[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RE: starship-design: Re: debate

In a message dated 12/8/97 9:39:50 PM, lparker@cacaphony.net wrote:

>Perhaps there is some confusion in semantics here.
>We have built plenty of fusion devices that surpass breakeven - just not 
>devices that are viable as commercial powerplants. We aren't necessarily 
>looking for a powerplant design, we are looking for a propulsion design. By 
>default that includes a lot of the devices (such as bombs) that have 
>surpassed breakeven.
>The antimatter catalyzed concept is just that, an Orion concept with 
>extremely small fusion bombs.

Good point.  A fusion drive is at base a very leaky fusion reactor, leaking in
one direction.  ;)