Why does it feel so much like a scam?
[deleted]
Launch a Water-Propelled Satellite into Deep Space
21–30 of 64 posts
Re: Launch a Water-Propelled Satellite into Deep Space
#22They sure write a lot but for someone more technologically oriented, the water plasma engine or CAT is most interesting. http://pepl.engin.umich.edu/thrusters/CAT.html "First, from a propellant tank, our fuel propellant will be injected from its storage tank into the plasma liner, a quartz chamber that distributes the gas and contains the plasma. The gas is turned into a plasma by a radio frequency antenna that surro…
So basically the water is reaction mass, and it's actually powered by solar cells?
They should write that WAY more prominently on the kickstarter page, as is it feels like a scam.
Re: Launch a Water-Propelled Satellite into Deep Space
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
"While we have obtained some external funding, this mission may never happen without your help." I suppose I get it, but I thought Kickstarter campaigns required a deliverable end result as a result of contributions?
What do you mean by deliverable? "There will be a camera for science" is an end result.
He means a link between, you donate, they make product. You donate, they achieve X with your money. This one reads more like, "We have vague plans and lots of money but we need more, please contribute to our slush fund".
As best I can tell, the direct impact of the kickstarter funds will be paying for a camera to put on a launch vehicle to watch the CAT engine, but it's not very clear.
Re: Launch a Water-Propelled Satellite into Deep Space
#24I am unsure what is the relevance of water in this project. It is not like the noble gases used in other engines (including ion) are difficult to find or too expensive.
Unless there's the long-term goal of collecting water in order to 'refuel' the craft. Which is unlikely, as they are too tiny to afford thee extra machinery.
I'm thinking it's just a matter of reducing for the 'fuel tanks'.
Re: Launch a Water-Propelled Satellite into Deep Space
#25They sure write a lot but for someone more technologically oriented, the water plasma engine or CAT is most interesting. http://pepl.engin.umich.edu/thrusters/CAT.html "First, from a propellant tank, our fuel propellant will be injected from its storage tank into the plasma liner, a quartz chamber that distributes the gas and contains the plasma. The gas is turned into a plasma by a radio frequency antenna that surro…
So basically the water is reaction mass, and it's actually powered by solar cells? They should write that WAY more prominently on the kickstarter page, as is it feels like a scam.
In the second sentence of the kickstarter page it says "a new rocket propulsion system powered by the Sun and propelled by water". I think that is pretty clear.
Re: Launch a Water-Propelled Satellite into Deep Space
#26Would something like this be able to work within the atmosphere?
Re: Launch a Water-Propelled Satellite into Deep Space
#27So wouldn't this build up a charge over time if its giving off electrons or am I misunderstanding?
Re: Launch a Water-Propelled Satellite into Deep Space
#28Would something like this be able to work within the atmosphere?
In a word: no. It generates a very minute amount of thrust. That's ok in the freefall of space because acceleration running 24/7 adds up fairly quickly. But these thrusters won't have a thrust to weight ratio higher than 1 so they can't feasibly be used for in atmospheric flight.
Re: Launch a Water-Propelled Satellite into Deep Space
#29I am unsure what is the relevance of water in this project. It is not like the noble gases used in other engines (including ion) are difficult to find or too expensive. Unless there's the long-term goal of collecting water in order to 'refuel' the craft. Which is unlikely, as they are too tiny to afford thee extra machinery. I'm thinking it's just a matter of reducing for the 'fuel tanks'.
While I am no expert in chemistry he mentioned that one of the benefits of using water was the fact that it is in a liquid state and thus you could effectively store more energy within a finite amount of space. At least one of the noble gases (argon) does not compress down to a liquefied state, so perhaps that applies to the others? Large compression tanks are also quite heavy, so perhaps that is a consideration too.
Re: Launch a Water-Propelled Satellite into Deep Space
#30I'd just like to point out that their first kickstarter didn't make even half its goal. We all talk about how we wish more money was devoted to research like this. Skip your latte today and toss them a fiver.
better still, skip your latte every day. lattes are shit.