The Nuclear Fusion Rocket Is Coming!

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 มิ.ย. 2024
  • The Nuclear Fusion Rocket Engine Is Coming!
    Last Video: The Real Reason SpaceX Is Developing A New Space Suit
    • The Real Reason SpaceX...
    ►The Space Race Merch Store Is Live! Shop our first release while quantities last: shop.theteslaspace.com/
    ► Join Our Discord Server: / discord
    ► Patreon: / theteslaspace
    ► Subscribe to our other channel, The Space Race: / theteslaspace
    Mars Colonization News and Updates
    • Mars Colonization News...
    SpaceX News and Updates: • SpaceX News and Updates
    The Space Race is dedicated to the exploration of outer space and humans' mission to explore the universe. We’ll provide news and updates from everything in space, including the SpaceX and NASA mission to colonize Mars and the Moon. We’ll focus on news and updates from SpaceX, NASA, Starlink, Blue Origin, The James Webb Space Telescope and more. If you’re interested in space exploration, Mars colonization, and everything to do with space travel and the space race... you’ve come to the right channel! We love space and hope to inspire others to learn more!
    ► Subscribe to The Tesla Space newsletter: www.theteslaspace.com
    Business Email: derek@ellify.com
    #Spacex #Space #Mars
  • วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี

ความคิดเห็น • 362

  • @TheSpaceRaceYT
    @TheSpaceRaceYT  10 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Check out our Excitement Guaranteed Starship Merch here: shop.theteslaspace.com/

    • @user-sx2cv9wh8h
      @user-sx2cv9wh8h 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      The Space Race, Which Country/Territory & Nationality/Denonym Are You?

    • @ncdave4life
      @ncdave4life 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      "Deluge" is supposed to be pronounced DELL'yüj, not duhLÜJ'.

  • @filonin2
    @filonin2 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +141

    I want to point out that ISP is a rating of how efficient an engine is and a HIGHER number is more efficient, not less. So it is 1/3 as efficient as Space X's Raptor. Your numbers seem wrong and they entirely undermine the point you are trying to make.

    • @filonin2
      @filonin2 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +42

      Yeah, I checked their wikipedia and you meant to say 10,000 seconds for the ISP. Not 105 seconds. That would be worse performance than any rocket, ever.

    • @lanata64
      @lanata64 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +33

      yeah kinda shows how this guy doesn't really know much. i wish there were less unknowledgeable elon fanboys on yt

    • @JoshKaufmanstuff
      @JoshKaufmanstuff 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +22

      Yeah, he makes nice videos, but he often makes ridiculous mistakes like this

    • @lordgarion514
      @lordgarion514 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +18

      Sadly, proofreading and checking your work started going out the window about 5 minutes after the internet showed up.

    • @millinoid2151
      @millinoid2151 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +12

      @@filonin2it actually says 105s directly on their website… they’re missing a couple zeroes on it, maybe a typo? Lol
      “The Direct Fusion Drive is a revolutionary steady state fusion propulsion concept, based on a compact fusion reactor. It will provide power of the order of units of MW, providing both thrust of the order of 10−101N with specific impulses between 103− 105s and auxiliary power to the space system.”

  • @geraldimhof2875
    @geraldimhof2875 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +32

    TLDR: Higher Isp = higher exhaust velocity = higher efficiency.
    Isp is not in seconds because it measures how fast an engine is. It's in seconds because It's inversely proportional to the speed of fuel consumption. A higher Isp means slower fuel consumption, not a slower engine.
    However, it is directly proportional to exhaust velocity, which in turn gives you the engine's thrust capability.

    • @bozhijak
      @bozhijak 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      1 kg of thrust from 1kg of fuel for x amount of time (sec).

    • @bozhijak
      @bozhijak 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Also this would have to be used only in space.

  • @anarchofuturist3976
    @anarchofuturist3976 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +56

    105 seconds? that would be much lower isp. existing nuclear thermal engines are in the ballpark of 1000 seconds

    • @magnetospin
      @magnetospin 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +13

      I assume he meant 105,000 seconds otherwise it wouldn't make any sense.

