Jump to content

New AeroSpace craft Propulsion


SUBS17

Recommended Posts

Heaven can design fantastical technology, but recent budget cuts mean they can only show it off on greaseboards. Something 23:5 ''And a Kiwi shall lead them''

:megalol:

 

This is some pretty deep suff right here....

 

 

How do you find these things SUBS17......:megalol:

 

Can you please stick to some credible sources..... I know he has 11 subscribers and all. It just would be a little better if it was a bit more....mmm....technical.

 

Where does the steam come from, water? How does this lift 400,000 tones?

Is that including the water needed?

 

Sounds more like a power plant, they use steam too. They need quite a bit of water to turn into

. You need a lot of water for that and water weight. 1 liter of water = 1.00 kilograms.

i7-7700K OC @ 5Ghz | ASUS IX Hero MB | ASUS GTX 1080 Ti STRIX | 32GB Corsair 3000Mhz | Corsair H100i V2 Radiator | Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVMe 500G SSD | Samsung 850 EVO 500G SSD | Corsair HX850i Platinum 850W | Oculus Rift | ASUS PG278Q 27-inch, 2560 x 1440, G-SYNC, 144Hz, 1ms | VKB Gunfighter Pro

Chuck's DCS Tutorial Library

Download PDF Tutorial guides to help get up to speed with aircraft quickly and also great for taking a good look at the aircraft available for DCS before purchasing. Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you find these things SUBS17......:megalol:

 

 

That's Subs in the video. I'm serious. That's him, that's his YouTube channel. He says he's the ArkAngel Daniel. Which is supposedly an upgraded angel. Like, a BMW with all the options or something.

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does the steam come from, water? How does this lift 400,000 tones?

Is that including the water needed?

 

You see, that is fairly easy if your starting point is a cartoonish understanding of what nuclear reactions or power plants are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You see, that is fairly easy if your starting point is a cartoonish understanding of what nuclear reactions or power plants are.

 

Hay, I'm just a simple sentient kind...not in heaven and just asking a simple question.

 

Forget any pictures then. Where does the steam propulsion come from in this model then? :helpsmilie:

I'll leave this with you zhukov032186.:P

i7-7700K OC @ 5Ghz | ASUS IX Hero MB | ASUS GTX 1080 Ti STRIX | 32GB Corsair 3000Mhz | Corsair H100i V2 Radiator | Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVMe 500G SSD | Samsung 850 EVO 500G SSD | Corsair HX850i Platinum 850W | Oculus Rift | ASUS PG278Q 27-inch, 2560 x 1440, G-SYNC, 144Hz, 1ms | VKB Gunfighter Pro

Chuck's DCS Tutorial Library

Download PDF Tutorial guides to help get up to speed with aircraft quickly and also great for taking a good look at the aircraft available for DCS before purchasing. Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You see, that is fairly easy if your starting point is a cartoonish understanding of what nuclear reactions or power plants are.

 

The heat box superheats water injected which creates thrust, in space the water injection may not be necessary. Fission is not involved in this process, the Aerospace Craft carries water for take off and re-entry which is a different process when compared to the SpaceShuttle. It slowly descends from orbit.:joystick:

[sIGPIC]2011subsRADM.jpg

[/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hay, I'm just a simple sentient kind...not in heaven and just asking a simple question.

 

Forget any pictures then. Where does the steam propulsion come from in this model then? :helpsmilie:

I'll leave this with you zhukov032186.:P

 

water + 4000 degrees C = Thrust :book:

[sIGPIC]2011subsRADM.jpg

[/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That, seriously, is the one part of it that actually makes sense. You heat water, you get steam, which produces thrust, albeit probably not in magic quantities. Everything else about it is just fairy dust. But then, why do I bother?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some interesting aspects:

 

  • 52 Trillion zeros = 0, just with unnecessarily many digits.
  • Plutonium, cobalt and barium melt (and boil!) at temperatures considerably lower than 4000°C.
  • Turning 1kg of water at 100°C into 1kg of steam at 100°C requires 2256kJ of energy, so if you want to vaporize 1kg of water every second, you need 2,256MW of thermal power. Pu-238 produces a decay heat of approximately 570W/kg, so you'll need 4000kg of Pu-238 to produce a mass flow of 1kg/s of steam.

 

 

And no, I don't have anything better to do in the evening than to disprove trolls/nutjobs on youtube.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found one at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)

 

LOL;)

 

SUBS17,

This is how you put together a proper paper on.....Whatever

 

Nuclear-heated steam rocket using lunar ice

 

It's in space (Lunar) moon so they want to dig up the ice and use that for fuel, instead of taking the necessary fuel from earth to get around. It's 1/6 of earth gravity, which helps.

