Slashdot Mirror
New System Propels Satellites Without Propellants
cylonlover writes "Astronauts on the International Space Station (ISS) are testing a new propulsion system ... inside the station. While this might seem like the height of recklessness, this particular system doesn't use rockets or propellants. Developed in the University of Maryland's Space Power and Propulsion Laboratory, this new electromagnetic propulsion technology called the Resonant Inductive Near-field Generation System (RINGS) uses magnetic fields to move spacecraft as a way to increase service life and make satellite formation flying more practical."
So these work like magnetic torquer bars?
"While this might seem like the height of recklessness, this particular system doesn't use rockets or propellants" ... just magnetic fields, so that's ok then, good think there's no electronic equipment up there or anything!
(I'm sure they know what they're doing, it's just that the summary seemed retarded.)
This technology has been used in hoverboards since at least 2015.
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
Why don't they just use magsails?
Don't stop where the ink does.
"Electromagnetic formation flight (EMFF) gets around this propellant problem by turning the satellites in a formation into electromagnets. By using a combination of magnets and reaction wheels, spacecraft in formation can move and change their attitude and even spin without propellant. Satellites can change their polarity to attract or repel one another, turn, or shift their relative positions in any manner that doesn't require changing the center of gravity for the entire formation." So its all about formation flying, the satellites will pull/push off each other to remain in the correct formation. They will still needs propellent to move the whole cluster, but they can stay in formation without using any fuel.
Very cool technology but its not a reactionless drive sadly. The magnets merely allow a swarm of sats to hold a formation in relation to each other.
Oh well... darned laws of physics getting in the way again!
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
This is for positioning satellites relative to each other. The applications are things like telescopes made of several spacecraft to create a mirror larger than what is practical to launch in one piece.
But this isn't an engine that will allow a satellite to stay in orbit without fuel. They still need a traditional engine with propellant for everything besides adjusting the distance between nearby satellites.
You are right, but there are currently about 6000 man made satellites in orbit (only about half of which are functional) and only 70 odd probes which go beyond earths magnetosphere so it's not like a huge number of vehicles couldn't use this technology. Especially since Satellite life times are normally limited by propellant they can carry
Also, just off the top of my head Jupiter and Saturn have magnetospheres.
These comments are my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the other voices in my head.
Either you use the magnetic field to move your ship, or you use the difference in potential across long wires to generate power.
This is robbing energy from the Earth to move the space station. Quick, someone call Al Gore!
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Or, does everybody else think the guy in the picture is scared to death of the terminator like spacecraft floating around the cabin?
Also...why has it (apparently) taken us almost 65 years to make our own working versions of the propulsion systems used by the alien spacecraft that crashed in Roswell and stored in Area 51? Huh?
Actually, this is pretty cool. Now, the bigger question is whether these devices will be able to maneuver in open space or will they require a magnetic field (Earth, stellar, etc) to function? What is the, theoretically, maximum "thrust" and velocity these craft will be capable of achieving?
Sounds like this is basically only useful to help maintain a low-power consumption orbit of heavenly bodies with strong magnetic fields(aka just earth in our solar system). As in it wont work at all, when removed from the earths magnetic field.
It certainly isn't an unobtanium reactionless thruster, which would be nice; but given the economic importance of nearish-earth satellites, giving them a lifespan limited only by solar panel decay and/or technical problems, rather than propellant load, is a pretty nice little upgrade.
From what I understand in the article, it's a technology for formation flying. You can generate your own magnetic field anywhere, using one of the spacecraft, and use this "non-natural" magnetic field from one of the other spacecrafts.
Rings? Cmon? I can't be the only one who instantly makes this connection...
As with any technology, wait until the public gets its' hands on it. I can easily see this type of propellant being used in roads, elevators, in our shoes (fuck stairs - we Americans are lazy)... this will be fun
Sounds like they'd be better off just figuring out how to put a gas station in space and have all the of the satellites simply stop for a fill up from time to time. Can you imagine the fuel prices at that pump?
jsut athnoer menagiensls ltitle psrhae for you to dcoede. Why do we wtsae our tmie dnoig tihs?
How do they work?
Why we can't do this more simply with gyroscopes and an electrodynamic tether?
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
That's the idea, except the gas station is called Sol and it's supplying fuel to everywhere remotely.
You dufus.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
There is no solar panel decay in space.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Tank Farm Dynamo by David Brin (1983)
No, maybe you should try reading the article?
It has nothing to do with actual propulsion (despite the title) - just changing the relative positions of groups of satellites without changing the center of mass of the group. External (nonuniform) magnetic fields would cause problems (I suspect anyway) making the task more difficult and limiting just how far apart things can get while still using this system.
Because that requires satellites to leave their working orbit for refuelling.
A propellant, by definition, it anything that propels.
So how the hell do you propel without a propellant?
This is a "propulsion system" if you assume that other satellites are your reaction mass. Let's see how effective it would be to get to the Moon by flinging satellites out the back of the spacecraft.
Relevant TV clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Uqv6hlXKU4k&t=25
Solar panel decay is much faster in space than on the ground, anywhere from a factor of 2 to an order of magnitude worse depending exactly where and what kind of solar panel you use. Radiation damage can reduce light transmission of any covering, and increases leakage currents. Thermal cycling and UV damage can at least be designed around to some degree, limiting your choice of what materials to use. Without other bottlenecks, and if limited on how much initial excess capacity you could build into an array, decay would limit operations to a time scale on the order of a decade.
THis is just changing the orientation of subunits and spacing of subunits without changing the center of mass. It would not seem magical if theywere connected by gears. Here they are doing it with magnetic coupling. But there's no "propulsion" since that implies changing the center of mass.
the chinese have a method for massless propulsion however:
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2008/09/chinese-buildin/
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Propellant-less floating robot on a spaceship? There must already be footage of the thing floating around with a laser pointer attach and the astronauts swinging tools while making light-saber noises. At least that's what I would do.
Interesting. Opens up the possibility of an orbital tug boat. The real satellite can be moved around the tug boat.
I was immediately taken by how RINGS resembles a fictional spaceship.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
You better let Nasa know that then Geenyus ...
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/361716main_SMI_Problem8.pdf
Just getting harder and harder to say something with tongue in cheek on /. without people trying to take it literal. Geesh...my nerd friends really are lacking in any creative thought related to humor. I'll spell it out next time and put something at the end that says, "This is a joke. Please reserve your derogatory comments for those that are seriously stating something silly. This is meant to be silly and absurd. If you take it literally, you are a dufus.
jsut athnoer menagiensls ltitle psrhae for you to dcoede. Why do we wtsae our tmie dnoig tihs?
Isn't something that PROPELS an object, by definition, a PROPELLANT?