Slashdot Mirror
New Engine Raises Possibility of Cheap Travel To the Moon
shreshtha writes with this intriguing bit from The Daily Mail: "A tiny satellite thruster which can journey to the Moon on just a tenth of a litre of fuel could usher in a new low-cost space age, its creators hope. The mini-motor weights just a few hundred grams and runs on an ionic chemical compound, using electricity to expel ions and generate thrust. The tiny motor isn't built to blast satellites into orbit — instead, it's to help spacecraft manouevre once they're in space, which previously required bulky, expensive engines."
To whom shall I write the check as I securely invest my life savings?
Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K.
Seriously, I can travel to the Moon with no fuel if I start in the right position with the right momentum. TFA doesn't tell us much unless the secrets are hidden in the video I'm blocking on the bottom of the page.
Sorry to self-reply, but:
Can we stop having summaries posted where the only link goes to the Daily Mail? Every human should be disgusted that our species can produce something as wretched and pathetic as that hive of stubborn ignorance.
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
Who would have guessed this got posted by Timothy!
Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
The new thruster has nothing to do with getting to the moon or even getting into space. It's a way for a small satellite to maneuver once it is in orbit. It could possibly be used for getting into lunar orbit from low earth orbit, but its intended purpose right now is to help clean up debris.
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/enginelist.php#id--Ion
It's a great site which details (with lots of math) the various problems with space travel.
I do not think that the news is that they reinvented it, and seriously everyone on /. knows of the about ion-engines so there is little point in even mentioning it. But that here is a practical use of that engine that works better then anything else we are currently using.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
is launching to space from earth/moon surface. Traveling once there, and landing (at least in earth) could be relatively inexpensive. But once the space elevator, space fountain or other approaches are built and gives us relatively cheap ways to reach space, this kind of approachs could make a difference.
Anorexic hamsters, possibly. Even Kate Moss weighed more than a kilogram.
(You must be American and unfamiliar with SI units.)
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Maybe we can try 'right position and right momentum' with Timothy'. A good swift kick in the kiester would do him some good....
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
The propulsion system emits ions at high speed (40 km/s) and is thus very efficient at converting propellant mass to satellite momentum. Thrust is low, but given time, ver lge orbit chanegs are possible. for example, in order to reach lunar orbit from low-Earth orbit, a 3-kg nanosatellite with our motor would travel for about 2 years and consume about 500 grams of fuel" - Herb Shea
This ion thruster is unique by its extremely small size. we have miniaturized not only the ion emitter, but the entire thruster including high-voltage electronics and tank. Our complete thruster has a mass of 200g (including 100 ml of fuel), thus allowing it to be used on nanosatellites. It is the first high efficiency electric propulsion system that can be used in cubesats and 5kg satellites, such as those being planned for OLFAR The principle of operation of colloid thruster a bit different from the ion engines used fro instance on SMART-1, which uses ionize Xenon. in our case, we use a particular conductive liquid, an ionic liquid, from which we can extract both positive and negative ions. using a liquid avoids a pressurized tank, and allows for important simplification of the system (no valves, no heavy tanks, all flow controlled by capillary and electrostatic forces. using the ionic liquid allows the same speed as using a gas, but offers one big advantage: since we emit (from 2 chips in parallel) both positive and negative ions, the spacecraft stays electrically neutral, which is essential for electric propulsion to avoid having the ions fly back to the spacecraft. for more conventional electric propulsion systems, only positive ions can be emitted, so a neutralizer is needed to emit electrons to keep the spacecraft charge neutral. not having a neutralizer allows significant mass and power savings.
I'm biased, 'cause I work on this!
http://lmts.epfl.ch/microthust
- Herb Shea
Parent link is bad. Try this:
http://lmts.epfl.ch/microthrust
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.