 

Full paper

 

 


Edited by David OC

i7-7700K OC @ 5Ghz | ASUS IX Hero MB | ASUS GTX 1080 Ti STRIX | 32GB Corsair 3000Mhz | Corsair H100i V2 Radiator | Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVMe 500G SSD | Samsung 850 EVO 500G SSD | Corsair HX850i Platinum 850W | Oculus Rift | ASUS PG278Q 27-inch, 2560 x 1440, G-SYNC, 144Hz, 1ms | VKB Gunfighter Pro

Chuck's DCS Tutorial Library

Download PDF Tutorial guides to help get up to speed with aircraft quickly and also great for taking a good look at the aircraft available for DCS before purchasing. Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nuclear thermal rocket engines use (or to be more precise; used, since all experiments with these ended decades ago) fission reactors to generate heat, which they, in layman's terms, do quite well. Radioisotopes do not. They are fine for powering RTGs in Soviet lighthouses, deep-space probes or NASA's latest Mars rovers, but they provide nowhere near enough thermal energy for the proposed use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nuclear thermal rocket engines use (or to be more precise; used, since all experiments with these ended decades ago) fission reactors to generate heat, which they, in layman's terms, do quite well. Radioisotopes do not. They are fine for powering RTGs in Soviet lighthouses, deep-space probes or NASA's latest Mars rovers, but they provide nowhere near enough thermal energy for the proposed use.

 

Radioisotopes make some good heat like a camp fire.:thumbup:

 

At least they did some research for this movie, do like this movie.

 

i7-7700K OC @ 5Ghz | ASUS IX Hero MB | ASUS GTX 1080 Ti STRIX | 32GB Corsair 3000Mhz | Corsair H100i V2 Radiator | Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVMe 500G SSD | Samsung 850 EVO 500G SSD | Corsair HX850i Platinum 850W | Oculus Rift | ASUS PG278Q 27-inch, 2560 x 1440, G-SYNC, 144Hz, 1ms | VKB Gunfighter Pro

Chuck's DCS Tutorial Library

Download PDF Tutorial guides to help get up to speed with aircraft quickly and also great for taking a good look at the aircraft available for DCS before purchasing. Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That, seriously, is the one part of it that actually makes sense. You heat water, you get steam, which produces thrust, albeit probably not in magic quantities. Everything else about it is just fairy dust. But then, why do I bother?

 

The plutonium provides heat for 52 trillion zeros in years so it is a very long lasting form of propulsion. Superheated steam from this would give immense power resulting in an environmentally clean form of propulsion for Aerospace craft. 1 unit could lift over 100 000 tons. So exploration of the Solar system by astronauts is possible, it could even be used for a new form of aerospace airliner that could travel Sydney to London in 4 hours. You cannot however use if for military purposes.:book:

[sIGPIC]2011subsRADM.jpg

[/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nuclear thermal rocket engines use (or to be more precise; used, since all experiments with these ended decades ago) fission reactors to generate heat, which they, in layman's terms, do quite well. Radioisotopes do not. They are fine for powering RTGs in Soviet lighthouses, deep-space probes or NASA's latest Mars rovers, but they provide nowhere near enough thermal energy for the proposed use.

 

Fission results in an instantaneous leap from 4000 to 64 000 degrees C which is impractical for Aerospace flight. This design is unique, no one else has tried it BTW Barium does not melt at all!

[sIGPIC]2011subsRADM.jpg

[/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The plutonium provides heat for 52 trillion zeros in years so it is a very long lasting form of propulsion. Superheated steam from this would give immense power resulting in an environmentally clean form of propulsion for Aerospace craft. 1 unit could lift over 100 000 tons. So exploration of the Solar system by astronauts is possible, it could even be used for a new form of aerospace airliner that could travel Sydney to London in 4 hours. You cannot however use if for military purposes.:book:

Repeating a ludicrous claim over and over doesn't make it any more reasonable. Also, as has been pointed out: what is '52 trillion zeros in years' even supposed to mean? It's like the very concept of numbers is lost on the author there.

 

P.S.: Barium melts at ~720°C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barium does not melt it is created by particle collision. 52 Trillion zeros in years is how long Plutonium lasts before it expires through half life. So as a heat source it is very handy however a better option is magma which is 4000+ degrees C, is not radioactive and is lighter than plutonium although access to magma may have to wait a few years.

[sIGPIC]2011subsRADM.jpg

[/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barium does not melt it is created by particle collision.

 

 

No.

 

 

52 Trillion zeros in years is how long Plutonium lasts before it expires through half life.

No. The half-life of plutonium (Pu-238 ) is approximately 88 years (source). Regardless on how we interpret your nonsensical term "52 Trillion zeros in years" (either 52 trillion years, or 52*10^100000000000), 88 is less. If you start out with 1 kg of Pu-238 you will have 500g after 88 years. And 250g after 176 years. After 875 years, there will be 1g left.

 

 

Sorry to say so, but youtube university and a 100% reality-free diet will not get you the Nobel Prize in Physics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Sorry to say so, but youtube university and a 100% reality-free diet will not get you the Nobel Prize in Physics."

:megalol:

9700k @ stock , Aorus Pro Z390 wifi , 32gb 3200 mhz CL16 , 1tb EVO 970 , MSI RX 6800XT Gaming X TRIO , Seasonic Prime 850w Gold , Coolermaster H500m , Noctua NH-D15S , CH Pro throttle and T50CM2/WarBrD base on Foxxmounts , CH pedals , Reverb G2v2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...