Jump to content

List of new propulsion systems


bartekkru99
 Share

Recommended Posts

I thought that the Epstein drive was explicitly a fusion torch?

What the show doesn't say is what kind of fusion reactor it is.... Inertial confinement, magnetic confinement, beam colliders, dense plasma focus... etc.

"Fusion Torch" doesn't say what method is used to achieve fusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, KerikBalm said:

I thought that the Epstein drive was explicitly a fusion torch?

What the show doesn't say is what kind of fusion reactor it is.... Inertial confinement, magnetic confinement, beam colliders, dense plasma focus... etc.

"Fusion Torch" doesn't say what method is used to achieve fusion.

 

24 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

The are fundamentally the same but the difference is that fusion drives are realistic and Epstein drives are just have a magical amount of isp.

 

So they literally took an existing concept, and slapped a cool name on it just so they could fudge the ISP numbers and have cool-looking ships. Welp; not the worst iv'e ever seen in Science Fiction, but still kinda silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, KerikBalm said:

I thought its Isp was fine, but its thrust was way to high, like the "even at 99.9% efficiency, the waste heat would instantly vaporize it" kind of high.

I remember seeing that.....i think Scott Manley talked about that; also pointing out that many of the ships of the expanse have no visible way to dump that heat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

 

 

So they literally took an existing concept, and slapped a cool name on it just so they could fudge the ISP numbers and have cool-looking ships. Welp; not the worst iv'e ever seen in Science Fiction, but still kinda silly.

Yep that's what TV shows do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 11/14/2019 at 1:44 AM, KerikBalm said:

I thought that the Epstein drive was explicitly a fusion torch?

What the show doesn't say is what kind of fusion reactor it is.... Inertial confinement, magnetic confinement, beam colliders, dense plasma focus... etc.

"Fusion Torch" doesn't say what method is used to achieve fusion.

If you read the books of The Expanse, you'll see that they make mention of pellets of deuterium-tritium ice. So that points to the Epstien drive being an ICF drive with power for the drive coming from an ICF reactor instead of being harvested from the drive pulses. (please do read the books, they're great reading and all available on Amazon Kindle as well as hard-copy).

Like others mentioned, the ISP and thrust are cranked up quite a ways because it's fiction, and the heat magically disappears, but such a drive is not beyond the laws of physics. As a matter of fact, Project Dadelus is a study that proposed using a two-stage ICF fusion torch to get a probe out to a stable orbit of Alpha Centauri within 100 years of launch, and that's no mean feat considering that fusion drives are basically the minimum viable drive for interstellar travel within the local stars within the span of a human life.
Anything less than a fusion drive of some sort will mean you go so slow you're going to have to build a generation ship or get cryo-stasis working due to the long travel times. Personally, I trust cryo-stasis more than I trust a generation ship because with a crew and passengers in cryo-stasis you don't have to worry about the civilization on board deciding they don't want to build a colony at the other end of the journey, or just going insane and forming a suicide cult. Among many other reasons, those two are why I don't think generation ships will work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 11/13/2019 at 2:48 AM, herbal space program said:

My only beef with metallic hydrogen is I can't see what it really gets you. Is it that much denser than ordinary liquid hydrogen? Even if it is, that only reduces the volume of it you need to carry, not the mass. Meh!

 

On 11/13/2019 at 6:02 AM, herbal space program said:

Yeah, I can see how the phase transition itself could store a lot of energy, but my bet as to what physical substance could contain it effectively is essentially nothing.

So its the same basic principle as a can of compressed air as a rocket, or the old fireless locomotives https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fireless_locomotive

Now decades ago, there were some calculations about what pressure would be required to obtain metallic hydrogen, and what pressure would be required to keep it metallic. The calculations for the pressure required were waaayyyy off.

Back when they were making those (incorrect) predictions for required pressure, a paper or two suggested that maybe you could release the pressure after making it metallic, and it would stay like that unless sufficiently disturbed. So you wouldn't need some heavy, incredibly strong container with a horrible mass fraction to store it (which would render it useless)

Now just because their model was wrong doesn't mean there is no metastable form of metallic hydrogen.

We seem to have made metallic hydrogen, and it wasn't metastable. However, as Ice has many forms as it gets more compressed, maybe metallic hydrogen does too.

There is always the possibility that there is some even more compressed form with different properties (note: as work/energy put into it is a matter of force over distance, the forces involved in compressing it even more are enormous, but the distances are miniscule, so don't expect much of an Isp increase).

