Could a NASA “Plasma Engine” Be The Future Of Space Travel?

NASA is discussing this..

In 39 days this type of engine could get us to Mars. That sounds pretty cool and expensive but some think it is definitely worth it besides satisfying intellectual curiosity. But of course the first challenge is thrust. Current rocket engines that burn solid fuels are super powerful but likely could not get us to the red planet or other parts of the solar system with people in a reasonable time frame. However, this technique which is barely at the prototype phase has yielded some promising results.

Here is a bit more information on how this thruster works.  The basic technology has been known for a few decades but they made some improvements:

Known as a Hall thruster, these engines have been operating in space since 1971, and are now routinely flown on communication satellites and space probes to adjust their orbits when needed. These things are awesome, and scientists want to use them to get humans to Mars, except there’s one – rather large – problem: the current lifespan of a Hall thruster is around 10,000 operation hours, and that’s way too short for most space exploration missions, which require upwards of 50,000 hours.

What do you think?  Is this a reasonable way to get people to Mars?  And if we did that, what would the purpose be and what would be the best things to do first?  Feel free to comment with your ideas.

thanks to aip.org for the great info

thanks to sciencealert.com for the great info



11 Comments

  1. Curtis Gardner said:

    They’ll need a 88 like the military has for armor vehicle recovery hauling an M1 Abrahams out of a ditch…I’ll be happy to test how tough it is for them!

  2. Jason Good said:

    The faster you go, the bigger your aircraft gets. So whatever causes that needs to be turned into a fuel source giving you unlimited power while keeping your spacecraft the same size. In return, the faster you go the more power you will have.

  3. Adam Waller said:

    Otis T Carr did it in 1955. Given, not mercury vortex. It was counter-spun electromagnetic fields that generated 89% anti-grav. This info is still available. Just hard to sift through.

*

*

Top