    • @grandeelfa
      @grandeelfa 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      should be around 11,000 seconds

    • @CountryLifestyle2023
      @CountryLifestyle2023 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Well I mean we don't rly have nuclear thermal engines yet, just prototypes. Would love to see nuclear fission or Fusion rockets in space though.
      Truly think it's the future of space travel

    • @alienblade2005
      @alienblade2005 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      There was a typo on their website and it's meant to be 10^5 seconds

    • @alienblade2005
      @alienblade2005 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ​@@magnetospinMeant to say 10^5 so 100,000

  • @g.f.martianshipyards9328
    @g.f.martianshipyards9328 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +20

    Ahem, you should doublecheck that ISP number for the DFD.

    • @whacked00
      @whacked00 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Higher Isp is more efficient. 105 sec is REALLY poor performance. This type of engine should have an Isp in the thousands of seconds.

    • @dr.testing3482
      @dr.testing3482 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ☝🤓

  • @fakeaccount401
    @fakeaccount401 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +21

    LLNL's fusion is exactly a microscale H-bomb with lasers for first stage (instead of A-bomb). With proper power source for lasers (read, another reactor) you could build a 1950s-style nuclear pulse engine out of it. That's, probably, all.

  • @DavidJancan
    @DavidJancan 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    You said 105 ISP for a fusion think again you may have wanted to say 105K as theoretical ISP of fusion engine is 135,000 seconds

  • @dollin9515
    @dollin9515 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +29

    I cant express how giddy it makes me that there's any advancements in fusion. I'm not hopeful that it will become viable in my lifetime as an energy source but I hope my generation can lay out the path for the future to use it to it's fullest capacity.

    • @ctuna2011
      @ctuna2011 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Are you in your 20's?

    • @dollin9515
      @dollin9515 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@ctuna2011 almost 21

    • @harvirdhindsa3244
      @harvirdhindsa3244 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@dollin9515you will live to see it

    • @protorhinocerator142
      @protorhinocerator142 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      You mean advancements in fusion, right?

    • @Imagine_Beyond
      @Imagine_Beyond 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @dollin9515 Fusion is very different from fission.

  • @s3cunit
    @s3cunit 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

    Even that LLNL "break even" isn't really accurate. It didn't create more energy than the gross of what the entire process took, only what the laser injected. If you factor in the energy required for all the ancillary requirements, like magnetic containment, things like induction and heat losses, it was something like 20-fold short. So, we're still a loooooong way away from viable fusion.

    • @kristinehansen.
      @kristinehansen. 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      We don't need to make more energy than in for use in a spaceship

    • @stupidburp
      @stupidburp 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Fission is fine for near future nuclear spacecraft. It will last decades without a refueling and the propellant will run out far sooner anyways. Even with numerous propellant refills the reactor will keep going for a reasonable length of time suitable for space station use, not just a single trip to Mars and back.

  • @scottpugmire5449
    @scottpugmire5449 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Please check your ISP specs.

  • @floydbertagnolli944
    @floydbertagnolli944 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Another in a series of my favorite videos you have produced. 😊

  • @billthecat7536
    @billthecat7536 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    The OLM and the booster don't sit on the concrete pad. They sit on the load bearing pilings buried deep in the ground. And all those NEW underground piles for added support were poured over a month ago, so they're already at 85-90% of design strength. Relax. ;-)

    • @sydrivers8311
      @sydrivers8311 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Ya this clown doesn’t know what he is talking about. The same one said he doubted when Elon said things be back up and running in a few months. He is an idiot!

    • @ralphsmith7696
      @ralphsmith7696 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      I am sure the two are not even connected. The expansion would be catastrophic.

  • @richardscott5529
    @richardscott5529 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Fantastic presentation 😊Bang On.😊

  • @folk.
    @folk. 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    1G acceleration would be ideal. Then there would be no difference in "gravity" onboard the spaceship. Half way to destination and the ship breaks with 1G.

    • @LisaAnn777
      @LisaAnn777 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      How long would it take at that acceleration?

    • @folk.
      @folk. 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      ​@@LisaAnn777 2 days to Mars, 16 days to Neptun. Acceleration 1G to half way, and 1G deceleration the rest of the distance

    • @button4boy
      @button4boy 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Just like in The Expanse!

