|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2007 6:20 pm
Kurzon_Dax Steven Hawkings Kurzon_Dax Steven Hawkings Kahalm I like the concept behind "ram jet" engines. Not to be confused with the airplane "ram jet". But anyway the thought is if you have a massive scoop that could collect even the extreamly small concentration of usable particals in space (mostly Hydrogen) and use them as a fuel to burn for propulsion. It would take a very long time to build, and a very long time to get up to speed, however, once it gets going it can obtain (theoretically) an speed 1/2 light or so... Theoretically... Sorry, my sources on that is print and telivision only, so I cant link... Anyway, I must note about conventional methods of propulsion. Even if you where able to make a rocket that couold approach light, You really wouldnt be able to tell many people. Since realitivity comes into play Your trip to the nearest planet (outside our solar system) and back may be only 30 years, but for everyone else it may be hundreads, or thousands... By then you'd be comming back in an antique. Another method is use He-^3 on the moon as a way to get cheaply to Mars, or send the ship to Mars a year in advance while on the planet it would extract the needed material in order to get the fuel to get home. Though chemical rockets only go so far, and using hydrogen as a means is far better due to the fact that its the most common element out there, though its still a theory. I bet my money on solar sails since its a proven techolongy. I've heard of that, im sort of doubtfull though. Not about the propulsion, but the strain on the human body in OGs that long, it could have some ill effects. Well yes, that is the major concern, two years in space makes bones weak and the heart also. It also realeses pressure on muscles, which make them longer, and they arnt in use. They could spin the ship really fast to simulate something like gravity....maybe. Though for some reason its not the full effect of gravity still on the human body like Earth.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 1:26 pm
Solar Sails would be a good propulsion method for interstellar travel since you would not have to worry about running out of fuel. Starting off around the area of Venus would probably be sufficient and then using the gas giants as gravity boosts would set you on your way. I personally like the nuclear pulse propulsion method, Project Orion. The shear engineering feats this would have to overcome would be amazing. But since there is such concern because it using essentially atomic bombs, I doubt this project will ever come off the ground. I think there is another variation of this called "Medusa", which uses the nuclear explosions as the driving force of a sail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 9:06 am
Fires Fuel Solar Sails would be a good propulsion method for interstellar travel since you would not have to worry about running out of fuel. Starting off around the area of Venus would probably be sufficient and then using the gas giants as gravity boosts would set you on your way. I personally like the nuclear pulse propulsion method, Project Orion. The shear engineering feats this would have to overcome would be amazing. But since there is such concern because it using essentially atomic bombs, I doubt this project will ever come off the ground. I think there is another variation of this called "Medusa", which uses the nuclear explosions as the driving force of a sail. The only problem with sails is when you want to reverse. Using the gravity pull of other planets as a slingshot is a tried and tested method. I think a lot more research will have to be done on stabilising the energy release of nuclear reactions, whether fission or fusion. The problem with finding energy sources is the age-old problem of the first law of thermodynamics: energy cannot be created or destroyed, merely changed from one form to another. Therefore, we must have an energy source that can be renewable if we wish to maintain continuous acceleration (remember that we do not have to offset the force of friction in space) or have great amounts of standby fuel. Photocells are one possibilty that are currently being used, however in deep space their efficiency would have to be greatly improved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2007 10:21 pm
Seanchaidh Fires Fuel Solar Sails would be a good propulsion method for interstellar travel since you would not have to worry about running out of fuel. Starting off around the area of Venus would probably be sufficient and then using the gas giants as gravity boosts would set you on your way. I personally like the nuclear pulse propulsion method, Project Orion. The shear engineering feats this would have to overcome would be amazing. But since there is such concern because it using essentially atomic bombs, I doubt this project will ever come off the ground. I think there is another variation of this called "Medusa", which uses the nuclear explosions as the driving force of a sail. The only problem with sails is when you want to reverse. Using the gravity pull of other planets as a slingshot is a tried and tested method. I think a lot more research will have to be done on stabilising the energy release of nuclear reactions, whether fission or fusion. The problem with finding energy sources is the age-old problem of the first law of thermodynamics: energy cannot be created or destroyed, merely changed from one form to another. Therefore, we must have an energy source that can be renewable if we wish to maintain continuous acceleration (remember that we do not have to offset the force of friction in space) or have great amounts of standby fuel. Photocells are one possibilty that are currently being used, however in deep space their efficiency would have to be greatly improved. Yep, and what therirthinking is using space as the energy source. with all this high enerpthy as space is there most be some full floating around that can be extercted every place a ship goes. they are in the process of determine a average for certain particles like uranium and other elements contained in space. Though I don't know how they plan on doing this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 6:32 am
Nuclear Space Craft, Ehh, not really gonna happen.