If such a metastable form existed, it would be amazing. Without it, you are relying on mechanical strength to store energy, and you might as well say you have a drive that uses a spring made of an uber-material/scrith/ unobtanium to launch pellets or whatever (mass is mass for momentum purposes) for propulsion. When you've fully extended the spring, you need a service station to recompress it and load more rocks for it to launch... Or something like that.

I just want to see a hint that such a metastable form can exist.

To me the criteria of "you can't prove that it is impossible" is not what we should use to determine what kind of drives to put in ksp 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/8/2019 at 11:46 AM, KerikBalm said:

To me the criteria of "you can't prove that it is impossible" is not what we should use to determine what kind of drives to put in ksp 2

Besides, even if it's metastable enough to be containable with something lighter than Jool, how are you going to get to it? I think Helium-3 fits the bill a lot better as a difficult-to-get resource that enables a super-efficient propulsion system.

On 11/30/2019 at 2:35 AM, Wilhelm Kerman said:

I just watched that video and it is absolutely stunning... :0

The Kerbals actually have fingers! Also, I thought it was said there'd be no BG parts, but those stations had rotating segments.

Edited by herbal space program
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, herbal space program said:

Besides, even if it's metastable enough to be containable with something lighter than Jool, how are you going to get to it?

You could make it. It seems we've been able to make a minute amount of metallic hydrogen (that reverted to non metallic as soon as pressure was released) after all.

Quote

I thought it was said there'd be no BG parts, but those stations had rotating segments.

Well, it could be an entirely new rotating part that isn't the same one as in BG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I've been trying to figure out what the last unknown propulsion system is, and so I've been re-watching the trailers etc. At 2:02 in the announcement trailer, does that look like the ICAN-II drive? The "nozzle" area kind of looks like this:

 ICAN-II_engine.jpg

It's an antimatter-catalyzed microfission/fusion drive.

I'm not sure how the other ones have been confirmed, I wish I could get a hold of Nate Simpson or someone in the dev team to ask them about this or other propulsion systems, but I also know they're very busy. I also dont know if this has been suggested yet.

Here's where I first heard about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwS_aHfE6Es

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
55 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

You may want to be more overt as I have no clue what you're talking about.

In your opinion, which engine is best suited for interstellar travel with "existing" technology?
If we exclude such a thing as warp engines and antimatter engines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, OOM said:

In your opinion, which engine is best suited for interstellar travel with "existing" technology?
If we exclude such a thing as warp engines and antimatter engines.

Cant you just tell us? :(
I guess I’ll bite >,< lightsail?

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Dale Christopher said:

Cant you just tell us? :(
I guess I’ll bite >,< lightsail?

 

Just now, Dirkidirk said:

z-pinch fusion or ICF combined with a magsail. Or a laser/maser powered lightsail.

Laser Sail ... well, this thing will serve as the basis for the probes.
But if you need to dump a few tons of cargo, then probably, as the person wrote below, this is a Z-Pinch or ICF.
But right now we are talking about the ICF, or rather, Deadalus.

But the problem is that Daedalus will not work, but in the game it will be similar to the working method of interstellar travel.

Why? well, at least two reasons
1. The national means of ignition didn’t manage to achieve normal and trouble-free ignition of the deuterium-tritium capsule.
If there are such problems with a deuterium-tritium capsule, then I’m even afraid to imagine what kind of problems there will be with the ignition of a deuterium-helium-3 tablet.
2. The fact that in its current form ICF Daedalus will not work is said by people directly related to this area.
http://www.icarusinterstellar.org/e-beam-icf-for-daedalus-reconsidered/

KSP is a kind of simulator in which scientific accuracy has a major role to play.
You say, but this game allows things like scientific hypotheses.
Yes, I agree, but there is one big BUT.
This is something that we have not yet explored, the path to the unknown or an almost complete confirmation of operability.
But in this case, we are fully aware that Deadalus will not work in real life.
Nevertheless, developers add it to the game. With such success, why not add the details for the Imperial Star Destroyer?
I see here only two more or less adequate options
1. Do not offer this game at all.
2. To completely rethink the principles of Daedalus from a modern point of view.
Perhaps this is not even a confirmed hypothesis, but at least it will not be known. And she will have a chance to really work.

