The new Vasimir engine soon to be tested in space

The new vasimir engine if proved to work has the ability to open deep space up, and make a trip to mars truly feasible.

The new rocket is named Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket (VASIMR). A traditional rocket can produce a specific impulse of around 450 seconds, or in other words 1 pound of thrust from 1 pound of fuel for 450 seconds. VASIMR can produce several times this amount, cutting a trip to Mars from 6 to 9 months with conventional rockets down to a mere 2 to 3 months. It could do this by being able to burn fuel continuously the whole trip accelerating on the first half of the journey to Mars and decelerating on the second leg of the journey, preparing to enter orbit.

Article: www.dailytech.com...





So what do you guys think? Is this the future of inter planetary travel within our solar system?

I'm sure this is the beginnng... though i wonder how practical this would be for travel over comparatively short distances. these are low-thurst engines (i.e they produce relatively less thrust per second at any point in time, so no "kick in the pants acceleration")...

BUT over long distances ( such as to mars, or even the Jovian planets) the constant thrust rockets could well put them well within reach... Imagine outposts on europa, callisto and titan, refueling points for even FURTHER journeys...

Yeah i agree. I doubt this tech would be used for short ranged stuff. It is low thrust and only operates in a vacuum.

I've been following Chang-Diaz and VASIMR for a while.

I am really looking forward to this test - this could be the motor that opens up the Solar System to mankind.

well nobodys mentioned the elephant in the room yet,

For tests at the station the engines power will be supplied by the ISS solar panels. For a full scale mission to mars we're talking an onboard nuclear reactor. Similar to what we have in submarines

I'm cool with that but greenpeace & the wider public need to be convinced.

The engine seems to be a step in the right direction, cutting the trip from 6-9 months down to around 3.
However i wont get really excited about real manned solar system exploration until the travel time is cut down to weeks or days rather than months.

Yeti101, i like the QI reference with the elephant in the room line.

To get anywhere relatively fast in the near term future theres going to have to be some sort of reactor on board. I agree Greenpeace would have objections to this, but we already have tons of them floating around in our oceans which pose much more of a risk. The only dangerous part is getting the reactor through the atmosphere and into orbit.

reply to post by rufi0o


yep the US navy has operated nuke subs for over 50 years without a core breach. Thats why im cool with it.

But do you remember the hoopla when casini was making its earth flyby? Poeple were talking about a catastrophe if something went wrong and its RTG fell to earth. All the hype when in reality there was zero danger.

The greens are powefull in parts of the world. Germany is decomming some nuclear power plants becuase the greens dont want them. Most peoples knowledge of nuclear power goes as far as the movie "the china syndrome" which really is the source of most peoples fear of nuclear technology, well that and chernobyl didnt help.

We will need a major pr blitz to overcome this problem.


[edit on 14-8-2008 by yeti101]

The Public sector may use this for interplanetary travel but the Government is using better means already.

Its a large step for humanity though. Now more and more scientists will be able to anwser more and more questions through research that this will allow them to do.

What better means is the goverment using already?

I like these sort of engines, they should work really well for our current and future needs in space, i just wish we had something that got us into orbit easily and cheaply right now, oppening space up is the most important thing we could do.

reply to post by just theory

i just wish we had something that got us into orbit easily and cheaply right now, oppening space up is the most important thing we could do.

[edit on 16-8-2008 by NGC2736]

Sounds like a roller coaster ride from hell, sign me up for that!

This Vasimir engine is really cool, and I hope it works out.

I agree that the next step really needs to be a cost effective way of getting into orbit. I believe once space is a little more accessible without all the launching pad rocket hoopla stuff, that we will see some real developments in space travel and technology.

Hopefully at some point the space elevator will open up space access to the masses. At the moment we have to rely on private companies such as spaceX who are doing a good job at bringing down launch costs, I just hope their next launch actually makes it to orbit,

Vasimir can open up the door to hybrid solutions. Eventually we can use hydrogen ram scoop ships to harvest fuel in space, and power combination vasimir / hydrogen ships for optimum time efficiency travel. You need to get permanent stations out to an end point to harvest the fuel. Some could be transported back and some could boost the return trip. The trick is always in making the bootstrap process as practical as possible.

We need to get harvesting, refining, and manufacturing bootstrap facilities into space. Once that is achieved, there is no limit to scale possible, so even slow becomes practical.

A ship is far more slow than a jet plane, yet tankers and cargo ships abound. Scale is their efficiency. When you need to boost it out of earth's gravity well, scale is relatively tiny.

[edit on 18-8-2008 by Cyberbian]

Originally posted by NGC2736
There was an idea floating around a few years back about building a track down one side of a mountain, and back up another to allow some form of jet to attain space flight.

A few years farther back than you might think...

I happen to be reading Robert Heinlein's The Man Who Sold The Moon (1949!) at the moment, and the original idea for launching the lunar rocket was to build a track/catapult system built up the side of Pike's Peak.

He also correctly predicted the method that was actually used to get to the Moon - a multi-stage chemical rocket - although he was a bit wrong on the date, which he had pegged as 1978.

Still, not too shabby a prediction for 1949

reply to post by xmotex


My father-in-law is a physicist who worked a NASA for a while. He was also a personal friend of R.A. Heinlein. For the past ten or so years (after NASA) he's been pushing the idea of a rail launched vehicle. Based on maglev technology, the track would be about 300 miles long. It would be enclosed in a reduced pressure tube. Once the thing was built the $/lb to orbit would beat anything current or on the drawing boards.

The problem has been the initial capital outlay. It would be errm..astronomical.


[edit on 18-8-2008 by Phage]

reply to post by NGC2736


That idea was floating around 55-60 years ago, and was used in a 50's sci fi movie.
It doesent work, you dont gain any energy from such a system.
The gravitational potential energy you gain going down the mountain is negated by the climb up the other side, all you do is use energy but get no work done.

The big problem with the launch sled/rail launch ideas is the insane accelerations needed to put something in orbit. With a track 300 miles long you can limit those accelerations but you still wont get anything into orbit any more efficiently. Because a rocket is self powered it accelerates in proportion to the loss in mass of fuel. The more fuel it burns the faster it accelerates, because it gets lighter. It dosent reach escape velocity until it is at very high altitude and there is almost no atmospheric friction.
A ballistic projectile decceleerates once it leaves the launcher so you would have to leave the launcher at escape velocity plus any losses due to the sizable air resistance and all of the losss due to gravity.
So instead of 17500 mph to reach orbit you'll have to start out leaving the launcher with a siazable increase in initial velocity, lets say on the order of 25-30k mph

reply to post by punkinworks


Everything you say makes sense. "Dad" was telling me about it in a late night session with our mutual friend Jack D. For some odd reason I can't recall a lot of the details and there were plenty.

The reason for the low pressure tube was to reduce drag on the vehicle. The exit from the tube was at a high enough altitude to equalize the pressure in the tube. Can't recall just how the elevation of the tube was achieved (mountain, ridiculous scaffold?). There may have been a booster that ignited at some point after leaving the rail....like I said, there are gaps in my memory but the system made sense to me...at the time.

He got kind of mad when I told him it sounded great but it would never get built.

Edit to add: The power was to be provided by orbital solar panels beaming power to the surface via laser (his real specialty). Again it works on paper but building it is an entirely different matter.


[edit on 19-8-2008 by Phage]