Though fun to see. More interesting than the station keeping (indefinite part) is that it enables ~100km orbits, which are ~5x closer than what remote sensing satellites use today and thus could get 5x the resolution for the same instrument.
Yes, the article also points out that the idea is not new, but rather that this research was focused on addressing practical problems, such as corrosion of the engine's parts.
An Alcubierre drive is not a new idea either, but if someone demonstrated one I would be mightily impressed.
That is an extreme example for multiple reasons, of course, but the point is that the gulf between idea and working thing is often monstrous. Ideas are cheap, implementation is hard.
The thing is is this kind of engine does better than a regular one +big tank of propeller in the lifetime of a VLEO satellite, which due to newer regulation by the US is 5 years, so you don't really need eve a big tank
Basically the attempt to make a Bussard Ramjet work? I just wonder if the drag isn't just too much to overcome, can't wait for their prototype results.
The Earth's upper atmosphere is delicate. It's already being disturbed with rocket fuel residue and particulate space junk. Vacuuming up air and ionizing it risks putting the upper atmosphere even more out of balance.
Very much not a new idea: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_low_Earth_orbit
Though fun to see. More interesting than the station keeping (indefinite part) is that it enables ~100km orbits, which are ~5x closer than what remote sensing satellites use today and thus could get 5x the resolution for the same instrument.
Yes, the article also points out that the idea is not new, but rather that this research was focused on addressing practical problems, such as corrosion of the engine's parts.
> ~5x closer than what remote sensing satellites use today and thus could get 5x the resolution for the same instrument.
I would think a bit less. You won’t get a factor of 5 decrease in atmosphere to watch through and I would guess you’d get more vibration.
Ideas require a ton of research to transform into reality.
100km is the height where meteoroids ablate. You must mean 100k miles and even there the largest meteors start to become visible.
Indeed at the bottom tfb quotes heights of 190-250km for model calculations.
An Alcubierre drive is not a new idea either, but if someone demonstrated one I would be mightily impressed.
That is an extreme example for multiple reasons, of course, but the point is that the gulf between idea and working thing is often monstrous. Ideas are cheap, implementation is hard.
The thing is is this kind of engine does better than a regular one +big tank of propeller in the lifetime of a VLEO satellite, which due to newer regulation by the US is 5 years, so you don't really need eve a big tank
Basically the attempt to make a Bussard Ramjet work? I just wonder if the drag isn't just too much to overcome, can't wait for their prototype results.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bussard_ramjet
Feels like someone SpaceX would be very interested in hiring.
Too bad this wasn’t available for SWIFT.
'contactless, neutralizer-less radio-frequency (RF) helicon plasma thruster'
fairly sure that wins just on the absolute impossibility of creating an acronym , just all business
works in wind tunnel testing.
It may never work then:)
if only it could be used to remove carbon from the atmosphere..
The Earth's upper atmosphere is delicate. It's already being disturbed with rocket fuel residue and particulate space junk. Vacuuming up air and ionizing it risks putting the upper atmosphere even more out of balance.
Could you elaborate on that?
The article mentions "both positive and negative ions are pushed out of the thruster".
Won't the ions eventually recombine?