Talk-Polywell.org

Energy Horizons
United States Air Force
Energy S&T Vision
2011-2026
AF/ST TR 11-01
31 January 2012

Not one peep about p-11B fusion, Polywell, FRC, DPF or LENR.

Sad. What a miserable waste of my tax dollars.

DeltaV wrote:Energy Horizons
United States Air Force
Energy S&T Vision
2011-2026
AF/ST TR 11-01
31 January 2012

Not one peep about p-11B fusion, Polywell, FRC, DPF or LENR.

Sad. What a miserable waste of my tax dollars.

Is this a good place to start a Navy vs AF fight? That said it is sad.

OTOH when the Polywell stuff was fresh ('07 IIRC) I had a group of exAF officers who are now R&D guys contact me.

I'd love to see USAF and USN try to outdo each other on Polywell funding.

Not politically correct, though (therefore unlikely to happen), as it doesn't involve solar, wind, etc.

They probably spent more on that worthless "vision" paper than all Polywell funding to date.

They probably spent more on that worthless "vision" paper than all Polywell funding to date.

I think that this is actually quite likely.

DeltaV wrote:Energy Horizons
United States Air Force
Energy S&T Vision
2011-2026
AF/ST TR 11-01
31 January 2012

Not one peep about p-11B fusion, Polywell, FRC, DPF or LENR.

Sad. What a miserable waste of my tax dollars.

These things are showing promise. But until I see working reactors, I think they still must be considered speculative. At least the Navy is funding the most promising of these, which is the polywell.

It is the nature of bureaucracy to be averse to any kind of innovation or risk.

What I would like to see is more on Thorium nuclear power (LFTR, MSR, etc.) as well as the various small modular reactors being commercialized. If stuff like polywell or LENR do not show up, advanced fission power is the future of energy production.

Actually, I (as do Slough, Rostoker, Art Carlson and others) that FRC- colliding beam reactors have a higher chance of success than Polywell, even.

Skipjack wrote:Actually, I (as do Slough, Rostoker, Art Carlson and others) that FRC- colliding beam reactors have a higher chance of success than Polywell, even.

I for one would be ecstatic if both solutions prove practical...

I for one would be ecstatic if both solutions prove practical...

Well that of course would be the best of all possible outcomes. Personally, I have given up on being optimistic about anything lately.

Presuming the Polywell works, the navy can certainly use in on their ships. A fusion powered aircraft are certain to be much harder, if the weight doesn't kill the idea outright.

On a tangent, fusion ramjet cruise missile with an unshielded reactor?

On a tangent, fusion ramjet cruise missile with an unshielded reactor?

Like Pluto? Be fun.

According to all we know at this point, you can probably fit a polywell on a plane the size of a 747. Your payload will suffer greatly however. Likely a polywell world would see a more flying wing type configuration to increase usable volume while keeping within the limits of airports, at least until they can expand to the new, permanent system.

I see the project limits itself to goals achievable within 15 years.

The F-22 took 24 years from initial requirement to entering service. Development of the Nimitz class would only just barely fit in that time period.

I understand the USAF wanting to identify achievable goals, but I wonder if they understand that real improvement takes time; and usually longer than 15 years.

real improvement takes time; and usually longer than 15 years.

Only if the government does it.

How bout if they use it as the powerplant of a very large dirigible. May not even need to be helium filled, just a massive hot air machine.

20 MW of waste heat from a reactor could heat a BIG hot air dirigible.
(estimate based on a 100MW reactor with direct conversion system).