Rocket Engines Efficiency

Its easy thinking. The best rocket motor gets the rocket into space
with less fuel. Chemical rockets have great thrust but have heavy
weight. Liquid fuel about same. I think we need my pulse nuclear
engine which is a spin off from my inventing pulse fusion machine.
I'm sure Darla's space ship uses antimatter rockets,for that is the
top of the line(can't get better) Have an idea to improve thrust on
"Ion" engine. Its rather simple it works something like a ramjet,only
its all electric. I like the idea that laser can push electrons to
99.9999 of light speed. Lot of plasma in the universe,and that iis
hot stuff. I think of hybred rockets that can be used,and ion engine
kicking in as last stage to keep acceleration going. If I was 67 years
younger I would want a probe to visit Barnards star its less than 6 LY
away and its know to have a planet Reality is we have about 15,000
stars we will visit. If only I had Gates money, I know how every type
rocket works,and am clever enough to add to their efficiency.
TreBert PS I;m not cotton to solar sails

"bert" wrote in message
...
Its easy thinking. The best rocket motor gets the rocket into space
with less fuel. Chemical rockets have great thrust but have heavy
weight. Liquid fuel about same. I think we need my pulse nuclear
engine which is a spin off from my inventing pulse fusion machine.
I'm sure Darla's space ship uses antimatter rockets,for that is the
top of the line(can't get better) Have an idea to improve thrust on
"Ion" engine. Its rather simple it works something like a ramjet,only
its all electric. I like the idea that laser can push electrons to
99.9999 of light speed. Lot of plasma in the universe,and that iis
hot stuff. I think of hybred rockets that can be used,and ion engine
kicking in as last stage to keep acceleration going. If I was 67 years
younger I would want a probe to visit Barnards star its less than 6 LY
away and its know to have a planet Reality is we have about 15,000
stars we will visit. If only I had Gates money, I know how every type
rocket works,and am clever enough to add to their efficiency.
TreBert PS I;m not cotton to solar sails

Say BeeertBrain ... do you work that engine with your right hand, or
with your left ... or do you switch back and forth, you know, like a
monkey, flogging his nubby stubby ...

On Sep 28, 8:56*pm, "Hagar" wrote:
"bert" wrote in message

...





Its easy thinking. The best rocket motor *gets the rocket into space
with less fuel. Chemical rockets have great thrust but have heavy
weight. Liquid fuel about same. I think we need my pulse nuclear
engine which is a spin off from my inventing pulse fusion machine.
I'm sure Darla's space ship uses antimatter rockets,for that is the
top of the line(can't get better) *Have an idea to improve thrust on
"Ion" engine. Its rather simple it works something like a ramjet,only
its all electric. I like the idea that laser can push electrons to
99.9999 of light speed. *Lot of plasma in the universe,and that iis
hot stuff. *I think of hybred rockets that can be used,and ion engine
kicking in as last stage to keep acceleration going. If I was 67 years
younger I would want a probe to visit Barnards star its less than 6 LY
away and its know to have a planet * Reality is we have about 15,000
stars we will visit. *If only I had Gates money, I know how every type
rocket works,and am clever enough to add to their efficiency.
TreBert *PS I;m not cotton to solar sails

Say BeeertBrain ... do you work that engine with your right hand, or
with your left ... or do you switch back and forth, you know, like a
monkey, flogging his nubby stubby ...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I always was a switch hitter. Does than fit as an answer to how I
masterbate? Hagar why do you bother reading my posts??? You are
just showing how stupid you are. Just do like others do that can't
think and say "Einstein was wrong" That makes them smarter than
Einstein and brings their ego up O ya TreBert

On Sep 28, 6:14*pm, bert wrote:
On Sep 28, 8:56*pm, "Hagar" wrote:



"bert" wrote in message

....

Its easy thinking. The best rocket motor *gets the rocket into space
with less fuel. Chemical rockets have great thrust but have heavy
weight. Liquid fuel about same. I think we need my pulse nuclear
engine which is a spin off from my inventing pulse fusion machine.
I'm sure Darla's space ship uses antimatter rockets,for that is the
top of the line(can't get better) *Have an idea to improve thrust on
"Ion" engine. Its rather simple it works something like a ramjet,only
its all electric. I like the idea that laser can push electrons to
99.9999 of light speed. *Lot of plasma in the universe,and that iis
hot stuff. *I think of hybred rockets that can be used,and ion engine
kicking in as last stage to keep acceleration going. If I was 67 years
younger I would want a probe to visit Barnards star its less than 6 LY
away and its know to have a planet * Reality is we have about 15,000
stars we will visit. *If only I had Gates money, I know how every type
rocket works,and am clever enough to add to their efficiency.
TreBert *PS I;m not cotton to solar sails

Say BeeertBrain ... do you work that engine with your right hand, or
with your left ... or do you switch back and forth, you know, like a
monkey, flogging his nubby stubby ...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I always was a switch hitter. Does than fit as an answer to how I
masterbate? * Hagar why do you bother reading my posts??? *You are
just showing how stupid you are. Just do like others do that can't
think and say "Einstein was wrong" That makes them smarter than
Einstein and brings their ego up * O ya * TreBert

There's no requirement that our redneck Hagar and his father rabbi
Saul Levy have to read anything we compose, however it's their public
funded and/or special interest job.

