Mixing two systems.

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Skyskimmer

Guest
Alright I'm just gonna assume you all know what power transmission from solar satelites, and vasmir are. But what about combing the two? Can this be done. Just curious also could this same tech be used on earth for air industry?
 
S

SteveCNC

Guest
Re: Mixing too systems.

While I am sure it could be used effectively at short range to transfer power to perhaps some new capacitor array for power storage but Vasmir is generally thought of as either a long duration motor for distances like mars and beyond or for station keeping in orbit . Although if the graphs are correct it may be possible to get the efficiency near 100% with a fairly high thrust which could really turn into a game changer .

As for use on earth , I'm not that crazy about the possibility of ionizing our atmosphere any more than we already do by beaming power all over the place . Plus the possibility of something crossing the path of the beam is a bit high for use in human travel I would think .
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
Re: Mixing too systems.

"Mixing too systems."

I would strongly suggest that if you expect to be taken seriously, you buy a dictionary and learn how to use it.
 
S

Skyskimmer

Guest
Re: Mixing too systems.

I would suggest if you wanna be taking serious as a mod stop attacking people on grammatical errors, I'd love to see you work in a place where english isn't a first language, you'd have a grammatical melt down. Regardless, as I said I struggle with these type of things I don't like being insulted on a daily basis on this stuff.

Regardless, even as a moon to leo, tug system it seems like it'd be far cheaper and efficient weight wise, to have one solar platform fueling multiple engines, instead of having a nuclear engine on every tug, or worst have massive solar arrays on each tug reducing it's efficiency, by increasing bulk weight. On top of that this type of mutual investments, I think makes each other part that much cheaper.
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
Re: Mixing too systems.

I've only commented on two of your hundreds of posts, every one of which contains numerous spelling (not grammar) errors. So your statement that I insult you on a daily basis is false. I could, but I don't.

And I am speaking as a user, not a moderator...I make it clear when I am acting as a mod...

Finally, frankly, it's embarassing to the SDC site when topic titles have gross spelling errors. It degrades the quality of the site. In posts, I don't care as much. But in topic titles, where everyone who looks at a forum sees it, it upsets me very much.

As I said, buy a dictionary and use it...at least for thread titles, please.

This will be my last post on this side subject.

USER MW
 
B

bdewoody

Guest
Grammer errors indicate a basic lack of education or the lack of mental power to use said education properly. That is why MW and others like myself shudder when we read some of the posts here in SDC where the members should have a mastery of elementary english.

And most people for whom english is not their first language are much better educated in english than apparently many Americans and they can spell words properly. It's one thing to occasionally mis-spell a word but something else when a poster uses a wrong word entirely. Combing is not the same as combining, look them up and maybe you will figure out why MW gets so upset.
 
B

believer_since_1956

Guest
Re: Mixing too systems.

SteveCNC":3j9sbm1q said:
While I am sure it could be used effectively at short range to transfer power to perhaps some new capacitor array for power storage but Vasmir is generally thought of as either a long duration motor for distances like mars and beyond or for station keeping in orbit . Although if the graphs are correct it may be possible to get the efficiency near 100% with a fairly high thrust which could really turn into a game changer .

As for use on earth , I'm not that crazy about the possibility of ionizing our atmosphere any more than we already do by beaming power all over the place . Plus the possibility of something crossing the path of the beam is a bit high for use in human travel I would think .
There are a few issues which makes me doubt the claimed 100% efficiency
1. Assuming that the RF Power Amplifiers are Class C operation they only achieve 90% efficiency for pulsed operation the Vasmir requires continuous operation for ionization of the propulsion plasma.
2. The driver stages might achieve 75% efficiency so from an Rf standpoint we are at 67.5% efficiency.
3. A nuclear reactor is a thermodynamic engine the maximum efficiency of a thermodynamic system assuming no friction or loss due to electrical resistance is 80% total efficiency is now 54%.
4. There are other issues such as the mass of the radiators to get rid of the excess heat from the reactor and control electronics.
5. How to build a reactor with low enough mass to get into orbit
6. International Treaties regarding fissionable masses in orbit.
7. See the Mars Society Utube videos concerning issues about the Vasmir system it has some serious problems I was there for the session it is most informative.
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
There's really only two explanations for anyone claiming near 100% efficiency for any system.

