It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Ion engine could one day power 39-day trips to Mars

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 10:07 AM
There is no way to know if the Tesla flight system is space worthy.
I often wondered if the Moon was ever reached using ether forces.
At 18,000 mph or 300 mps as the top speed in our atmosphere
perhaps the speed will not top out in space.
The speed of light is 180,000 miles a second.
Light speed is only 600 times the top craft speed.
Thus take the light years and divide by 300 and shorten your ride.
Well something like that.

posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 10:24 AM

Originally posted by Wildbob77
When I saw the nuclear power plant, I wondered how do you safely get a nuclear power plant in orbit?

The potential downside of failure in that launch would be huge.

they have already put put a number of nuke power plants up in space, I think all the deep space probes like Voyager and Cassini have had them, they work by taking the heat generated from the natural decay of the nuke material and using a thermal coupler to convert that into electricity.

The material is heavily encapsulated so in theory the launch vehicle can explode in the atmosphere and they should survive, they are even supposed to survive a re-entry (no idea if this has ever been proven).

posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 10:59 AM
reply to post by jkrog08

Great reply.

I loved the video of the force field.

Sometimes it's hard for me to imagine what people are actually doing in the lab in this day and age.

posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 11:01 AM
reply to post by TeslaandLyne

Friction is a limiting factor in speed in our atmosphere.

In space, you don't have friction so you should be able to go much much faster.

I'll have to do some research to see what speeds spacecraft have obtained.

posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 11:16 AM

2 PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY, E. A. Moelwyn-Hughes, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1965. Page 224: Rutherford and Geiger found the number of alfa-particles ejected per second from 1 g of radium was 3.4 x 1010 (k=1.26 x 10-11 sec-1 , later determined by Madam Curie at 1.38 x 10-11 ). Each particle carries two units of positive electricity. This will produce 34 zillion alfa - particles per second, at 4.5 Mev. The number of charges per second, yields huge a amperage which, when stepped down to normal 120 VAC, is staggering. Page 230: 1 atom of radium expels one alfa-particle producing 1.5 billion ions, at 4.5 Mev. Page 231: “One alfa-particle has more than sufficient kinetic energy to bring about all the ionizations which stand to its credit”, and is “..quantitatively sound”.

From here

A current generator must always have a load as when the load is
removed the ion buildup must be removed as the possibility of
damage occurs.

Too much of a good thing, ions, is not a good thing.

posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 11:57 AM
reply to post by Now_Then

those are RTGs not the same thing as a nuclear reactor.

A Nuclear reactor for a spaceship to mars would have to be assembled in space. Also to get the sort of power to make the trip in 30 odd days would require a nuclear reactor with around 70% efficiency. Current tech gives about 20% and even next gen nuclear rectors will give about 45%

lots of work to do.

[edit on 24-7-2009 by yeti101]

posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 12:05 PM
reply to post by yeti101

So more along the lines of nuke sub power plants? I know those puppies use superheated water, I wonder how it would work in space? Water again? Maybe oil

Shielding the crew is going to be important, unmanned vehicles there are a lot less things to consider... Starting with the moaning meatbags and all their little requirements

posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 12:19 PM
reply to post by Now_Then

yes like reactors on subs except alot better. Theres alot more info on whats required here especially if you read the comments.

posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 09:02 AM
Trip to Mars Russian style:

I didn't see the ion space craft.
There must be other videos.

posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 06:25 PM
reply to post by jkrog08

both of your fusion reactors will not work and never will work as it is a lame ass design.the plasma ALWAYS kinks,loses energy and poof!...fizzles out.

that is why fusion reactors will be always be 5 years in the future indefinately...ooops 50 years now...

torus? it is the wrong shape.too many degrees of freedom for the particles.

some people never learn..

what shape is the sun?

posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 06:41 PM
WOW! This is very exciting!

At first, when I read the OP, I thought "39 days? No way!!!. But then, if we figure the trip to be timed at opposition, when Mars is just 35 million miles away, then that would only be about 40,000+ mph to make the trip. Maybe more like 50,000 mph if you consider acceleration from the Earth's surface and then decelleration into Mars' atmosphere. Still, that seems like a very doable number -- maybe three times the speed of the ISS.

I think we should go, and go with the travel parameters of setting up an orbital station, so the subsequent trips could have an easier time of it. I can't help wondering, though, if this would truly be a "round-trip" for the brave souls that elected to go.

Very interesting!

posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 06:43 PM
reply to post by jkrog08

Good job; as usual, you packed a lot of info into your post. You outline some of the possibilities, some of the variables. Thanks for a well-thought out post. Wish I could give you more than a mere star.

posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 05:36 AM
The ion idea sounds great.
If its a success then they can start working on more advanced technology.

posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 05:53 AM
Just as a note, impulse drive on startrek is provided by ion engines.

posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 07:08 AM
they only have to build the reactor in space .. the uranium can be mined from the moon as there was uranium detected recently.

posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 03:54 PM

Originally posted by hisshadow
Just as a note, impulse drive on startrek is provided by ion engines.

I think you will find the pules a supposed to be created by some sort of repetitive nuclear explosions (fusion?)

Several real impulse drives have been built using both regular explosives and real nuke explosions.

An ion drive would not be a great idea, you can only really turn it on or off - when it's on it gives a gental but continuous push, low acceleration - you will never out manoeuvre the Borg with that!

posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 04:11 PM
Columbus's first trip from Spain to America took only 36 days.

It came at a time of growing imperialism, stagnant over populations, disease a great demand for new resources and with a populace in europe that was growing fed up with it's rulers.

What was discovered opened the doors for the continued growth of civilization and allowed people to inevitably immigrate away from their oppressors.

The journey was hard, there were unknown factors and many risks.

Yet it lead to the continued expansion of the civilizations who took notice and companies, nations and individuals who built more ships... The results were far above and beyond what Columbus ever expected them to be.

Sound Familiar

History repeats itself

Nuff said

[edit on 4-8-2009 by mopusvindictus]

posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 01:20 AM
reply to post by KSPigpen

velcro did not come from the space program. that's an erroneous urban legend.

The hook-loop fastener was invented in 1941 by Swiss engineer, George de Mestral[5][7][8] who lived in Commugny, Switzerland. The idea came to him one day after returning from a hunting trip with his dog in the Alps. He took a close look at the burrs (seeds) of burdock that kept sticking to his clothes and his dog's fur. He examined them under a microscope, and noted their hundreds of "hooks" that caught on anything with a loop, such as clothing, animal fur, or hair. [3] He saw the possibility of binding two materials reversibly in a simple fashion,[8] if he could figure out how to duplicate the hooks and loops.[5]

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in