Space game fuel
Author
I am frequently speculating about a space sim game I will make one day. It will be near future, with recognizable technology or close to it where possible (like using high powered automatic rifles as weapons instead of energy weapons, and missiles). Anyway, I was speculating that perhaps high explosives like C4, ANFO, etc have more energy that can be released from normal dry or liquid fuel. Assuming this near future figured out how to contain and regulate such a violent reaction. My problem is I do not know if C4 or ANFO acually has more energy than normal fuel, or if it just releases it far more violently than regular fuel.
Anyone care to clarify?
Why not go with Fusion Reaction as energy source? Fusion works in theory(And they're building a fusion reactor right now that will output more energy than you put into it).
Also, the reaction is quite cheap, can be easily controlled and is useable for long periods of time(Because you don't need an awfull lot of fuel to get the reaction running).
The problem with explosives is that they release their energy very fast. Controlling it is much harder than it is to control a nuclear reaction. These techniques also requires lots of said explosive that it's not feasable to carry the weight of your ship times 100 in fuel.
Toolmaker
Also, the reaction is quite cheap, can be easily controlled and is useable for long periods of time(Because you don't need an awfull lot of fuel to get the reaction running).
The problem with explosives is that they release their energy very fast. Controlling it is much harder than it is to control a nuclear reaction. These techniques also requires lots of said explosive that it's not feasable to carry the weight of your ship times 100 in fuel.
Toolmaker
Author
Quote:Original post by Toolmaker
Why not go with Fusion Reaction as energy source? Fusion works in theory(And they're building a fusion reactor right now that will output more energy than you put into it).
Also, the reaction is quite cheap, can be easily controlled and is useable for long periods of time(Because you don't need an awfull lot of fuel to get the reaction running).
The problem with explosives is that they release their energy very fast. Controlling it is much harder than it is to control a nuclear reaction. These techniques also requires lots of said explosive that it's not feasable to carry the weight of your ship times 100 in fuel.
Toolmaker
Fusion adds a texture to the game I do not want in it. It is probably more likely, but I want non nuclear, maybe even non cutting edge kinda tech. Not that containing high explosive and releasing it slowly is a small technological feat. I just like the idea more for this game.
You may find this table interesting.
Edit: That is to say, notice how low the energy density for explosives is. TNT is in the table and ANFO is below. You'll need a lot more explosives than normal fuel if you want to power anything with it.
Edit: That is to say, notice how low the energy density for explosives is. TNT is in the table and ANFO is below. You'll need a lot more explosives than normal fuel if you want to power anything with it.
Author
Quote:Original post by lightbringer
You may find this table interesting.
HAHA! If I read that table right, I would be better off burning wood.
Quote:Original post by Witchcraven
HAHA! If I read that table right, I would be better off burning wood.
That is correct :)
Which just means that your idea was not feasible. But a hydrogen-based solution may have merit. Not sure about the exact state of the science on that today though.
Author
Unless anyone has any other ideas, maybe I will need to go cutting edge. I wonder how unlikely the ability to generate large quantities of antimatter will be 200 years or so from now. Although that sounds way too sci fi. Fusion may be best. Unless anyone can figure think of any other interesting means of propulsion that may be possible.
I think the most feasible is nuclear fusion. It's a well understood process, limited afaik by engineering concerns mostly. Helium-3 fusion is considered to be a likely candidate for spaceship propulsion. The closest source of Helium-3 is on the moon, though mining it there presents a number of engineering challenges also. But when we get enough from the moon, we could go and mine it on Saturn. (Jupiter has some too, but apparently there is way too much radiation on Jupiter)
Mixing in antimatter may be interesting but as you already mentioned there's the problem of producing enough of it.
There's also solar sail. It's slow, but only limited by engineering concerns. The theory has been around for a while.
Ion thrusters are in use today, but they would be unbearably slow from what I undestand.
For some more ideas check out this article.
Edit: Found an interesting article that describes some of the methods, drawbacks, and theories behind nuclear fusion as a propulsion method.
[Edited by - lightbringer on June 8, 2006 7:30:05 AM]
Mixing in antimatter may be interesting but as you already mentioned there's the problem of producing enough of it.
There's also solar sail. It's slow, but only limited by engineering concerns. The theory has been around for a while.
Ion thrusters are in use today, but they would be unbearably slow from what I undestand.
For some more ideas check out this article.
Edit: Found an interesting article that describes some of the methods, drawbacks, and theories behind nuclear fusion as a propulsion method.
[Edited by - lightbringer on June 8, 2006 7:30:05 AM]
I don't wish to rain on your parade but there is a flaw inherent in your concept, namely that 'near future' and 'space travel' do not belong together in any realistic fictional universe. By the time we colonise other parts of this star system we will already have invented super human AI, cybernetic brain implants, a variety of weird new weapons (energy based weapons are unlikely, however) and totally mastered fusion as a power source, which would be the natural choice to power spaceships.
HOWEVER, if you are looking for a retro-futurist 'steampunk' vibe then thats a different story and reality has little to do with it, in which case why not just use PETROLEUM? It has a whole car culture associated with it already which you can use as narrative and stylistic inspiration.
(btw it's not completely unfeasable to run a spaceship on gas, just very impractical)
HOWEVER, if you are looking for a retro-futurist 'steampunk' vibe then thats a different story and reality has little to do with it, in which case why not just use PETROLEUM? It has a whole car culture associated with it already which you can use as narrative and stylistic inspiration.
(btw it's not completely unfeasable to run a spaceship on gas, just very impractical)
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
