[BigCinBigD]

What about the rest of the ship?

:^)

[piytar]

Carter /spit signed off on a treaty that killed the Orion project, which by now would have us moving at a significant fraction of c (speed of light). So I’m sure obama will sign off on something similar that will kill this. Why? Because they are both first and foremost anti-America, and this kind of advance is too much for America to own in their putrid minds...

[dr_lew]

A mission trajectory study estimated that a VASIMR-powered spacecraft could reach the red planet within 40 days if it had a 200 megawatt power source. That's 1,000 times more power than what the current VASIMR prototype will use, although Ad Astra says that VASIMR can scale up to higher power sources.

What couldn't we all do with a thousand times more power.

[eclecticEel]

It’s not gonna get us out of the Earth gravity well - where the real obstacle to space travel lies.

[Pontiac]

Ad Astra sees nuclear power as the likeliest power source for a VASIMR-powered Mars mission, but the nuclear reactor that could do the job remains just a concept on paper. The U.S. only ever launched one nuclear reactor into space back in 1965, and it achieved just 50 kg/kW.

Kiwi Rockets

Kiwi A rocket

[mountainlion]

Sounds real convenient on the timing. Could be the global warming equivalent for getting funding for space.

[Beowulf9]

Mars ping.

[Brett66]

This has been under development since the 70’s, it’s hardly a new technology.

I’m glad to hear Franklin Chang Diaz has went into the commercial field though, they should be able to get these working as positioning thrusters for satellites.

This propulsion is like anything else, they COULD do a lot with it - if they had a MW class nuclear reactor to power it.

Since that’s a political barrier instead of a technical one, I don’t suspect we’ll progress past where we went in the 60’s with that idea, but a lower powered solar version may actually get used in space.

[Rockitz]

New? Pfffft! This concept has been on the books for decades. Looks like another laboratory experiment that won’t scale to the power and propellant load requirements of an actual vehicle. I’m also wondering how safe this will be to test on the ISS. I’ll bet the safety folks have not reviewed the requirements for this yet either.

[Flavius]

Why don’t they just fire up that Roswell thing

[Iron Munro]

And let’s not overlook the fact that you have to slow down as you near your destination - on both legs, out and back.

Traveling at such high velocities requires a significant source of power to slow down - such planetary gravity, plasma engines, rockets, etc.

[Spaghetti Man]

We ain’t going anywhere with O in charge. Ever since Mondale they’ve been trying to kill NASA, and now they’ve succeeded.

[Forgiven_Sinner]

Just reading the title, and being an old space flight fan, I thought, “The only drive that could do that in 40 days is ion drive.” “Ion drive” is what I call plasma drive—basically, strip atomic nuclei and then accelerate them for drive. This gives very efficient, continuous acceleration.

I was pleased to see I was right, but not pleased they have not come up with a better technology. The canonical method of interplanetary space flight is to build the ship in orbit. You use a lander at your destination (Mars, moon, whatever) and then return the ship to orbit. This has been known my whole life (54 years)

The big issue with space flight is commercial viability. Once we make money doing it, then private enterprise will take over. I propose creating a geosynchronous solar energy station big enough to power the US. From the profits from that, build another over Hawaii. From those profits, build a third. Then you will control the world's energy supply and no longer need to worry about oil or money.

[r9etb]

a spacecraft could make the trip in just over a month using the engine and a large enough power source

It's that "large enough power source" that's the hard part. Power requirements for the sort of engine in question run in the kilowatts per newton of thrust.