    • @swiftmatic
      @swiftmatic หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@folk. 2 days with Mars at closest approach. 3.5 days at normal opposition

  • @timrobinson513
    @timrobinson513 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    Ar you sure those ISP numbers are right?

    • @filonin2
      @filonin2 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      That's what I said. 105 seconds ISP would be worse than any rocket, ever. He doesn't seem to realize bigger numbers are more efficient with ISP.

    • @timrobinson513
      @timrobinson513 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @filonin2 yea, I think he got them the wrong way around? Also, the Angry astronaut Chanel did video on this not long ago, too. Slightly more in-depth.

    • @rogeriopenna9014
      @rogeriopenna9014 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ISP is exhaust velocity in meters per second divided by Earth's gravity acceleration... Which you can round up to 10.
      At 110 to 300 km per second exhaust speeds from their site, that is 110 to 300 thousand meters per second. Divided by 10...
      About 10 to 30 thousand ISP

  • @aleksanderkuncwicz7277
    @aleksanderkuncwicz7277 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I hope more people in our life time could visit outher planets,lots of wealth and land in Space.

  • @stuartnetherclift7566
    @stuartnetherclift7566 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    ISP is a measure of performance - higher is better. So 105 seconds is terrible - is this right? It says this on the Pulsar web site too...

  • @charleshartig3247
    @charleshartig3247 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

    Ad Astra - The VASIMR® Engine; already certified by NASA. Next step: Put it up there!

    • @spacesterzone
      @spacesterzone 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      yup

    • @rogeriopenna9014
      @rogeriopenna9014 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      You don't know what you are talking about.
      It's a shitty engine. You were fooled by the 39 days to Mars headlines.
      You would need 200 MW of power for that
      200 MW generated by an ultra light weight reactor that is science fiction.
      The fusion reactor they talk about in this video wouldn't be capable of generating that amount of power and if you did get several of those together, it would weigh so much it wouldn't get to Mars in 6 months, much less 39 days.

  • @lgonzalez1154
    @lgonzalez1154 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    They are almost ready to start testing! Exciting times!

  • @lodewijkwolff
    @lodewijkwolff 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Raising velocity in order to reduce the time required to reach e.g. Mars sounds wonderful! However, once you reach your destination, you will also need to reduce your velocity in order to land. Does this mean nothing more than that it will actually take twice as long to reach your destination?

  • @luthermcgee3767
    @luthermcgee3767 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Excellent video. Marvelously done.

  • @johnhopkins6260
    @johnhopkins6260 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Proposal: propulsion system that can, to a calculated distance between Mars and Earth, that can maintain an acceleration rate of 1G; At the aforementioned point, turn around and decelerate at a rate of 1G... reducing/minimizing the human physiological impact on extended zero-G environment.

  • @australianpenguins6266
    @australianpenguins6266 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    we are living in some exciting times for sure

  • @KariemMajeed-qr4cb
    @KariemMajeed-qr4cb หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    All you got to do is come out with a proposal system boost controller

  • @ngamashaka4894
    @ngamashaka4894 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    I thought it was serious till I heard fussion......

  • @richardbailey3343
    @richardbailey3343 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Well its about time somebody figured out a reliable sustainable propulsion unit im sure space x would like a batch of these inits😮😅😅😅

  • @charlesjohnston1506
    @charlesjohnston1506 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Another great video!! Thanks!

  • @FrancoisGregory
    @FrancoisGregory 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    I seem to have missed where they magically have the energy required to create the magnetic field and plasma.

    • @arthurmario5996
      @arthurmario5996 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      umm, I think they said the "magic" is fusion. The magnetic field could be made by the same electrical generation system used for power the life support, etc.
      For example, the Waste heat from the drive could magically power a rankine or closed brayton cycle turbo-generator.
      last i checked, most fusion reactors use super-conducting magnets and only need power for the cryo-coolers.

    • @davidbrisbane7206
      @davidbrisbane7206 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Simple ... Another fusion reactor 😂🤣😂🤣

  • @Azzty45
    @Azzty45 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Good luck

  • @RussTillling
    @RussTillling 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    How much does the Booster weigh, and does it weigh more when it is pressurized to stop the domes crumpling?

