Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Building Tomorrow's Space Battleships with Today's Tech
Space dot COM ^ | 2FR Post 4-25-02 / 1 January 2000 | By Robert Peterson

Posted on 04/25/2002 6:53:02 PM PDT by vannrox

Building Tomorrow's Space Battleships with Today's Tech



By Robert Peterson

special to space.com
posted: 06:02 pm ET
21 January 2000


In the movies, X-wings and TIE fighters dart and weave in dogfights out of a WWII epic. But what if we had to build a maneuverable spaceship that could potentially take evasive actions -- and we had to do it today?


In fact, let's say aliens decided to invade Earth tomorrow. While their gigantic command ship camps in high orbit, their attack fighters cruise above the maximum altitude of our jets, dropping bombs on us.


What do we do?


Earth-shattering kaboom


Bryan Palaszewski, leader of advanced fuels research at NASA's Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, suggests a nuclear pulse propulsion system to power the ship.


"You'd need to be able to avoid spacecraft that could change orbits quickly," he told space.com. "The alien vessel would probably have a really advanced system that could manipulate gravity, and we just can't do that."


The ship would carry many small nuclear bombs, which would be ejected one by one behind the ship and explode.


The explosions would then bounce off a blast shield, called a "pusher plate." Springs and cushioning would support the blast shield to absorb the impact of the explosion and propel the ship forward.


It's kind of like a pogo stick, but instead of bouncing off the ground to propel the stick up, you set off a nuclear explosion under the stick and ride the recoil.


As for moving in other directions, Palaszewski said multiple pulse chambers could theoretically be installed on all sides of the ship, although, he cautioned, "that design would produce some interesting structural problems."


Short of that, he said, such a vehicle could slowly turn itself while explosions propelled it in a different direction .


In a hundred years, experts at the Marshall Space Center expect us to be using a process called magnetized target fusion to move around in space.


John Cole, the center's manager of space transportation research, compares magnetized target fusion to a nuclear pulse engine, only using fusion instead of fission bombs. The resulting explosions would generate huge thrust in the form of gamma- and X-ray bursts.


"You could go anywhere in the solar system and bring the crew home in a year's time," Cole said.








Lots of thrust


How strong would those nuclear engines be?


"Not only would it be fast, but it would use very little fuel," Palaszewski noted. "So the spacecraft would be very compact."


Les Johnson, project manager of interstellar propulsion research at Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., said a nuclear pulse engine would deliver 20 times the thrust of a space shuttle.


Once the ship is built, how would we fight with it? Stressing that this was a purely speculative idea , Palaszewski suggested that a pulse chamber could be put on the front of the ship and used as a weapon.


"I'm sure it'd be OK to just launch a little bomblet at one of those aliens."


Another option might be to simply turn around and aim the nuclear-bomb-launching engine at the target. It's an idea Larry Niven called "the Kzinti lesson" in his Known Space stories, referring to an alien race that learned about it the hard way.


Change the oil and add a new blast shield


Of course, a nuclear pulse ship would have its limitations, Palaszewski said.


Although each chamber could produce several thousand explosions, each explosion would vaporize part of the blast shield. When the blast shield finally wears out, that chamber would be useless and, in the meantime, radiation from the nuclear blasts could endanger the crew.


To offset this problem, Palaszewski suggested the blast shields be made of lead, which absorbs radiation. On a ship with multiple chambers, the cockpit would be put in the middle of all the blast shields.


How far into science fiction are we? Not too far, actually.


Legendary physicist Freeman Dyson worked on a nuclear pulse propulsion concept with a project called Orion in the late '50s and early '60s, creating several working test vehicles propelled by explosives before the 1963 Nuclear Test Ban Treaty ended his research..


"If aliens were attacking, no one would care about a test ban treaty," Palaszewski said.


Back in the science fiction world, Larry Niven featured a battleship powered by a nuclear pulse engine in his 1985 novel Footfall, written with Jerry Pournelle, and it's still a popular SF concept, appearing as recently as Stephen Baxter's new novel, Manifold: Time.





Earth to Mars in two months


In case the hypothetical battle for the Earth goes badly, how could we get really far away, really quickly?


Les Johnson from the Marshall Space Center says we could travel to Mars in as little as two months using a nuclear pulse engine, and it would take only a few more months to reach Jupiter.


Meanwhile, a nuclear pulse engine is probably the most immediately available of many possibilities, according to John Cole, the Marshall Center's manager of space transportation research.


"[Pulse engines] can be built any time," Cole said, while hastening to note that we could also use a solar sail to travel far into space. In cooperation with the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., the Marshall Center is currently working to build a solar sail that would power an uncrewed vessel outside the solar system.


The sail will be made of a super-thin carbon fiber that would catch sunlight like a sail catches wind.


"Light photons hit the sail and push it forward like a rubber ball thrown at door would push it open," Cole said.


The unmanned ship would be six times faster than the Voyager probes which toured the planets of the solar system.




TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: battleship; building; nasa; nuclear; peace; space; technology; war; weapon

M2P2 -- Fast New Space Propulsion System



posted: 08:08 am ET
17 August 1999

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Researchers said Monday they hope to be able to launch a spacecraft that will pass other probes to be the first spacecraft out of the solar system.


Using a new propulsion system known as M2P2, it would be 10 times faster than the space shuttle and could zip by Voyager I, launched in 1977 and currently 6.8 billion miles away, at the very edge of the solar system.


Robert Winglee and colleagues at the University of Washington said they had just received a $500,000 grant from NASA to work on the system.


M2P2 stands for Mini-Magnetospheric Plasma Propulsion. It consists of a plasma chamber about the size of a large pickle jar, or about 10 inches square.


Solar cells and solenoid coils would power the creation of a dense magnetized plasma -- charged gas -- that would inflate an electromagnetic field around the spacecraft.


This field would be acted on by the solar wind -- a stream of charged particles steadily put out by the sun -- and would serve as a kind of solar sail.


The solar wind, while relatively weak, moves at 780,000 to 1.8 million miles an hour. It could theoretically push a spacecraft at speeds up to 180,000 miles per hour or 4.3 million miles a day.


By contrast, the space shuttle travels at about 18,000 miles per hour or 430,000 miles a day.


Last year NASA launched Deep Space 1, which uses ion propulsion. Last month it flew by an asteroid, taking measurements.

1 posted on 04/25/2002 6:53:02 PM PDT by vannrox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Pipe dreams, or maybe bombs. "20 times the thrust of a space shuttle" say 100 millions pounds thrust; accelleration crushes human pilot? Sorry wings don't work in space. There will be no dog fights. MIT AERO/ASTRO '67
2 posted on 04/25/2002 7:13:59 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
Space Battleship Yamato
3 posted on 04/25/2002 7:28:31 PM PDT by GATOR NAVY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
Blanket statements are always incorrect.
4 posted on 04/25/2002 7:44:24 PM PDT by Tony in Hawaii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tony in Hawaii
F=ma
5 posted on 04/25/2002 7:56:06 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
I think the gas core nuclear rocket could be an excellent propulsion system.

Short of using antimatter, the highest reactor core temperature in a nuclear rocket can be achieved by using gaseous fissionable material. In the gas-core rocket, radiant energy is transferred from a high-temperature fissioning plasma to a hydrogen propellant. In this concept, the propellant temperature can be significantly higher than the engine structural temperature. In some designs, the propellant stream is seeded with submicron particles (up to 20%) to enhance heat transfer. Both open-cycle and closed-cycle configurations have been proposed. Radioactive fuel loss and its deleterious effect on performance is a major problem with the open-cycle concept. Fuel loss must be limited to less than one percent of the total flow if the concept is to be competitive.

The open-cycle engine relies on flow dynamics to control fuel loss. With both the open and closed cycle concepts, cooling the engine walls is a major engineering problem. For example, a radiator can be used to actively augment the cooling of the gas-core engine. Specific impulse for a regeneratively cooled engine is limited to approximately 3000 lbf-s/lbm. However, addition of an active cooling system for the engine structure, in addition to regenerative cooling, permits use of a higher plasma temperature, resulting in a specific impulse of up to 7000 lbf-s/lbm. An open-cycle gas core engine is estimated to weigh about 200 metric tons.

The closed-cycle gas-core ("nuclear light bulb") nuclear rocket avoids the nuclear fuel loss of the open-cycle gas-core engine by containing the nuclear plasma in a quartz capsule. Thermal radiation from the plasma passes through the quartz capsule to be absorbed by the hydrogen propellant. The nozzle and quartz wall are regeneratively cooled by the hydrogen propellant. A stage using a large light bulb engine (6000 MW power, 445 kN thrust, 56.8 metric tons engine weight) would be quite large (about 216 tons) and have a low stage mass fraction (0.57), although the specific impulse would be almost 2080 lbf-s/lbm with a T/W near one. A small light bulb engine (448 MW power, 44.7 kN thrust, 15.1 metric tons engine weight) has been designed to be small enough to be compatible with the Shuttle cargo bay with a specific impulse of about 1550 lbf-s/lbm and a T/W of about 0.3.


6 posted on 04/25/2002 7:56:11 PM PDT by Brett66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brett66
Makes much more sense. We built it and it works. Great show about it on one of the Discovery channels recently.
7 posted on 04/25/2002 7:58:18 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
"That's no moon. It's a space station..."
8 posted on 04/25/2002 7:58:39 PM PDT by RandallFlagg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brett66
The most likely advanced propulsion to be used would probably be a nuclear thermal. The Minature Nuclear Propulsion Engine MITEE is a likely candidate. Very small and low-weight, it would be a likely candidate if the defense department or NASA wants to start using them.

MITEE

9 posted on 04/25/2002 8:02:57 PM PDT by Brett66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: vannrox

10 posted on 04/25/2002 8:15:45 PM PDT by green team 1999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson