Which is Better: Single Engine w/5 Gears or 5 Engines w/'Fixed' Propulsion?

In summary: Basically, if a craft lands on another planet or Moon?..and has a Superconducting plate, (which is obviously situated so that it can be lowered to below the craft, the craft being the 'ring' from the experiment that I had seen), then surely this would produce a really fantastic propulsion system to crafts that need a once-only boost for take off from..say Mars or dare I say it bodies that may have surfaces that already have 'superconducting' surface's?That's correct. A craft could use a superconducting propulsion system to boost itself into orbit.
  • #1
Wave's_Hand_Particle
134
0
A single Engine with five gears, or five separate Engines with 'fixed' propulsion's, as opposed to transitional gearings?

A rocket leaving Earth has 'boosters', once it is orbiting it uses propulsion systems that are more compact and have a weight-to-ratio output more efficient than Earthbound systems due to the fact that the craft is allready in motion,(my wording here may be technically vague,forgive me).

What I want to know is, if a Craft is already in a far-off part of Space, then what 'type' of propulsion system is the most efficient for attaining higher speeds?..I know that gas or aerosols can manouvre crafts for docking etc..but I seen an experiment where a 'Superconducting', Electro-Magnetic ring was propelled to a great height, and this was in a Lab on Earth.

Is it feasible that crafts can have Superconducting Propulsion systems, on board to be used as 'boosters'?

Basically, if a craft lands on another planet or Moon?..and has a Superconducting plate, (which is obviously situated so that it can be lowered to below the craft, the craft being the 'ring' from the experiment that I had seen), then surely this would produce a really fantastic propulsion system to crafts that need a once-only boost for take off from..say Mars or dare I say it bodies that may have surfaces that already have 'superconducting' surface's?

The question again, can Superconduction, Electro-Magnetic systems be used to launch crafts from its surface to Orbit?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
It sounds like you're talking about magnet-electrodynamic drive (the "caterpillar" drive from "The Hunt for Red October"). That's a real technology that works for ships - it has nothing at all to do with spacecraft propulsion and referencing it to spacecraft propulsion is a relatively recent hoax.
 
  • #3
Wave's_Hand_Particle said:
A single Engine with five gears, or five separate Engines with 'fixed' propulsion's, as opposed to transitional gearings?

Many rocket engines are throttleable as it is.

A rocket leaving Earth has 'boosters', once it is orbiting it uses propulsion systems that are more compact and have a weight-to-ratio output more efficient than Earthbound systems due to the fact that the craft is allready in motion,(my wording here may be technically vague,forgive me).

Not exactly. A rocket leaving Earth has boosters to take advantage of staging. Any mass you drop off along the way, you don't have to spend fuel to accelerate it up to orbital velocity. Different rockets are used in space to take advantage of underexpansion of the flow. As a rocket's exhaust speeds up in the nozzle, its pressure drops significantly. The faster it goes, the lower the pressure drops. This is just what Bernoulli's equation tells you should happen (although you need to use different equations... rocket exhaust is not incompressible). If the pressure drops below ambient pressure, you get a 'suction' at the nozzle exit, reducing the thrust from the rocket. You can see this on footage from the space shuttle during liftoff. The exhaust plumes are bent inward. That's because of the outside air pushing them. If you watch the full ascent, that angle will decrease and eventually the plume will go outward (the Shuttle's main engines are optimized for upper atmosphere operation). Once the craft is in orbit, you don't need to use engines at all, except to turn your ship or do a de-orbit maneuver.

What I want to know is, if a Craft is allready in a far-off part of Space, then what 'type' of propulsion system is the most efficient for attaining higher speeds?

Whichever type of propulsion system has the highest Specific Impulse or Isp. That's a measure of how fuel efficient a rocket is. The best we have (or could have within a few years) are either electrical (Ion drives, arcjets, etc.) or nuclear.

The question again, can Superconduction, Electro-Magnetic systems be used to launch crafts from its surface to Orbit?

Russ mentioned the answer to this. Until (biiiig if, here...) we find a way to warp gravity or something like that, every spacecraft propulsion system will have to use something for fuel.
 
