NASA's New Plasma Rocket Ready For Testing

[Theinquisition]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/nasa-apos...184004642.html

Most of today's rockets are chemical rockets, which means they propel themselves through space by combining certain chemicals in a way that makes them explosive. Chemical rockets are heavy and fast-burning, which is great for getting off the surface of Earth, but less great for long voyages to the outer solar system.

For these longer trips, NASA is looking at using a new type of rocket: the plasma rocket.

NASA awarded a contract to the company Ad Astra back in 2015 to build a plasma rocket, and that rocket is rapidly approaching readiness. The company has been running several short tests of the engine and is preparing for a longer, 100-hour test. Once that happens sometime next year, the rocket engine will be closer to real missions.

The plasma rocket, the Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket (VASIMR), works by heating neon or argon gas to incredibly high temperatures using magnetic fields. That hot plasma is then fired out of the back of the rocket at very high speeds, providing thrust.

The plasma rocket has an advantage over traditional chemical propellants in that it can provide a small amount of thrust over a very long time, such as days, weeks, or months. Longer burn times mean the rocket needs less fuel, and less fuel means the rocket can carry more cargo. Of course, longer burn times also means longer travel times, but when you're just ferrying around supplies a few extra weeks or months isn't too important.

In addition to carrying cargo, plasma rockets could be used to send spacecraft to distant targets more quickly. Plasma rockets could enable us to reach Jupiter, Saturn, or more distant targets in a year or two instead of the better part of a decade, which could mean more missions to the outer solar system.

In a few short years, plasma might be propelling us around the solar system.

This Engine could be revolutionary, good job NASA.

[Deleted]

Neat. Refueling for argon or neon might be a problem out there, though. Not to mention it still uses physical fuel, the EM drive was fascinating because it doesn't.

[Independent voter]

Neat. Refueling for argon or neon might be a problem out there, though. Not to mention it still uses physical fuel, the EM drive was fascinating because it doesn't.

Any news on the EM drive? That was the one that worked on microwaves, right?

[Teleros]

This Engine could be revolutionary, good job NASA.

Not sure it'll be *that* good, but yes, it's good to see old VASIMR going places.

There's some useful info from the always-brilliant Atomic Rockets website on VASIMR engines in general.

As to this specific one...

Thrust: 5.7 Newtons
Specific Impulse: 5,000 s
Exhaust Speed: 50 km/s
Efficiency: 72%

Basically this meant for slow, steady acceleration - you're not going to get off the ground in this thing, because the thrust orders of magnitude too low. It'll be nice whenever you need to accelerate slowly but continuously for long periods of time however. Obviously, the biggie will be how well it scales up, and whether a high-thrust (ie, surface-to-orbit) version is doable, as if not, it may have to be a space-only engine, whilst chemical rockets are used to ship everything into orbit.

[Afrospinach]

Whenever I read about these things I am usually RIP all those noble gases that will be gone forever.

I am surprised they are not using xenon, there is a reason it is heavily preferred for ion thrusters, I think it was either atomic weight or electromagnetic properties that makes it a more ideal propellant.

[Deleted]

Any news on the EM drive? That was the one that worked on microwaves, right?

Not that I've seen, although I haven't been exactly looking either. And yes.

[Daedius]

Awesome -- I hope to live long enough to witness us mining from asteroids and other planets before I kick the bucket.

[Zmaniac17]

Not sure it'll be *that* good, but yes, it's good to see old VASIMR going places.

There's some useful info from the always-brilliant Atomic Rockets website on VASIMR engines in general.

As to this specific one...

Thrust: 5.7 Newtons
Specific Impulse: 5,000 s
Exhaust Speed: 50 km/s
Efficiency: 72%

Basically this meant for slow, steady acceleration - you're not going to get off the ground in this thing, because the thrust orders of magnitude too low. It'll be nice whenever you need to accelerate slowly but continuously for long periods of time however. Obviously, the biggie will be how well it scales up, and whether a high-thrust (ie, surface-to-orbit) version is doable, as if not, it may have to be a space-only engine, whilst chemical rockets are used to ship everything into orbit.

This type of engine will never have enough thrust to put anything in orbit. It's definitely space only engine. But like you said, with low power and constant acceleration over long periods we can cut mission duration's from months and years to days and weeks.

I think orbital rings, launch loops, space elevators and sky hooks will likely be the things that eventually replace chemical rockets.