  • @mathiaslist6705
    @mathiaslist6705 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Sorry, but an Isp of 105 seconds must be an error for the proposed engine.The pulsarfusion site quotes an exhaust velocity of 110 to 350 km/s which corresponds to an Isp of about 11 000 to 35 000 seconds.

  • @rogeriopenna9014
    @rogeriopenna9014 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    The ISP is actually between 10 and 30 THOUSAND seconds

  • @1winlock
    @1winlock 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    We have beed chasing the fusion carrot on a stick for 50+ years. It is likely that it will take another 50+ years to get it practical and economic.

    • @pakviroti3616
      @pakviroti3616 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      LONGER. Fusion is 25 years away and always will be.

    • @davidlang4442
      @davidlang4442 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      This fusion thing will never happen. It's a jobs and career funding program...sort of like the cure for cancer...

  • @chadleach6009
    @chadleach6009 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    will be ready in 30 years 30 years from now with a possible delay or two or more of 30,60 or 90 years.

  • @jtit2025
    @jtit2025 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    This rocket has been coming for 50 years lllol

  • @JosephDent-qd9ih
    @JosephDent-qd9ih 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Quicker easy and clean with great sanitation!

  • @vec306
    @vec306 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +102

    Just another 30 years for Fusion to work.😂😂😂😂😂😂

    • @javierderivero9299
      @javierderivero9299 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +17

      The problem is that fusion works...but you need energy for input and you get less as an output....but that is not a problem in a rocket...is only a problem when you build a nuclear plant

    • @xermionthesecond4396
      @xermionthesecond4396 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +20

      fusion works, just not net positive. Works fine for a rocket.

    • @n.g.s1mple29
      @n.g.s1mple29 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      This joke is old, give it a rest

    • @_starfiend
      @_starfiend 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      Fusion is already possible here on Earth has been for a great number of years, what's not yet possible is getting more power out than is used to start the 'reaction'.

    • @jmcclain8237
      @jmcclain8237 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I'm not sure what your point is.

  • @jasons44
    @jasons44 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I love the search for new space propulsion, i welcome the British/ e.u friends

  • @215father
    @215father 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    So how long do it take to slow down,or stop when you get to your destination.does it take years aerobraking.

  • @TayyabHussain-xk6gn
    @TayyabHussain-xk6gn 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Amazing🎉

  • @Alexandr_Lee
    @Alexandr_Lee 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +17

    Russia has been working on the project of a nuclear tug "Zeus" for many years - a spacecraft with a nuclear reactor. Its first version is to fly on ion thrusters, very large ones. They are ready and tested. And the next version of the tug can be equipped with rotary magneto-plasma engines. In general, it is very similar to what you are talking about in this video. Russia has been working on this technology for several years. The first flight of the tug is scheduled for 2030. First he will go to Venus, drop one probe there. Then a gravitational maneuver and flight to Jupiter, more precisely, to its moons.
    In the future, I would like to see a collaboration between Russia and the United States (because when will all this enmity end?). Future, more powerful versions of the nuclear tug could work in conjunction with Starship. Starship can put a large payload into orbit. And Zeus can deliver it to the Moon or Mars. Not very fast, but very very cheap.

    • @CountryLifestyle2023
      @CountryLifestyle2023 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Is my understanding correct, it's more of a space ship with a nuclear reactor on it, to power ion engines? So technically wouldn't be a nuclear rocket but an ion rocket powered by nuclear reactor?
      Genuinely asking and curious

    • @Alexandr_Lee
      @Alexandr_Lee 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @@CountryLifestyle2023 Well, it won't be a rocket, the nuclear tug will be launched into orbit by the Angara-A5 heavy launch vehicle. You can search for "nuclear tug Zeus" and see what it looks like. But in general, yes, it will not have a nuclear engine, only a nuclear reactor with an electric generator that will power either ion or magneto-plasma engines, which are much more efficient than classic ion ones. And it was the idea of these magnetoplasma engines, apparently, that was taken by this British startup. Because earlier Roskosmos has already stated that it is working on this technology. Well, let's see who does better =)