  • #4
russ_watters said:
It sounds like you're talking about magnet-electrodynamic drive (the "caterpillar" drive from "The Hunt for Red October"). That's a real technology that works for ships - it has nothing at all to do with spacecraft propulsion and referencing it to spacecraft propulsion is a relatively recent hoax.

Sorry Russ I aint seen "Hunt for the red october", and I certainly have not heard of any recent Hoax material. My wording of what I wanted to know is pretty feable after re-reading my post, but I was reading some material, and played an old video of Frank Close-lecture.

It was in this lecture he showed a demonstration of Superconductive Electro-Magnetics, where he placed a 'metal ring' around the magnet, throwed a switch and up flew this metal ring,this was what I was aiming for.

A pretty basic notion I had was that on planets with a 'low-gravity', then the escape velocity would be within a "superconductive-Electro-Magnetic" propulsion system just for the take-off?..or so I was contemplating, thanks anyway.
 
  • #5
Wave's_Hand_Particle said:
It was in this lecture he showed a demonstration of Superconductive Electro-Magnetics, where he placed a 'metal ring' around the magnet, throwed a switch and up flew this metal ring,this was what I was aiming for.
Thats basically a solenoid. Its the same as any other magnetic propulsion (including an electric motor) Its also still an action-reaction propulsion system. The nearest equivalent in spacecraft is ion propulsion, which also is real and works (Cassini, iirc, uses it), but it won't get us even to 10% C.
 

FAQ: Which is Better: Single Engine w/5 Gears or 5 Engines w/'Fixed' Propulsion?

Which option provides better overall performance - single engine with 5 gears or 5 engines with fixed propulsion?

The answer to this question depends on various factors such as the intended use, desired speed, and weight of the vehicle. In general, a single engine with 5 gears may provide better overall performance for smaller and lighter vehicles, while 5 engines with fixed propulsion may be more suitable for larger and heavier vehicles.

What are the advantages of using a single engine with 5 gears?

A single engine with 5 gears can offer several advantages, including better fuel efficiency, lower maintenance costs, and a lighter overall weight for the vehicle. It also allows for smoother acceleration and deceleration, as well as easier control for the driver.

Are there any disadvantages of using 5 engines with fixed propulsion?

Yes, there are some disadvantages to using 5 engines with fixed propulsion. One major disadvantage is the higher cost of maintenance and fuel consumption compared to a single engine with 5 gears. Additionally, the complexity of controlling multiple engines and coordinating their movements can be challenging for the driver.

Can the choice between these options affect the vehicle's speed?

Yes, the choice between a single engine with 5 gears and 5 engines with fixed propulsion can have an impact on the vehicle's speed. In general, 5 engines with fixed propulsion may allow for higher top speeds, but a single engine with 5 gears may offer better acceleration and handling at lower speeds.

Which option is more cost-effective in the long run?

The cost-effectiveness of these options depends on various factors such as the initial cost, maintenance costs, and fuel efficiency. In general, a single engine with 5 gears may be more cost-effective in the long run due to lower maintenance and fuel costs. However, for larger and heavier vehicles, 5 engines with fixed propulsion may be a more practical and cost-effective option in the long run.

Similar threads

Remarkable New Marine Propulsion Systems
Replies
5
Views
3K
The unsolved engineering of the "Space Ladder"
Replies
25
Views
5K
SpaceX SpaceX: Interplanetary Transport System
Replies
3
Views
2K
Is my fictional Solar System stable and realistic?
Replies
21
Views
2K
Exploring the Physics of Epic Space Battles
Replies
18
Views
5K
Technical Paper for an Introduction to Mechanical Engineering class
Replies
1
Views
2K
Kerbal Space Program - Rocket Design Basics
Replies
2
Views
8K
Admissions Can someone critique my statement of purpose? (Master's Degree in Quantum Engineering)
Replies
8
Views
3K
Alternative spacelaunch methods
Replies
10
Views
4K
Could women be better suited for long distance space travel?
2
Replies
48
Views
12K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top