RE: starship-design: Staged Fusion Power

["L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>]

Nels and Zach,

While the idea is doable (Project Dumbo, 1960 something) The output is far
below what we can achieve through other means. There is a lot of energy loss
to waste heat, etc.

Check the site I uploaded on AIMSTAR and antimatter catalyzed microfusion.

Lee

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu
[mailto:owner-starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu]On Behalf Of Zach
Johnson
Sent: Sunday, August 16, 1998 5:55 PM
To: N. Lindberg
Cc: starship design
Subject: Re: starship-design: Staged Fusion Power


   N. Lindberg wrote:

>         I was reading some of the numbers for the various engines that
> could be used to power a starship, and I noticed that every fusion
> reaction shown only used its fuel once.  If a closed powerplant (not
> rocket) could be run hot enough, there's no reason I can see not to run
> the fuel up to heavier elements instead of just throwing it away after it
> turns to helium. Note:  I didn't do any math for this one, it might be
> impractical.  Although I realize that a scheme like this would require
> reactors far superior to a today's can't-quite-ignite tokamaks, it might
> be doable in fifty years. The power from this type of reactor could be
> used to power a laser or ion drive, the latter prehaps adding the
> reactor exhaust to the Xenon reaction mass.
>         The upshot is, exhaust recycling could reduce the amount of fuel
> required by which is one of the major hurdles of starflight.
> Best Regards,
> Nels Lindberg



    Could you combine fusion and fision to produce a continous reaction?

From,
Zachary Johnson