But adding the obviously useless Daedalus in the form of an engine with the ICF in accordance with the plans of the 1980s is kind of crazy.
The same metal hydrogen engines are more likely.
For even from the most skeptical point of view, this is a scientific hypothesis, which has not yet been refuted, but also not confirmed.

At that time, it would seem that the working Daedalus was refuted back in 2013.
At least again, in the form in which it was originally, and which will be in the game.

It is written through google translator, so ... confusion is possible.
7fbad68fc0097479415f100d472b727e.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/15/2019 at 8:24 AM, KerikBalm said:

I thought its Isp was fine, but its thrust was way too high, like the "even at 99.9% efficiency, the waste heat would instantly vaporize it" kind of high.

Yes an fusion engine can have very good isp but the problem is efficiency and heat.
If your reaction is only charged particles it help a lot. 
You can make an primitive pulsed fusion drive today, however this is not an fusion reactor, it uses energy, so you need an reactor or solar to power it, and power is an constrain, power restrict how often you can fire off pellets, still its much better than ion as you get bonus energy from the fusion engine is larger than ion however. 
If you have an good fusion reactor you can use it as an engine too, issue is again heat. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, OOM said:

In your opinion, which engine is best suited for interstellar travel with "existing" technology?
If we exclude such a thing as warp engines and antimatter engines.

Antimater is possible but idiotic expensive and even more dangerous. Warp engines is pure sci-fi. 

Gameplay vise I feel the setup could work.
No not very happy with the metalic hydrogen setup, realism and also the ISP is not that fantastic. Had it been expensive but powerful setup so you could get 700s on an 2 ton  200 KN engines in high trust configuration with an option to get 1500s with low trust then yes. Now it looks more like an beefed up Nerv using weird fuel. 
Rather have advanced fission engines and early fusion ones. 
Orion, yes love them, perfect for moving heavy stuff fast, however the engine is huge and scaling down don't work well. You can also not land with them, yes you can use secondary engines and interesting landing leg systems on lower gravity worlds. 
Assume they will be expensive to run as nuclear bombs are expensive. 
While orion is nice its not an starship engine.
Daedalus fit that niche larger than Orion bu also has higher ISP and cheap fuel once you extracted it. 

And some OP engine found on an spaceship wreck on an super Venus 20 LY away. Who you need to extract and return to KSC to unlock. 
Love the idea, you won the game anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/24/2019 at 10:06 AM, [email protected] said:

Ok guys. I do hate to remind you but look carefully in the first 20 or so seconds of the announcement trailer.

 

it clearly says NOT ACTUAL GAMEPLAY! 

Note you may need to just let it play because that disclaimer was DELIBERATELY PLACED to be completely obscured by the you tube time slider overlay.

 

seriously its a old advertising trick. Make the game look better than it actualy is then pretend you made it obvious that the trailer is non representative.

it' not actual gameplay might just mean the graphic aren't as good as in the trailer (your GPU will explode), and you can't set camera angles in these ways.

 

On 2/22/2020 at 4:58 AM, magnemoe said:

Antimater is possible but idiotic expensive and even more dangerous. Warp engines is pure sci-fi. 

Gameplay vise I feel the setup could work.
No not very happy with the metalic hydrogen setup, realism and also the ISP is not that fantastic. Had it been expensive but powerful setup so you could get 700s on an 2 ton  200 KN engines in high trust configuration with an option to get 1500s with low trust then yes. Now it looks more like an beefed up Nerv using weird fuel. 
Rather have advanced fission engines and early fusion ones. 
Orion, yes love them, perfect for moving heavy stuff fast, however the engine is huge and scaling down don't work well. You can also not land with them, yes you can use secondary engines and interesting landing leg systems on lower gravity worlds. 
Assume they will be expensive to run as nuclear bombs are expensive. 
While orion is nice its not an starship engine.
Daedalus fit that niche larger than Orion bu also has higher ISP and cheap fuel once you extracted it. 

And some OP engine found on an spaceship wreck on an super Venus 20 LY away. Who you need to extract and return to KSC to unlock. 
Love the idea, you won the game anyway. 

with existing tech, I would say that something that the spacecraft itself aren't that powerful and independent, which a light sail will be fine. also, even we don't have controlled fusion out of the lab yet, but we do have hydrogen bombs, which allows project Orion to work. Also, even I'm not sure if it will be available in this century or not (fusion definitely will), the Alcubierre warp drive is not pure sci-fi, it's based on general relativity, and NASA Eagleworks is working hard on it.

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...