Low Exhaust Velocity Fusion Rocket

JoshNH4H · 2014-06-24 13:07:31

When we talk about fusion rockets, we're usually talking about ones with extremely high exhaust velocities, often discussed for their use in starships or interplanetary ships on brachistochrone (read: constant acceleration followed by constant deceleration) trajectories, for example making it possible to get from Earth to Mars in between 5 and 13 days accelerating at 1 g all the while depending on the orbital configuration. This would require between 4,200 and 11,000 km/s of delta-V (for reasonable mass ratios [Read: I used 5], exhaust velocities between 2,600 and 6,800 km/s-- .9% to 2.3% of c). I certainly agree that if you're going to fly brachistochrone trajectories like these you need ridiculously high exhaust velocities like those.

But what if you just want to build a better launcher from Earth? The thrust requirements are perhaps slightly higher but the exhaust velocity requirements are much lower. If you want to launch from Earth with a total trajectory delta-V of 14 km/s, which is enough not only to launch to orbit but also to slow down to 3-4 km/s entry speed, which is a much nicer re-entry, you need an exhaust velocity around 10 km/s, or 1000 s. I assumed a mass ratio of 4 so that you can have a good structural fraction.

This is a much less strenuous application than brachistochrone trajectories, because the engine power will be lower per unit thrust. Having said that, it will still be high. If you have a T/W at liftoff of 2 (because the mass ratio is lower than for a chemical rocket, you need to start off with a correspondingly higher thrust to weight to minimize gravity losses), and 1/3 of your structural mass fraction is the engines, the engines will need to have a thrust-to-weight ratio of 25. At an exhaust velocity of 10,000 m/s, this corresponds to a specific power of 2.5 MW/kg. This is roughly comparable to the highest engine chemical thrusters, which isn't really a surprise since taking into account the lower T/W of the engine and its higher exhaust velocity we're asking for something roughly comparable to a chemical engine in terms of performance.

Of course this is still an incredibly high power to weight ratio for an electrical device. Maybe if the polywell pans out, eh?

Terraformer · 2014-06-24 15:02:53

Or ultimate dialectric capacitors, with a capacity of 500MJ/kg... with 10% of your craft as capacitors, you'll be able to produce a jet with twice the Isp of Hydrolox...

JoshNH4H · 2014-06-24 15:15:46

What do you mean when you say ultimate dielectric capacitors? Are you referring to a real design or a feasible concept, or simply picking a number?

Terraformer · 2014-06-25 04:31:03

No, Adam Crowl posted the link somewhere in... Icarus Interstellar? That's the limit that they were talking about. Whether we can realistically make such capacitors remains to be seen, but at least it's possible. Kind of like a low mass, high power fusion reactor

But if we can, then cheap access to space becomes a much easier challenge.

JoshNH4H · 2014-06-25 08:31:58

Sure, fair enough. I wonder what that ship would look like.

I would imagine that these ultracapacitors would work best at low temperatures, so they would probably be surrounded by liquid hydrogen, which would also be used as the fuel for the rocket. Hopefully they would be dense but they might not be, who knows?

Depending what the q of the fusion reactor was, we might or might not want to power it separately. I assume that a high specific power, high net power reactor may have a lower q (ratio of energy output to energy input) than reactors designed to maximize q, so perhaps it would make sense to power it with a high-q, lower output reactor. Though then again larger reactors tend to have higher q's anyway.

:sigh: If only we had a propulsion system that was cheap, safe, high thrust, high Isp, reliable, and actually existed.

JoshNH4H · 2014-06-25 10:18:16

Do we have any guesses available as to what the thrust-to-weight of a mass driver might be?

Quaoar · 2014-10-16 15:20:16

Here there are some very interesting designs by Robert Bussard about polywell powered realistic fusion spaceships: a shuttle SSTO and a lunar lander, with a water propelled high thrust regenerative cooled electro-thermal fusion rocket (15-20 km/s of exaust velocity); an inner solar system ship with a radiator cooled moderate thrust electro-thermal fusion rocket (55 km/s of exaust velocity); an outer solar system ship with low thrust thermal fusion rocket (200-400 km/s exaust velocity).

http://www.askmar.com/Fusion_files/QED% … tation.pdf

Last edited by Quaoar (2014-10-16 15:20:56)

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-10-20 06:25:54

So basically fusion SSTOs require the fusion product be kept separate from the propellent, as contact with air would disrupt the fusion process by cooling the plasma.

