Jump to content

Fusion Propulsion


NSEP

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, sevenperforce said:

Depends on the type of nuclear reaction. One cannot use a chain of thermonuclear bombs as a fusion reactor; even though Q>1 fusion is taking place, the reaction is so energetic that it would be impossible to contain the heat and pressure enough to produce a sustained reaction. Same thing here, though on a much smaller scale.

Which prompts the question: would it be possible to use a ship-mounted railgun pair to fire a nuclear bullet at a target in outer space?

You could scale up an ship engine some order of magnitude, add some water an a nuclear bomb then piston is on top :)
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MatterBeam said:

I don't understand. Could you elaborate?

What's the tradeoff between using railgun-launched kinetic-ignition fusion bullets (where the fusion fuel is fired at the target alone and compressed to fusion on impact) and dual-bullet railgun-initiated fusion shots?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, sevenperforce said:

What's the tradeoff between using railgun-launched kinetic-ignition fusion bullets (where the fusion fuel is fired at the target alone and compressed to fusion on impact) and dual-bullet railgun-initiated fusion shots?

Oh there's no tradeoff. The two concepts use the same mechanism to start a fusion reaction, but the version I posted here is a propulsion method while the fusion bullets I will post about is a weapon.

Edited by MatterBeam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, sevenperforce said:

Depends on the type of nuclear reaction. One cannot use a chain of thermonuclear bombs as a fusion reactor; even though Q>1 fusion is taking place, the reaction is so energetic that it would be impossible to contain the heat and pressure enough to produce a sustained reaction. Same thing here, though on a much smaller scale.

Which prompts the question: would it be possible to use a ship-mounted railgun pair to fire a nuclear bullet at a target in outer space?

To someone with no fusion background, what NIF (national ignition facility, a laser confinement program) looks a lot like a small scale thermonuclear bomb.  I'll admit confining the thing with a laser vs. heating with a nuclear explosion is significantly different.  But it certainly is a series of thermonuclear explosions.

The railgun sounds feasible, but you realize that the explosion is going to be going right back at the railgun?  With laser confinement you might get away with mirrors downstream of the blast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MatterBeam said:

Oh there's no tradeoff. The two concepts use the same mechanism to start a fusion reaction, but the version I posted here is a propulsion method while the fusion bullets I will post about is a weapon.

Off-topic:

You're the blog writer for tough sci-fi!!??

 

Back on topic (Not related to your post): So, seeing as we could build fusion rockets with current tech with either super large solar panels or fission reactors. So, I'm wondering, how soon could we build one, how much would it cost, and how far could we get (Assuming an unmanned probe, not crewed)?

Edited by Spaceception
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Spaceception said:

Off-topic:

You're the blog writer for tough sci-fi!!??

 

Back on topic (Not related to your post): So, seeing as we could build fusion rockets with current tech with either super large solar panels or fission reactors. So, I'm wondering, how soon could we build one, how much would it cost, and how far could we get (Assuming an unmanned probe, not crewed)?

Yes, I am. :D

How soon? About ten years. It would take about 10x the development cost of the Falcon 9, so about 10-20 billion. The problem is that absolutely no-one wants or needs a first generation fusion spaceship.

By first-generation, I mean it relies on fission-ignited fusion pulse units for propulsion. It is the most accessible technology. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MatterBeam said:

Oh there's no tradeoff. The two concepts use the same mechanism to start a fusion reaction, but the version I posted here is a propulsion method while the fusion bullets I will post about is a weapon.

Assume the weapon design is that you shoot the bullet at an target and you get fusion then it hit something, how will this work if you hit target at a angle, not straight on? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...