    • @CountryLifestyle2023
      @CountryLifestyle2023 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @Alexandr_Lee So more of a transport vehicle in space, can't take off but once in space can move things around.
      Any development with nuclear via fission, Fusion or other variations in space is rly important and look forward to seeing them.
      Magneto plasma engines are not a new idea or new thing. The idea has been around since 1970s, in the USA, and multiple companies are trying to achieve it atm. So the British didn't steal the idea from Russia. It was already a concept since before Russia existed lol 😆
      I would put my money on SpaceX, I know they are not doing the same thing, but by 2030 they could be sending first human missions to Mars... lol

    • @Alexandr_Lee
      @Alexandr_Lee 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@CountryLifestyle2023 Sorry, I'm writing through an online translator. Apparently, I didn't express myself correctly. I meant that the British are in this race because the Russians are already doing it. And if we are doing this, then apparently it is already technically possible =)

    • @CountryLifestyle2023
      @CountryLifestyle2023 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @Alexandr_Lee All good, I assume things get lost in translation.
      I just mean, UK isn't doing it because Russia is. USA started it before Russia did, but no one assumes Russia is doing it to copy USA.
      It's just the next phase in space travel that companies and nations are developing. Something that has been in the making for decades but only possible now.
      I think it's likely a Roskosmo "propaganda" moment, saying that UK is copying them. 🤔 just my opinion, I could be wrong.
      I did look up the Nuclear space Tug and it looks very interesting. Can't wait to see it in action.

  • @mr_obscure_universe
    @mr_obscure_universe 14 วันที่ผ่านมา

    ... and the win goes to laser propelled photon sails, for frugal space flight.

  • @Moist_yet_Crispy
    @Moist_yet_Crispy 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Rad video!

  • @firewalkerjon
    @firewalkerjon 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    At last, a science feature narrated by a human, not an AI voice. Thank you for that and for great content.

  • @jesselomas8626
    @jesselomas8626 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    On fusion drive - a little confusion over fusion reactors for power generation AND for a fusion drive.

  • @Quinn37
    @Quinn37 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Gonna need warp speed to go anywhere humans can live

  • @rowshambow
    @rowshambow 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I'm seeing a few different ones mentioned in videos. NTP and NEP engines, FFRE, this one.
    Are they all the same? Or just different flavors of coke?

  • @jameswilson4732
    @jameswilson4732 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    We should have had this technology in the 80s

  • @stephen6866
    @stephen6866 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Ok ! I m ready for soace travel 😅

  • @Just1heyU
    @Just1heyU 9 วันที่ผ่านมา

    All of the above where feasible. 🌎

  • @nightlightabcd
    @nightlightabcd 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I've been hearing about such things for about the last thirty years and it hasn't happened yet!

  • @jameswarren423
    @jameswarren423 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I’ll believe it when I see it 😵‍💫

  • @ApteraEV2024
    @ApteraEV2024 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    11:40 i gots u Essay, 4 realZ!❤😅

  • @Lewis-dq2xb
    @Lewis-dq2xb 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    need to try and catch booster yet

  • @craigsinnott296
    @craigsinnott296 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Spacex will have Warp Speed before NASA test nuclear 🤣😂

  • @MickGough1957
    @MickGough1957 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Fusion! That is for the far future when fusion is actually delivered and affordable. Thermal nuclear-using fission is deliverable in the near future and is far cheaper. Go for something that works rather than provides constant funding streams. And fusion does that in spades. 70 plus years and it is still "just around the corner".

  • @RoninX33
    @RoninX33 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I see this will be out in a few generations

  • @songhan1586
    @songhan1586 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    nuclear fusion rocket is like putting the cart before the horse. Get a fusion powerplant online first, then you can begin research fusion rockets. Everything is pointless until then.

  • @Spacefan867
    @Spacefan867 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    1,050 Seconds? 105 ISP is worse than 300 ISP

  • @zrakonthekrakon494
    @zrakonthekrakon494 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Get started now because fusion propulsion will be absolutely paramount to interstellar travel, ion engines will take 100’s of years to reach the nearest star it’s simply not viable. If we can’t get a fusion or nuclear engine working we will likely never leave the solar system for the next 300-500 years.

  • @ApteraEV2024
    @ApteraEV2024 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    4:20 then dont send a rocket! Send the Station!❤😅

  • @wombatillo
    @wombatillo 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Yeah I want to see it in operation in a vacuum chamber or in orbit before I believe it.