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-10-20 10:14:43

It was a very interesting download by the way. So it says a closed fusion reactor could heat propellant and produce multiple g thrust to lift off of Earth, and using more efficient open fusion reactors in space, it could travel to Titan in 6 months, and those same fusion reactors would be the preferred power source on Titan, once the colony was established, as their is plenty of Deuterium on Titan in the form of various ices and in hydrocarbon lakes, streams, and rivers. In addition Lockheed says it could develop a compact fusion reactor that could fit in the back of a large truck in 10 years!

Lockheed says makes breakthrough on fusion energy project

By Andrea Shalal

WASHINGTON Wed Oct 15, 2014 1:09pm EDT
?m=02&d=20141015&t=2&i=983693043&w=580&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&r=LYNXNPEA9E0V6
The magnetic coils inside the compact fusion experiment pictured in an undated photo provided by Lockheed Martin.

Credit: Reuters/Lockheed Martin

(Reuters) - Lockheed Martin Corp said on Wednesday it had made a technological breakthrough in developing a power source based on nuclear fusion, and the first reactors, small enough to fit on the back of a truck, could be ready for use in a decade.

Tom McGuire, who heads the project, said he and a small team had been working on fusion energy at Lockheed's secretive Skunk Works for about four years, but were now going public to find potential partners in industry and government for their work.

Initial work demonstrated the feasibility of building a 100-megawatt reactor measuring seven feet by 10 feet, which could fit on the back of a large truck, and is about 10 times smaller than current reactors, McGuire told reporters.

In a statement, the company, the Pentagon's largest supplier, said it would build and test a compact fusion reactor in less than a year, and build a prototype in five years.

In recent years, Lockheed has gotten increasingly involved in a variety of alternate energy projects, including several ocean energy projects, as it looks to offset a decline in U.S. and European military spending.

Lockheed's work on fusion energy could help in developing new power sources amid increasing global conflicts over energy, and as projections show there will be a 40 percent to 50 percent increase in energy use over the next generation, McGuire said.

If it proves feasible, Lockheed's work would mark a key breakthrough in a field that scientists have long eyed as promising, but which has not yet yielded viable power systems. The effort seeks to harness the energy released during nuclear fusion, when atoms combine into more stable forms.

"We can make a big difference on the energy front," McGuire said, noting Lockheed's 60 years of research on nuclear fusion as a potential energy source that is safer and more efficient than current reactors based on nuclear fission.

Lockheed sees the project as part of a comprehensive approach to solving global energy and climate change problems.

Compact nuclear fusion would produce far less waste than coal-powered plants since it would use deuterium-tritium fuel, which can generate nearly 10 million times more energy than the same amount of fossil fuels, the company said.

Ultra-dense deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen, is found in the earth's oceans, and tritium is made from natural lithium deposits.

It said future reactors could use a different fuel and eliminate radioactive waste completely.

McGuire said the company had several patents pending for the work and was looking for partners in academia, industry and among government laboratories to advance the work.

Lockheed said it had shown it could complete a design, build and test it in as little as a year, which should produce an operational reactor in 10 years, McGuire said. A small reactor could power a U.S. Navy warship, and eliminate the need for other fuel sources that pose logistical challenges.

U.S. submarines and aircraft carriers run on nuclear power, but they have large fission reactors on board that have to be replaced on a regular cycle.

"What makes our project really interesting and feasible is that timeline as a potential solution," McGuire said.

Lockheed shares fell 0.6 percent to $175.02 amid a broad market selloff.

(Editing by Jeffrey Benkoe)

The key point being is that a small fusion reactor that can fit in the back of a large truck, can also go into space Titan Society anyone? With fusion as a power source, this would open up both Mars and Titan to colonization. In a fusion powered economy, which would have more resources to exploit? I think Titan definitely has more deuterium. Deuterium fusion powered heaters would be quite popular.

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2014-10-20 10:19:18)

Spaniard · 2014-10-21 01:03:58

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

So basically fusion SSTOs require the fusion product be kept separate from the propellent, as contact with air would disrupt the fusion process by cooling the plasma.

In Space, if you try to maximize impulse, you could use the byproduct of fusion (like Helium-4 isotope) as propellent.
But for a SSTO, a lot of mass is required as propellent to reach the high thrust needed to reach orbit, so yes, fusion plasma and propellent are separated.
I suppose that a aneutronic with high energy capture is needed to transfer into the propelent, because using pure thermal transfer, the core would be hotter than propellent, and normal exahust heat is too high for a nuclear wall to resist.
The solution is to capture the energy in usefull (electric) form instead of heat and use fast transfer into propellent. Like a Skylon with extra energy transfer from microwaves usign fusion energy source with high energy capture (to avoid overheat into the nuclear reactor). If the nuclear reactor is enough powerfull, you could even use water in liquid form because the energy of the reactor is enough to avoid the needed of hydrogen and oxygen as in Skylon, and use a more compact design of the spaceship. Or use methane because it has a better hydrogen ratio (you don't need oxygen as oxydizer with a fusion source).