They are lying, or they don't understand anything about real physics.

As for anyone who believes them... :roll: :roll:
 
V

vulture4

Guest
Power transmission would probably be ineffective over distances of much more than GEO-to-earth and even then it requires quite a large antenna; at some slightly greater distance the receiving antenna would be heavier than the solar cells to generate the power on the spacecraft. It might be feasible for space tugs in earth orbit provided one could avoid pointing the beam at the earth, where it might really irritate people. That said, there have been science ficiton stories involving propulsion of interstellar spacecraft (too far from the sun for solar power) with huge lasers in orbit.
 
N

neilsox

Guest
Solar power satellites can be built using lasers instead of microwaves. This much reduces the spot size, making your idea more practical. Perhaps we will do this in 40 years or so. Present problems are 1 the the solar power satellites are too costly 2 We haven't built one yet, except very low power 3 Small spot size at high power is dangerous and potentially destructive 4 The theoretical range is limited to about 40,000 kilometers, so most craft would be out of range most of the time, unless we build hundreds of solar power satellites. Perhaps the practical range can be increased to several million kilometers, and the solar power satellites can be in solar orbit instead of Earth orbit, but that assumes extensive human presence throughout the inner solar system. Neil
 
G

gbmartin

Guest
bdewoody":24onuani said:
Grammer errors indicate a basic lack of education or the lack of mental power to use said education properly. That is why MW and others like myself shudder when we read some of the posts here in SDC where the members should have a mastery of elementary english.

And most people for whom english is not their first language are much better educated in english than apparently many Americans and they can spell words properly. It's one thing to occasionally mis-spell a word but something else when a poster uses a wrong word entirely. Combing is not the same as combining, look them up and maybe you will figure out why MW gets so upset.
I love it when someone attacks the "grammer" and spelling of another person and can't even spell the word grammar.
 
A

annodomini2

Guest
All this talk of solar panels and lasers, why not concentrate and focus the suns light onto the photovoltaics of the space craft?

Along the lines of a reflector telescope, but the output can be oriented?

You lose power in the conversion, photovoltaics are about 40% efficient at best and lasers are about 10% (please correct me). Then you have a second phase of photovoltaics at the craft.

So best case 0.4 * 0.1 *0.4 = 0.016 pr 1.6% efficient. Not including losses.

Ok a mirror setup is also not going to be 100% efficient, but I think it would be better than 4%.

Secondly, you might be able to use the system to at least heat up, if not vaporise earth bound asteroids. Maybe even deflect them.
 
S

Skyskimmer

Guest
gbmartin":1rwvy8lj said:
bdewoody":1rwvy8lj said:
Grammer errors indicate a basic lack of education or the lack of mental power to use said education properly. That is why MW and others like myself shudder when we read some of the posts here in SDC where the members should have a mastery of elementary english.

And most people for whom english is not their first language are much better educated in english than apparently many Americans and they can spell words properly. It's one thing to occasionally mis-spell a word but something else when a poster uses a wrong word entirely. Combing is not the same as combining, look them up and maybe you will figure out why MW gets so upset.
I love it when someone attacks the "grammer" and spelling of another person and can't even spell the word grammar.
Appears he lacks basic education by his own forum of logic. Whatever dude look up what it means to be dyslexic. You act like I've never learned to spell the words I have trouble with. It's not a flipping reading disorder. It's pretty hard wired, and is neurological in nature but your high level of education would already know that.

When I raed I see ervetinhg lkie tihs I sgtrugle to tpye the simpliest stuff.

That's how I see things, you can give me all the dictionary's you want, unless I spend hours proof reading what I type there will be errors.

MW are you kidding what's worst for your forums reputation, a dyslexic that can't spell, or a mod who harasses someone on their learning disability.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY