Talk-Polywell.org

How small in terms of size and mass could a polywell for transportation use practically be? Naval destroyers and submarines seem likely. Civilian naval shipping seems likely at some point given a working polywell plant. Railroad locomotives? Airliners? Trucks?

Dr Bussard, in an interview http://www.americanantigravity.com/grap ... erview.wma

mentioned designs for a truck based polywell. I think he mentioned 100MW.

Very Very roughly 1 KW = 1 HP

1 MW ~= 1,000 HP.

MSimon wrote:
1 MW

Generation III

From what I have seen on this forum and generally around it appears that power output scales as r^7 with a 2 meter radius reactor putting out 100MW. As I understand this changing the output power drastically will not drastically change the radius. So I dont see a polywell fitting on a train or truck.

However, i think that it is about time for hybrid super blimps to make an appearance/resurgance, you've even got helium production on board...

I think Dr. Bussard started out in the field of Nuclear flight

also, What is Generation III?

-Eric D

Gen I - stationary plants
Gen II - ships/ large aircraft
Gen III - trucks and trains

MSimon wrote:Gen I - stationary plants
Gen II - ships/ large aircraft
Gen III - trucks and trains

Timescale guesstimate on each generation?

IIRC, the el humungo 8000MWth plants mentioned for the QED rockets were 5m radius grid, 10m radius vacuum vessel. Though the 10m radius might have included the direct conversion system, with a smaller-radius vacuum vessel..

Here's an oddball option. A "deployable" Gen 1 or 2 reactor. Components packed densely, for transport, and then unfold like a toy transformer when in place. Transport mode no larger than a standard international shipping container.

Duane

The fewer the seams the better. I think one would be enough.

Or else we blimp or helicopter them in. Barges and ships every where else.

you could always use special road transport 3x3m can fit on most roads,
i think its tall that is the limeting factor

MSimon wrote:The fewer the seams the better. I think one would be enough.

Or else we blimp or helicopter them in. Barges and ships every where else.

BOOOOOORING!

Might as well have some fun. Besides, maximum packing density has some advantages.

Duane

There are a few specially designated very large load routes.
For example one goes from Morton Thiokol in Utah to a barge terminal in Louisiana for the SS Boosters.

Given that reactor gain, a key factor to reactor go / no go, is projected to scale with B^4R, R and total power could be pretty small given the right magnet technology. But what about radiation shielding?

Radiation shielding...

What's this I hear about a 477keV gamma emitted from a boron-10 neutron capture event? That's almost positron annihilation energy.

Maybe lithium-6 would be better. The cross section is one-fourth that of boron-10, but it doesn't emit gamma rays. It does, however, produce a tritium nucleus... hmm... where have I heard about THIS before?

Uranium-235 is another commonly mentioned option, but its cross section is even lower, and... why am I trying to come up with excuses not to use uranium as radiation shielding in a truck? Methinks I've heard about this reaction somewhere before too...

hanelyp wrote:Given that reactor gain, a key factor to reactor go / no go, is projected to scale with B^4R, R and total power could be pretty small given the right magnet technology. But what about radiation shielding?

One of the known problems is the large pulse power required for start up. Could be 1 to 20 MW for from 100 microseconds to as long as 10 seconds. That says you have to have a certain minimum size to be worth the power supplies. Of course if the start up problem can be reduced or eliminated then it is a different ballgame.

I'd be surprised if Polywell can work as a power source for anything smaller than a carrier. And I'm guessing it carries a small fission reactor to start up the fusion reactor.