Anti matter, That could happen if we could come up with a alternative way to make anti matter.
Ion Engine, It would take way too long to get a good thrust before earths gravity pulled you back in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 7:31 pm
I still think we should make a colony in Venus's high-atmosphere before we try to get anything past Mars unless it's a probe. There's just too much opportunity closer than we think and most people downplay the habitability of our other female neighbor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:41 pm
almisami I still think we should make a colony in Venus's high-atmosphere before we try to get anything past Mars unless it's a probe. There's just too much opportunity closer than we think and most people downplay the habitability of our other female neighbor.
To stay in orbit around Venus would cause a bone decalcification and genetic mutation (bigger brains, less muscle)...how could the human race live with that? What benefit's could we get out of Venus anyways?
First we'd have to detox the atmosphere around Venus; that process alone could take hundreds of years, not even thinking if it's a non-reversible process...!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:34 am
Steven Hawkings Kurzon_Dax Steven Hawkings Kurzon_Dax Steven Hawkings Kahalm I like the concept behind "ram jet" engines. Not to be confused with the airplane "ram jet". But anyway the thought is if you have a massive scoop that could collect even the extreamly small concentration of usable particals in space (mostly Hydrogen) and use them as a fuel to burn for propulsion. It would take a very long time to build, and a very long time to get up to speed, however, once it gets going it can obtain (theoretically) an speed 1/2 light or so... Theoretically... Sorry, my sources on that is print and telivision only, so I cant link... Anyway, I must note about conventional methods of propulsion. Even if you where able to make a rocket that couold approach light, You really wouldnt be able to tell many people. Since realitivity comes into play Your trip to the nearest planet (outside our solar system) and back may be only 30 years, but for everyone else it may be hundreads, or thousands... By then you'd be comming back in an antique. Another method is use He-^3 on the moon as a way to get cheaply to Mars, or send the ship to Mars a year in advance while on the planet it would extract the needed material in order to get the fuel to get home. Though chemical rockets only go so far, and using hydrogen as a means is far better due to the fact that its the most common element out there, though its still a theory. I bet my money on solar sails since its a proven techolongy. I've heard of that, im sort of doubtfull though. Not about the propulsion, but the strain on the human body in OGs that long, it could have some ill effects. Well yes, that is the major concern, two years in space makes bones weak and the heart also. It also realeses pressure on muscles, which make them longer, and they arnt in use. They could spin the ship really fast to simulate something like gravity....maybe. Though for some reason its not the full effect of gravity still on the human body like Earth. It's different than the effect of Earth's gravitational force becuase the energic pull is regulated on Earth, and is precise in force exerted. It'll take a hurdle in technology to artificially produce an equal gravity/matter balance that mimics Earth and the primary area we live in, atmospheric shpere-wise. There's also partle concentration in the air that may affect it, just from the added mass, interaction tween particles, and extrenuous electrons floating about. People keep looking for specifics, but tend to ignore the whole. We shouldn't focus soley on gravitational correction in spacecraft, but particular mimical corrections as well. You can have a fixed gravity the same of Earth, but gravity is not the only factor. Sorry if I sound like a rambling noob, but it's true. And I suck at describing things. xp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