  • @maximusprime9441
    @maximusprime9441 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The biggest issue is these engines are not built/tested off world. Also our ships are still to small.
    ET vessels are 1/4mile or more in size. What we see withing atmosphere are lighter lander type craft.

  • @WildmanTrading
    @WildmanTrading 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Going from earth to mars in 12 days may cause a few time dilation issues. Now with a Alcubierre drive we won't need to worry about that. If course the most energy efficient version that I know of uses 3 solar masses. However this is tiny compared to the original dozen observable universes.

  • @protorhinocerator142
    @protorhinocerator142 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    As with anything fusion, I'll believe it when I see it.

    • @user-sx2cv9wh8h
      @user-sx2cv9wh8h 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Russia & Belarus Are Very Strict!

  • @marcel1152
    @marcel1152 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Good to see more players in the fusion field. But this will talk pretty long - they barly get it work on earth so space will be mutch more difficult.

  • @aleksanderkuncwicz7277
    @aleksanderkuncwicz7277 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    People should make a plane using this to the moon.

  • @titolino73
    @titolino73 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    We need some Da Vinci / Einstein type deal scientists...!

  • @HeroicTurkey
    @HeroicTurkey 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The power of the sun in the palm of my hands.

  • @levyroth
    @levyroth 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    This is a nacelle. It means we're going to meet Vulcans soon.

    • @frontech3271
      @frontech3271 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Or Gawd

  • @NicholasNerios
    @NicholasNerios 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Fingers crossed Pulsar pulls it off. 🙏

  • @Jeff-C-Dallas-Texas
    @Jeff-C-Dallas-Texas 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    We haven’t been able to create man made fusion. This may be possible in 30 years. They need to stick with Fission

  • @Mortacxo
    @Mortacxo 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    not sure how they think they will be able to deflect space debris / rocks floating in space with that speed, you need more technologies to protect the ship first

  • @ryanbarry899
    @ryanbarry899 7 วันที่ผ่านมา

    In somewhere around 100 years, give or take 50

  • @nightlightabcd
    @nightlightabcd 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    Fusion is the energy of the future, and always will be! Videos in 2033 will be talking about how great fusion will be!

    • @CountryLifestyle2023
      @CountryLifestyle2023 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      In 2033 Fusion will be rdy in 20 years !
      All jokes aside, it might be easier to do these types of Fusion rocket reactors than the traditional types of Fusion reactors we are building on Earth. Power generating vs thrust is very different

    • @alienblade2005
      @alienblade2005 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Fusion propulsion is a lot easier than fusion energy since you don't actually need to hit and sustain ignition. It's just a way to convert electricity and propellant to thrust

    • @CountryLifestyle2023
      @CountryLifestyle2023 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @alienblade2005 he was joking around
      The common joke is , Fusion will be rdy in 20 years! 20 years later, Fusion will be rdy in 20 years

  • @Juan-ll6sf
    @Juan-ll6sf 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    We have to solve the problem of finding artificial gravity before thinking about nuclear fusion propulsion rockets. Thanks

    • @vidyaishaya4839
      @vidyaishaya4839 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      What's wrong with rotating cylinders? It works just as well.

  • @web_physics
    @web_physics 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Hi there you have said lot's of idea together for Mars manned mission but that didn't include how re-entry mission will accomplish,how astronaut's breath ,how breath,how communicate 😮😊😢😮 I think ai and robotics can help to solve that.

  • @TimothyLipinski
    @TimothyLipinski 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Great video and into ! The NASA designed "24-Hour Lunar Shuttle" (LEO to LLO) has the engine to take US from the deep gravity well of LEO to Mars ! The Mars rocket can refuel with Oxygen at Mars orbit for the return to Earth. The VASIMR engine is the best engine til fusion power plants are developed ! Also the Fusion Rocket Engines will be powered by He3 recovered from the Lunar Regolith ! ! ! Talk to you on yhe moon soon, tjl T. Lipinski

  • @pebble24
    @pebble24 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Super heavy B9 is confirmed for next flight. it's not about which is most probable. it is B9.

