Microwaves: Making Your Car or SpaceShip Fly!

a reply to: jedi_hamster

I think you're off on this one Hamster. Microwave propulsion isn't really all that far fetched. Some of the data SG has posted might seem somewhat controversial, but keep in mind most of this tech isn't exactly civilian industry standard fare. Some of it seems to be fairly new to the white world, though I personally have my doubts about that. Most of it has probably been hiding in plain sight as unmentioned (but present) anomolies produced in various scientific experiments and observations over the last few decades.

In it's simplest form, microwave propulsion is an electric rocket motor, microwave fired. A vessel with a nozzle and a propellant valve through which you introduce the propellant which is then superheated by microwaves and exits at a high rate of speed from the nozzle.

As for the EM Drive and the rest of it, it has produced thrust in multiple experimental trials, and they haven't even(officially) tested it at the supercooled(superconducting) temperatures which are specified in the design. I for one think there is probably something to this aspect of microwave propulsion. At the very least, the test results from EM Drive so far are very promising if not ironclad, in my opinion. Don't let the nay sayers fool you. This is not all pseudo science.

a reply to: engineercutout


Thank You and Kudos to EngineerCutOut !!!!

ALl the literature I have tucked away on my computer
systems is ALL peer-reviewed by some of the biggest
names in RF and Microwave technology.

And because of certian well placed individuals
I have general associations with, I have a mild
inside view on what the state-of-the-art is
in terms of Microwave heating of fuels
to propel aircraft and spacecraft
AND the use of direct-jetting and other
manipulation of Microwaves (and other EM
bands!) for lift control using non-aerodynamic
methodologies/principles.

On a historical basis, the use of Microwaves
for fuel heating-oriented propulsion methods
AND those used on a more-direct basis
has been around since the 1960's.

In those days (1960's), it was Rockwell,
North American and NASA's Optics and
Microwave Laboratory in the Electronics
Research Center (i.e. pioneered by Louis S. Roberts)
and ALSO in those days I think also General Atomics too!

It wasn't until the 1970's/Early 1980's that
LMCO, Northrup, Boeing, Raytheon got
interested in using microwaves for more
than just RADAR and Communications!

There is also the Atlantic Undersea
Test and Evaluation Center (AUTEC)
in Andros Island, Bahamas and an
underwater test area off of Puerto Rico
used for creating Super Cavitating
torpedos and submarines that
use microwave-heated plasmas
and/or microwave-heated
single-gas/multi-gas atmosphere
to create a dynamically shaped
hull/water boundary layer that allow
such craft to go hundreds of miles
per hour (200+ MPH!) in an UNDERWATER
environment! (i.e. the high-friction
water gets pushed out of the way
by a super-heated or super-agitated
plasma or gas)

That is what I have currently publicly disclosed
but I have MORE ESOTERIC INFORMATON that
can be used to further make my point......... ;-) :-)

a reply to: StargateSG7

Like by using pulsed femto second lasers and microwaves to create a plasma bloom off the bow creating a "Aqua" spike travelling in front of the boat at "C" and offering no resistance of it's own like a physical cavitator would?

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: StargateSG7

Like by using pulsed femto second lasers and microwaves to create a plasma bloom off the bow creating a "Aqua" spike travelling in front of the boat at "C" and offering no resistance of it's own like a physical cavitator would?

---

Using an Analog Analogy, almost the same technique
used in Aerospike engines (aka SR-71) to modify bow,
stern and inlet shock waves and fuel-air streams (aquastreams?)
to give a boost in fuel-burning efficiency and final propulsion force.
In the case of underwater use Microwaves to heat the gas or plasma
to form a turbulent but sticks-to-the-hull laminar air/gas/plasma flow
which allows the water to hydrodynamically cleanly be pushed out of the way.


See background link:
en.wikipedia.org...

We seem to think on the same level as per
your description which I fully understand!

I know of at least 15 SAP/CAP programs in the
last 20 years where such "Aero/Aqua-Spike" techniques were
used for underwater and aerodynamic propulsion.

China is now big on this supercavitation technology too...

China’s supersonic submarine, which could go
from Shanghai to San Francisco in 100 minutes,
creeps ever closer to reality:

www.extremetech.com... to-reality

a reply to: StargateSG7


I should note that Microwave induced supercavitation
is mostly a USA and Russia Research Topic
(with Some Israeli and UK research too!)

a reply to: StargateSG7

totally!!

I always liked this PDF. Aviation forum doesn't like it when I post these.

www.princeton.edu...

www.princeton.edu...

Check out the acknowledgements near the bottom of the first one. Speaks for it's self.

Imagine adding that to a MHD Scramjet or a Energy by pass Augmented Turbine! Zooooooooooooooooooom!!!!!!!

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: StargateSG7

totally!!

I always liked this PDF. Aviation forum doesn't like it when I post these.

www.princeton.edu...

www.princeton.edu...

Check out the acknowledgements near the bottom of the first one. Speaks for it's self.

Imagine adding that to a MHD Scramjet or a Energy by pass Augmented Turbine! Zooooooooooooooooooom!!!!!!!

---

These papers have more classified counterparts
which deal with the comparisons done between
hydrodynamic and plasmadynamic simulations
done on supercomputers versus real-world
imaging taken by something like this baby:

Phantom v2512 with 600,000 to one million frames per second slo-mo:
www.visionresearch.com...

The hydrodynamic/plasmadynamic flows around and within
specific hull and engine/motor structures can be run and then
compared between the computer simulation and the real world tests.

The computer simulation and real world imaging data is compared
using statistical analysis, advanced data mining and basic
number crunching algorithms so as to form a Minimum, Maximum,
Average, Mean and Predicted performance parameters list
which can then be input into a CAD/CAM/FEA system to
make a highly refined model or simulaton of a real world
aricraft/spacecraft/watercraft/undersea craft which
can have its shape and engines/motors OPTIMIZED
for maximum possible real-world efficiency, performance
and/or cost-effectiveness/manufacturability.

