Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Steam fires underwater jet engine
New Scientist.com ^ | 29 January 03 | Ben Crystall

Posted on 01/29/2003 3:55:22 PM PST by aculeus

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

1 posted on 01/29/2003 3:55:22 PM PST by aculeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Very cool!!! I wonder how much these engines will cost. However, I won't be completely impressed until they develop (or perfect) a magnetohydrodynamic (catepillar) drive. (Hunt for Red October fans will know what I am talking about)
2 posted on 01/29/2003 3:59:03 PM PST by Pyro7480 (+ Vive Jesus! (Live Jesus!) +)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
kewl...!
3 posted on 01/29/2003 3:59:40 PM PST by Mr. K (all your TAG LINE are belong to us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K
perhaps shrillary can use it to clean old crusty....
4 posted on 01/29/2003 4:03:02 PM PST by spokeshave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Any engine that runs on steam has a problem with response; it takes a while to "rev" up or down. I don't see any jackrabbit throttle response with this design, but it could work for larger vessels.

I still don't quite get the "shock wave" idea. Steam condensing in an air/water mix causes shock waves? How? Why? Is it the latent heat of condensation that is being given up into the stream? Unless it's pretty high-pressure steam, I can't imagine it has enough energy to cause a shock wave sufficient to provide much propulsion.

But it's been a long time since college physics and phase dynamics.

5 posted on 01/29/2003 4:04:58 PM PST by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Bump
6 posted on 01/29/2003 4:05:28 PM PST by Fiddlstix (Tag Line Service Center: Get your Tag Lines Here! Wholesale! (Cheaper by the Dozen!) Inquire Within)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
Sounds like another cold fusion fiasco
7 posted on 01/29/2003 4:09:00 PM PST by spokeshave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator
I goofed and didn't fill in the "source" box.

This is from New Scientist.com and I would be grateful if you executed a "fix".

Many thanks.
8 posted on 01/29/2003 4:09:03 PM PST by aculeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Pursuit Dynamics itself does not plan to manufacture the engine. Instead, the company hopes...


9 posted on 01/29/2003 4:14:38 PM PST by Ronaldus Magnus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
If the steam is superheated it might vaporize additional water. But I don't see how wet steam could create shock waves except some sort of reverse cavitation low pressure waves.

The boiler discription does'nt include a superheater so I'm assuming wet steam and scratching my head.

10 posted on 01/29/2003 4:15:09 PM PST by Dinsdale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: *tech_index; sourcery; Ernest_at_the_Beach
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list
11 posted on 01/29/2003 4:16:19 PM PST by Libertarianize the GOP (Ideas have consequences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
"Any engine that runs on steam has a problem with response; it takes a while to "rev" up or down. I don't see any jackrabbit
throttle response with this design, but it could work for larger vessels.

I still don't quite get the "shock wave" idea. Steam condensing in an air/water mix causes shock waves? How? Why? Is it the
latent heat of condensation that is being given up into the stream? Unless it's pretty high-pressure steam, I can't imagine it has
enough energy to cause a shock wave sufficient to provide much propulsion.

But it's been a long time since college physics and phase dynamics."

good point. pulled out my steam tables, been some years, and reviewed them. i had trouble following the concept. but then i am retired and senile could have missed something.

regards
the dozer
12 posted on 01/29/2003 4:17:45 PM PST by dozer7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: spokeshave
Why would she do that, without parasites, she has no social life.
13 posted on 01/29/2003 4:19:19 PM PST by Dead Dog (Socialism: Theft justified by lies, enforced by murder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Expect very low efficiency or our subs would already be using it.

We built these out of a candle and a copper tube 50 years ago.
14 posted on 01/29/2003 4:23:36 PM PST by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Finally, someone invented a cardboard & lard pump!
15 posted on 01/29/2003 4:39:40 PM PST by norraad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
Shock waves? It would have to be extremely high-pressure steam. Not the kind you'd find on a speedboat--unless its boiler's thermal efficiency is likewise extremely high, its fuel mighty potent, and its hardware HD. Besides, every steam-into-water system I've seen is extremely noisy.
16 posted on 01/29/2003 4:46:59 PM PST by zebra 2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: spokeshave
Maybe there IS an element of cold fusion going on in this. Bubbles bursting in the right way can generate tempertures in the millions of degrees (though for a very limited mass of water), and some think that small, hard to measure amounts of fusion could be going on in certain types of turbulent bubble streams. Maybe they got the "mix" just right, and the energy output seems very efficient because they are actually getting a boost from small amounts of cold fusion.

( I know, I know, close my tags: </tin_foil_hat> )
17 posted on 01/29/2003 4:51:27 PM PST by Weirdad (Cold Fusion: the ultimate "hydrogen power" (and gee, it's nu-que-lar too) !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
Expect very low efficiency or our subs would already be using it.

Well, subs tend to use conservative technology. But in any case, quiet technology. This thing will be noisy as hell. It won't be used by subs.

18 posted on 01/29/2003 4:53:38 PM PST by dark_lord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Depending on what speeds it's best at, it would make a heck of torpedo drive, assuming it works as advertized. Maybe it's a varient of the Russian "rocket" torpedo motor?
19 posted on 01/29/2003 5:01:36 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ronaldus Magnus
>>...to take the company public, sell out, and flee to Tahiti before any one figures out that the design is limited to a theoretical hydromechanical efficiency of 0.005%. ;~) <<

Sounds about right.

What makes water go out back rather than both ways? Smart "shock waves"? Smells fishy, without fish sucked in :-)

20 posted on 01/29/2003 5:05:25 PM PST by Leo Carpathian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson