reactor based rocket since the 60's . The simplest being a reactor pile with the coolant vented to a rocket nozzle.
Fission Fragment
More amazing stuff here
Nuclear thermal




top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join