Once everything is optimized on the computer,
the real world version can be built from scratch
using 3D printing (EBM/MPD/Laser Sintering)
or straight CNC machined to perfection down to
less than 1/50,000th of an Inch of dimensional error!

After that build-out, some locals in Utah, Texas or Alaska
get to see a blue-green, orange-white or red glow hovering
over their houses or coming from within their more
remote lakes, rivers and bays!

a reply to: StargateSG7
Is it possible that if an object is behind a microwave propulsionized craft; can or will there be damage from contact in some way?

originally posted by: PatriotGuard1776
a reply to: StargateSG7
Is it possible that if an object is behind a microwave propulsionized craft; can or will there be damage from contact in some way?

...

YUP! Cavity resonators used in both microwave-based fuel heating and
In direct jetting applications will
always have emissions.

Harmonics will be produced
And the internal reflectometry
Of ANY device used in microwave
Production pretty much ensures that
you SHOULD NOT stand underneath
or behind such propulsed vehicles!

It WILL COOK YOU !!!

The constant pulsing of emissions from
Such systems will also eventual change
or break chemical Bonds within plastics
And composites that have petroleum-based
resins in them thus becoming brittle/more
Fragile giving rise to possible aircraft/spacecraft
hull delamination issues.

a reply to: StargateSG7

Don't have time to go through everything right now.
Even if the question ahs been ask before, could you tell me if another matel can be used instead of copper?
All the examples I have seen on the web have shown copper being used and I would like to know if other "non-ferrous " metals would also work, since this could effect the cost.

originally posted by: tinymind
a reply to: StargateSG7

Don't have time to go through everything right now.
Even if the question ahs been ask before, could you tell me if another matel can be used instead of copper?
All the examples I have seen on the web have shown copper being used and I would like to know if other "non-ferrous " metals would also work, since this could effect the cost.

---

Copper is a the 2nd most electrically conductive metal
while SILVER is the MOST conductive but that is rather
expensive.

Aluminum Oxide Ceramic Infused with conductive
or non-conductive (i.e. always-touching/criss-crossing)
fibres can be used as a replacement for the linings
in exhaust nozzles or as coverings for ultra-heat
resistant turbine/fan blades or as the lining in
combustion chambers.

Alumina (aka Aluminum Oxide) is ultra hard
and can have it's ceramic-like brittleness
compensated for by adding small metallic
or non-metallic fibres to increase tensile
and torsional strength. It ALREADY has
high compressive strength and high
heat resistance (i.e. high melting point)
at 1500 Celcius (2700F) to 4000+ Celcius (7200F)
depending upon the ceramic formulation.

The 7200 Degrees Fahrenheit formulation
is a rather esoteric one that uses exotic
rare earths and other corrundum-like materials.

On a rather INEXPENSIVE basis you CAN get versions
of Alumina to width stand 2000 DEGREES CELCIUS
pretty easily and consistently!

If you need subsitutes for Copper as a conductive material
such as when collecting and transporting electrons ;-)
in a desired manner, then try softer formulations
of aluminum metal or if you need material flexibility
(i.e. bend, twist and coil) then use a high-salinity
liquid (i.e. Salt-Water!) encased in heat-resistant
non-conductive hoses.

If you're making saucer-like aerospace vehicles
that use Electro-Magnetic-Plasmadynamic
principles of flight, then you're going to have
to sandwich conductive layers of magnesium,
bismuth and some titanium interspersed between
Polyethylene and/or other semi-and-non-conductive
separators to make a dialectric hull (basically make
a giant supercapacitor!) that can be charged and
discharged very quickly (technically a transcapacitor!)

This is so you can push the Earth's atmosphere
out of the way (i.e. Plasma Sheathing!)

;-) :-)

Then to do Gravitational Shielding
so you can actually FLY your non-aerodynamically
shaped metal bucket, you're going to need a
REALLY HEAVY element such as vaporized
Tungsten, Lead, Gold, Uranium and you're
going to need to encase the chosen heavy
element in a Torus (i.e. large metal hose
all curled up -- See search term: Tokamak)
and accelerate them to near relativistic
speeds using a set of pulsed linear
induction coils.

The magnetic field created by the pulsed coils
will CONFINE the highly pressurized spinning
plasmas you will be creating. The reason why
you use magnetic confinement is that not
only is that plasma REALLY HOT, it's ALSO
that you need to make MANY micro-vortices
at near Planck's-Length scales so that
gravitational waves cannot pass through
or between the atomic structure of the
spinning heavy elements.

This is NOT a molelular scale process but rather
a Planck's Length (i.e. Quark-scale) process to
use spinning balls of highly excited atomic
structure to exert one or more of the
nuclear forces (i am assuming is the
STRONG binding force) so that as
those spinning/orbiting balls of
matter BLOCK as many directions
and pathways as possible so that
the WEAK FORCE (i.e. Gravity) CANNOT
pass through the gravitational shield structure.

This means anything INSIDE the torus's diameter is protected
from gravity and the accompanying issue of INERTIA being
applied to persons or objects inside the specific vertical
or horizontal AXIS that the torus structure encases.
You may need a GLOBULAR structure containing MANY
LAYERS of accelerated plasma if you want to protect
yourself in ALL directions from gravity and inertia!

---

I hope my explanation helps inform you
that YES Copper is NOT totally necessary
to build conductive systems and/or
aerospace vehicles.

There are OTHER materials available,
but you need some serious money
tomanufcature and machine such
more-exotic materials.

I HOPE THIS HELPS!