  • @harvirdhindsa3244
    @harvirdhindsa3244 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The team at Livermore worked with inertial confinement based fusion, while something like the ITER is a magnetic confinement based reactor. You say how the Pulsar team is working off of Livermore research. Does that mean the underlying principle of the Pulsar rocket is inertial confinement and those coils in the rocket are just meant to help with directing the flow? Trying to make sure I have this understanding right.

    • @petermartyn7873
      @petermartyn7873 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yes. I wouldn't know which it is from the video either but a strong guess is that this has got to be a magnetic confinement based reactor.

  • @Jam-In-With-Ben
    @Jam-In-With-Ben 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    hi

  • @jazzdub4958
    @jazzdub4958 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    UK based rocket, it will blow up then.

  • @user-vh7cr8tp5f
    @user-vh7cr8tp5f 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Concrete makes 75% design strength in 3 days, 2-3 weeks for 100% (depending on the mix design). This is verified by compression tests on 6” x12” destructive test cylinders mad by a third party materials testing lab

  • @jhonPriego-dp5fd
    @jhonPriego-dp5fd 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Mining big in mars 10 tons of anything great

  • @ThomasLee123
    @ThomasLee123 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Fusion? Really? I don't believe it.

  • @Bluesrains
    @Bluesrains 16 วันที่ผ่านมา

    YOU GO ELON!!

  • @australien6611
    @australien6611 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Didn't realise they had even got fusion to work?

    • @Lyonsbane75
      @Lyonsbane75 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Oh yeah, Fusion works. It’s just ‘barely’ breaking even though. Currently for ground-based Fusion power testing, you only get the amount of power out of it that you’re using to run it. Obviously, that’s not going to work for entire cities. So the work continues. Thankfully though, this engine is using the Plasma for the thrust and the power output for the ships electrical systems. Very economical.

  • @SpockBorg5
    @SpockBorg5 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Wouldn't it be easier to develop a nerva type propulsion system first?

    • @ToshisanMotonaka
      @ToshisanMotonaka 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Think about it real quick, if it was easy, it would have been done 30 years ago.

  • @CountryLifestyle2023
    @CountryLifestyle2023 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Now who will do it first , NASA or SpaceX ? Landing on Mars

  • @danutavram831
    @danutavram831 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Take it easy ;))))

  • @thanksfernuthin
    @thanksfernuthin 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Look up "deluge" and hit the pronunciation button.

  • @Cant_find_good_Handle
    @Cant_find_good_Handle 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    If I was going to compete in the space race I would name my start up “Just Use Some Thorium Fission Until Competitors Kill-themselves”, or JUST FUCK for short.

  • @philiphudgens4726
    @philiphudgens4726 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I'm not volunteering for the maiden voyage! Maybe the fifth or sixth.

  • @user-sx2cv9wh8h
    @user-sx2cv9wh8h 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    BY 2030, HUMANS CAN ENJOYLY TRAVEL TO MULTIVERSE, INFINITY, TRANSINFINITY, ALPHAINFINITY & BEYOND THE UNIVERSE BY 2030!

  • @justin-ug3wb
    @justin-ug3wb 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    i wish build them...

  • @rocquecaceres9221
    @rocquecaceres9221 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Let’s make it work before we start planning a trip to the Hoth system people!!!!….. 50 to 100 years I’d say!!!

  • @raedwulf61
    @raedwulf61 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    If the USA didn't spend its treasure on imperial wars, we could be on Titan by now.

  • @deemcclanahan
    @deemcclanahan 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I wouldn't want to live next to the huge magnetic field that would be required to contain the plasma.
    Also, wouldn't the gas that is used as the propulsion get used up?

  • @jorgesolis7891
    @jorgesolis7891 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I'm thinking in the engen of the movie Event Horizon.....

  • @svarodzic
    @svarodzic 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    How did we go from Nuclear Fusion Rocket to SpaceX Starship?! 🤷‍♂

    • @ngamashaka4894
      @ngamashaka4894 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Space ?

    • @LisaAnn777
      @LisaAnn777 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      What do you mean? We never had a fusion rocket I thought?

    • @ngamashaka4894
      @ngamashaka4894 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@LisaAnn777 Well we are always 30 years from getting fusion you know. As long as I remember and I'm old believe me we are always been 30 years away...:)