In space, a thermal core is viable, because you can use low thrust and heat rejection.

tahanson43206 · 2025-08-18 06:13:19

This topic from 2014 deserves an update in 2025...

kbd512 posted a link to a NASA report from 2012 that somehow missed the attention of the participants in the original topic.

The link to the PDF is available in the Google Meeting topic, with a date of 2025/08/17-18

https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 08#p233608

Here is a quote from the first page of the report:

Phase I Final Report
John Slough, Anthony Pancotti, David Kirtley, Christopher Pihl,
Michael Pfaff
MSNW LLC
8551 154th Ave NE
Redmond WA. 98052
425-867-8900
NASA Grant: NNX12AR39G
September 30, 2012

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2025-08-18 13:25:36

The NASA study kbd512 showed us is 31 pages long. It appears to be well worth reading as a foundation for subsequent reports.

I asked Google what has happened in the field since 2012, and it came up with this list.

Did you mean: what progress has been made on Fusion Driven Rocket science NASA study of 2012
AI Overview
Following the 2012 NASA study on Fusion Driven Rocket (FDR), a 2017 NASA publication further outlines the FDR concept. The FDR aims to achieve fusion propulsion by directly converting fusion energy into thrust, eliminating the need for electricity conversion and minimizing issues associated with radiators and heat rejection in space environments.
Key areas of progress and focus since 2012 include
Direct energy conversion: The FDR approach emphasizes direct conversion of fusion energy into a high-velocity exhaust stream, utilizing solid lithium propellant, according to NASA. This avoids the mass and thermal management challenges of fusion-electric systems.
Magneto-Inertial Fusion (MIF): Breakthroughs in achieving inertial fusion at a relevant scale for space propulsion include the enhanced confinement provided by significant magnetization of the target plasma, easing the compressive requirements for fusion gain and ignition. This approach is termed Magneto-Inertial Fusion (MIF).
Targeting High Specific Impulse (Isp): Research continues to explore how to best channel fusion energy into a suitable directed propellant for optimal Isp, with potential for Isp values in the range of millions of seconds.
Focus on Aneutronic Fusion and Beam Conditioning: Some studies have focused on aneutronic fusion and the development of beam conditioning processes for fusion products to create an exhaust jet with the required thrust and Isp characteristics.
Subscale Liner Compression Testing: Phase II studies for the FDR involve the assembly of a subscale laboratory liner compression test facility to reach fusion gain conditions, says NASA TechPort.
Increased Funding and Private Sector Involvement: Since the 2012 study, the landscape of fusion energy research and development has seen significant growth in both public and private investment. Several private companies are actively pursuing commercial fusion energy, including concepts with potential implications for space propulsion, like Helicity Space.
In summary, the progress since 2012 involves advancements in the theoretical understanding of fusion for propulsion, exploration of direct energy conversion methods, development of Magneto-Inertial Fusion (MIF) concepts, and a growing interest from both government and the private sector, all of which contribute to the potential realization of Fusion Driven Rockets in the future.
The Fusion Driven Rocket: Nuclear Propulsion through Direct ...
Mar 25, 2019 — The future of manned space exploration and development of space depends critically on the creation of a dramatically more proficient propulsion architecture for...
favicon
NASA (.gov)
Nuclear Propulsion through Direct Conversion of Fusion Energy
Sep 30, 2012 — There was no known way to accomplish this at that time, but it was feasible at least in theory. The second major theoretical result was obtained by Basko et al.
favicon
NASA (.gov)
Developing Private-Sector-Led Fusion Pilot Plants by the 2030s
Oct 4, 2024 — Public-Private Partnerships: Catalyzing Commercialization. ... In May 2023, the DOE awarded $46 million to eight private companies for fusion power plant design...
favicon
Nuclear Business Platform
Show all
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
The Fusion Driven Rocket: Nuclear Propulsion through ...
NASA (.gov)
https://www.nasa.gov › general › the-fusion-driven-roc...
Mar 25, 2019 — The Fusion Driven rocket (FDR) represents a revolutionary approach to fusion propulsion where the power source releases its energy directly into the propellant.
People also ask
What progress has been made towards controllable fusion energy?
Is fusion propulsion possible?
How many times more efficient can fusion-powered rockets be than conventional rockets?
What is nuclear fusion NASA?
Feedback
Concept Assessment of a Fission Fragment Rocket Engine ...
NASA (.gov)
https://www.nasa.gov › uploads › 2019/04 › niac...
PDF
by R Werka · Cited by 1 — The FFRE uses the relativistic speed of fission fragments to produce thrust, with a theoretical specific impulse of 1,000,000 sec, and a radiatively cooled ...
37 pages
Fusion rocket
Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Fusion_rocket
A fusion rocket is a theoretical design for a rocket driven by fusion propulsion that could provide efficient and sustained acceleration in space
Aneutronic Fusion Spacecraft Architecture
NASA (.gov)
https://www.nasa.gov › uploads › 2017/07 › niac...
PDF
It has reached a high level of scientific and technological maturity through a half-century of remarkable progress. However, even if a fusion reactor were to be ...
33 pages
Reaching the Stars in a Century using Fusion Propulsion
Initiative for Interstellar Studies
https://i4is.org › Featured
by PJ Mahon — Fusion-based rocket propulsion remains our best current option to deliver substantial probe payloads to the nearest stars quickly.
Analyzing the engineering feasibility of the direct fusion drive
ScienceDirect.com
https://www.sciencedirect.com › science › article › pii
by Y Jain · 2023 · Cited by 9 — This paper addresses the technological gaps and suggests avenues to improve specifications toward targets outlined in previous studies while considering costs.
Have fusion, will travel
ITER
https://www.iter.org › node › have-fusion-will-travel
Jul 15, 2019 — Fusion reactors are now contemplated as a heat source that would bring propellant to extremely high temperature (and hence high-velocity exhaust), or expel ...
niac_2012_phaseii_slough_fusi...
NASA (.gov)
https://www.nasa.gov › uploads › 2019/03 › niac...
PDF
Cited by 5 — 1D Liner Code is a Matlab® code developed to simulate the dynamic liner-compression for the fusion driven rocket experiment. The code assumes symmetric two ...
Nuclear thermal rocket
Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Nuclear_thermal_rocket
A launch was expected in 2027, but this was put on indefinite hold due to nuclear reactor test requirements, later compounded by proposed cuts by the second ...
Discovery III: Missions to the Outer Planets Using Inertial ...
Aerospace Research Central
https://arc.aiaa.org › doi
Jan 28, 2025 — This work revisits a NASA crewed spacecraft design concept Discovery II, which proposed to use a spherical torus magnetic confinement fusion reactor.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2025-08-18 13:30:24