~ BG

On Sep 28, 5:45*pm, bert wrote:
Its easy thinking. The best rocket motor *gets the rocket into space
with less fuel. Chemical rockets have great thrust but have heavy
weight. Liquid fuel about same. I think we need my pulse nuclear
engine which is a spin off from my inventing pulse fusion machine.
I'm sure Darla's space ship uses antimatter rockets,for that is the
top of the line(can't get better) *Have an idea to improve thrust on
"Ion" engine. Its rather simple it works something like a ramjet,only
its all electric. I like the idea that laser can push electrons to
99.9999 of light speed. *Lot of plasma in the universe,and that iis
hot stuff. *I think of hybred rockets that can be used,and ion engine
kicking in as last stage to keep acceleration going. If I was 67 years
younger I would want a probe to visit Barnards star its less than 6 LY
away and its know to have a planet * Reality is we have about 15,000
stars we will visit. *If only I had Gates money, I know how every type
rocket works,and am clever enough to add to their efficiency.
TreBert *PS I;m not cotton to solar sails

William Mook will gladly tell you everything you need to know about
nuclear pulse rocket engines, and then some. There's perhaps no one
more informed and experience on that topic than our William Mook.

~ BG

On Sep 28, 9:33*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Sep 28, 5:45*pm, bert wrote:





Its easy thinking. The best rocket motor *gets the rocket into space
with less fuel. Chemical rockets have great thrust but have heavy
weight. Liquid fuel about same. I think we need my pulse nuclear
engine which is a spin off from my inventing pulse fusion machine.
I'm sure Darla's space ship uses antimatter rockets,for that is the
top of the line(can't get better) *Have an idea to improve thrust on
"Ion" engine. Its rather simple it works something like a ramjet,only
its all electric. I like the idea that laser can push electrons to
99.9999 of light speed. *Lot of plasma in the universe,and that iis
hot stuff. *I think of hybred rockets that can be used,and ion engine
kicking in as last stage to keep acceleration going. If I was 67 years
younger I would want a probe to visit Barnards star its less than 6 LY
away and its know to have a planet * Reality is we have about 15,000
stars we will visit. *If only I had Gates money, I know how every type
rocket works,and am clever enough to add to their efficiency.
TreBert *PS I;m not cotton to solar sails

William Mook will gladly tell you everything you need to know about
nuclear pulse rocket engines, and then some. *There's perhaps no one
more informed and experience on that topic than our William Mook.

*~ BG- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Never heard of Mook BG Levy and Hagar are two sides to the same
turd. That is why they are known as **** heads. Their post prove
this. They hate people that can think. TreBert

On Sep 28, 6:45*pm, bert wrote:
On Sep 28, 9:33*pm, Brad Guth wrote:



On Sep 28, 5:45*pm, bert wrote:

Its easy thinking. The best rocket motor *gets the rocket into space
with less fuel. Chemical rockets have great thrust but have heavy
weight. Liquid fuel about same. I think we need my pulse nuclear
engine which is a spin off from my inventing pulse fusion machine.
I'm sure Darla's space ship uses antimatter rockets,for that is the
top of the line(can't get better) *Have an idea to improve thrust on
"Ion" engine. Its rather simple it works something like a ramjet,only
its all electric. I like the idea that laser can push electrons to
99.9999 of light speed. *Lot of plasma in the universe,and that iis
hot stuff. *I think of hybred rockets that can be used,and ion engine
kicking in as last stage to keep acceleration going. If I was 67 years
younger I would want a probe to visit Barnards star its less than 6 LY
away and its know to have a planet * Reality is we have about 15,000
stars we will visit. *If only I had Gates money, I know how every type
rocket works,and am clever enough to add to their efficiency.
TreBert *PS I;m not cotton to solar sails

William Mook will gladly tell you everything you need to know about
nuclear pulse rocket engines, and then some. *There's perhaps no one
more informed and experience on that topic than our William Mook.

*~ BG- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Never heard of Mook * BG Levy and Hagar are two sides to the same
turd. That is why they are known as **** heads. * Their post prove
this. They hate people that can think. * TreBert

It's nearly impossible to use this Google Groups version of Usenet/
newsgroups without having come across William Mook. And btw, that's
his real name.

I just did a basic - Search Groups - for William Mook, and there he
is. Add nuclear rockets to that William Mook search, as well as -
Sorted by date - if you like, and there he is again. If you simply
can't figure out how to utilize those nifty search features, then
never mind.