This paper was published in 2025: https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/1.A36159

Discovery III: Missions to the Outer Planets Using Inertial Confinement Fusion Propulsion
Kelvin F. Long
Published Online:28 Jan 2025https://doi.org/10.2514/1.A36159
Read Now
Tools
Share
Abstract
In the future, space missions to the outer planets within our solar system that carry a human crew may be possible. This work revisits a NASA crewed spacecraft design concept Discovery II, which proposed to use a spherical torus magnetic confinement fusion reactor. The revised spacecraft Discovery III is modeled using a numerical spacecraft propulsion and mission profile code called HeliosX written in Fortran 95, but using an inertial confinement fusion engine for the same 172-ton payload mass, matching mass flow rates and exhaust velocities, achieving a mission time of 118 days for Jupiter and 212 days for Saturn. Both the inertial confinement fusion (ICF) and magnetic confinement fusion vehicles utilize expellant propellant for mass flow rate augmentation by the thermalization of injected hydrogen and thermonuclear fuel in the exhaust. Calculations are performed and the models are assessed for deviation from optimality. It is concluded that, while the ICF version is more massive, less mature technologically, and the worst performer in terms of jet efficiency, preliminary results indicate a lower fuel requirement, which may imply a technological advantage.
Previous Article

(th)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2014-06-24 13:07:31

Low Exhaust Velocity Fusion Rocket

#2 2014-06-24 15:02:53

Re: Low Exhaust Velocity Fusion Rocket

#3 2014-06-24 15:15:46

Re: Low Exhaust Velocity Fusion Rocket

#4 2014-06-25 04:31:03

Re: Low Exhaust Velocity Fusion Rocket

#5 2014-06-25 08:31:58

Re: Low Exhaust Velocity Fusion Rocket

#6 2014-06-25 10:18:16

Re: Low Exhaust Velocity Fusion Rocket

#7 2014-10-16 15:20:16

Re: Low Exhaust Velocity Fusion Rocket

#8 2014-10-20 06:25:54

Re: Low Exhaust Velocity Fusion Rocket

#9 2014-10-20 10:14:43

Re: Low Exhaust Velocity Fusion Rocket

#10 2014-10-21 01:03:58

Re: Low Exhaust Velocity Fusion Rocket

#11 2025-08-18 06:13:19

Re: Low Exhaust Velocity Fusion Rocket

#12 2025-08-18 13:25:36

Re: Low Exhaust Velocity Fusion Rocket

#13 2025-08-18 13:30:24

Re: Low Exhaust Velocity Fusion Rocket

Board footer