~ BG

"bert" wrote in message
...
I always was a switch hitter.
~~~~~~~~~~

So Bert, you bang guys AND girls?

How sweet.






Does than fit as an answer to how I
masterbate? Hagar why do you bother reading my posts??? You are
just showing how stupid you are.

"HVAC" wrote in message
...

"bert" wrote in message
...
I always was a switch hitter.
~~~~~~~~~~

So Bert, you bang guys AND girls?

How sweet.


I think he mostly bangs it against rocks ... if he can get it can even
get a blue-veiner any more ... he long since discharged his brain, as
evidenced by his ludicrous posts ...

Robert Forward and Bernard Oliver both liked the idea of using small
amounts of anti-matter to spark a micro-fusion reaction. An extension
of the Teller-Ulam design allows bombs of any size to be built around
this small trigger.

Another approach is to use anti-matter to increase neutron yield in
fissile material, and create micro-fission.

Also, by increasing the peak density of a compressed fissile bomblet,
the critical mass falls as the fourth power of the compression.
Shaped plastic explosives achieve 3 to 1 compression density - and
critical masses in the kg range are possible with most materials.
Using zeta pinch to compress fissile materials achieves a 20 to 1
compression. While not enough to meet the Lawson Criterion for fusion
systems, it is plenty to reduce fissile critical mass (without anti-
matter) by a factor of 2,000 or so. So, we're talking about gram to
large milligram range. At the densities of most fissile metals we
have tiny whiskers shaped for self-implosion via zeta-pinch. Again,
a minature Teller-Ulam design this can be magnified to a fusion blast
of any size.

So, this sizes your engine.

An aneutronic blast - of Boron 10, or Lithium-6/Deuteride - substances
that are commonly available - produces only heat and no radiation.
The detonation of 1,000 blasts, typical of an orbital mission releases
less than a kilogram of material - or the release of a single small
nuclear blast to detonate whatever fusion fuels are needed to carry
out an orbital mission.

Planetary missions are 1,000 to 2,000 blasts more - but the radiation
released from the triggers don't pollute the Earth.

Fissile material releases about 140,000 MJ per gram.
Fusion of aneutronic material releases about 600,000 MJ to 900,000 MJ
per gram.

So, using 500 milligrams (70,000 MJ) to detonate 10 grams (7,000,000
MJ) of aneutronic fissile material - produces an ion blast that flows
out at 8.8% light speed. Or 25,000 km/sec.

Reflecting this ion blast efficiently produces an impulse equal to


F = mdot * Ve

And two blasts per second is a rate that accelerates a payload to
orbital speed in 8 minutes - (1,000 blasts in 500 seconds) with an
average acceleration of 1.88 gees.

21 grams per second = 0.021 kg/sec = mdot
25,000 km/sec = 2.5e7 m/sec

F = 0.021 * 2.5e7 = 525,00 Newtons = 53,560 kgf

This is a vehicle that masses 28,489 kg take off weight to maintain
1.88 gees.

The 1,000 bomblets total 10.5 kg. Another 116 kg allows an
additional 11,000 bomblets to support 11 orbital flight cycles, or a
delta vee of 100 km/sec.

This provides a constant gee spacecraft across the solar system. For
example, operating at 1/6th gee - one blast every 5.6 seconds - allows
flight to the moon at 1/6 average gee force - and achieves 25 km/sec
at halfway to the moon. Another 25 km/sec to come to rest on the
Moon, and another 50 km/sec to reverse the process and come back to
Earth. The trip at 1/6th gee takes 8 hours from Earth to Moon. A
structure of 4,273 kg - is 15% structural fraction - quite robust.
4,389 kg total mass 24,000 kg payload and 100 kg emergency bomblets.

The bomblets are $20,000 per kg. So, 116 kg - $2.32 million per
trip. The ship is $10,000 per kg - that's $42.73 million per ship.
The 100 kg of spare bomblets $2.0 million. A total of $47.05 million
per ship - and $2.32 million per trip. At 24,000 kg payload - has a
specific cost of $100 per kg.

The development cost requires access to nuclear energy data that is
classified in most situations. A focused effort free of tort concerns
in US law, would cost something on the order of $500 million. Another
10 ships $450 million. 2,500 kg of bomblets - $50 million - which
allows 25 trips to the moon and back carrying 24,000 kg.

This is deminimus system - and a good use of nuclear materials that
would otherwise flow into the wrong hands (the high price for the
bomblets is in part to maintain security of the system)

A global effort to build a fleet of a dozen spacecraft each carrying
5,000 cosmonauts across the solar system - and establishing a moon
base an outpost on Mars and visit all major bodies of the solar system
over a three year period. In the process the fleet transports all the
nuclear materials of Earth to the moon, and a base is maintained
there.

A vehicle that has 10,000,000 kg payload is 416x bigger so requires a
fusion fuel pellets massing 4.2 kg per bomblet. So each unit is 15 cm
(6 inches) in diameter. The fission elements are the same amount -
500 grams to lift off Earth.

Turn off the audio - the audio I had was deleted by you tube since
they said I was using the background musing without license - and I
haven't had time to re-record it. The video is informative though

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOpCMnLoM1c