Russian scientists develop plasma engine prototype promising Mars trips in 30-60 days

Skye Jacobs

Posts: 584   +13
Staff
Something to look forward to: Scientists have created a laboratory prototype of a plasma electric rocket engine that could revolutionize space travel. Based on a magnetic plasma accelerator, this propulsion system promises to significantly reduce interplanetary travel time, potentially enabling trips to Mars in just one to two months.

Russia's State Atomic Energy Corporation, Rosatom, recently developed a new spacecraft engine with impressive specifications. It far surpasses the capabilities of traditional chemical rocket engines, capable of generating at least 6 N of thrust and a specific impulse of at least 100 km/s.

"Currently, a flight to Mars using conventional engines can take almost a year one way, which is dangerous for astronauts due to cosmic radiation and exposure to radiation," Alexey Voronov, First Deputy Director General for Science at the Rosatom Research Institute, explained. "Using plasma engines can shorten the mission to 30-60 days, meaning it will be possible to send an astronaut to Mars and back."

The engine operates on a fundamentally different principle than traditional rockets. Junior researcher Egor Biriulin explained that a plasma rocket engine is an electric propulsion system with two electrodes. When charged particles move between them and a high voltage is applied, an electric current generates a magnetic field. This field propels the particles out of the engine, giving the plasma a directed motion that produces thrust.

This approach has a power output of about 300 kW, allowing for unprecedented speeds. While traditional power units have a maximum matter flow velocity of about 4.5 km/s due to fuel combustion conditions, the new plasma engine accelerates charged particles – electrons and protons – to a speed of 100 km/s (62 miles/s).

Engineers will test the technology using a large-scale experimental stand assembled in Troitsk. The stand's key equipment is a vacuum chamber measuring four meters in diameter and 14 meters in length. Rosatom will equip the test unit with systems for high-performance vacuum pumping and heat removal, allowing scientists to simulate the conditions of deep space.

One notable advantage of this new engine design is its efficiency. Biriulin noted that the plasma does not need to be intensely heated, which means that the parts and components of the engine do not experience temperature overloads. Additionally, the engine converts nearly all the generated electrical energy into motion.

The spacecraft's initial launch into orbit will still rely on traditional chemical rockets. However, the plasma engine takes over once it reaches its designated orbit. Future spacefaring could incorporate the technology into space tugs to transport cargo between planets.

Before getting too excited, it's important to note that the research comes with several caveats come with the research. For one, the engine is still in the prototype stage, and significant development work remains before Rosatom can use it in crewed space missions. Also, while the group claims that its estimates of the engine's capabilities are "justified" through more than 2400 hours of testing, this may be optimistic since Rosatom has not tested the engine in space-like conditions for long durations.

Additionally, the potential use of space tugs for cargo transport between planets is speculative at this stage. It's important to remember that this is an early-stage technology, and the dramatic reduction in travel time to Mars should be viewed as a potential long-term goal rather than an imminent reality.

The development of this plasma engine is part of a broader initiative by Rosatom to advance space exploration technologies. The company is also involved in developing new nuclear power plants for various space applications, onboard systems, and automatic control and navigation systems for spacecraft.

Permalink to story:

 
Biggest problem here is that Russia says it's going to happen, So it's probably not going to happen.
More broadly, NASA, ESA and other space agencies and R&D labs have been testing various propulsion systems for decades with promising results but none have come outside the lab.

I have been watching these for years and years on documentaries over and over with great optimism from the scientists and engineers developing them but the sad thing is getting them outside the lab is totally another matter.
 
They can't. They talked about it for decades. And if you are aware what state their science is in, well they can't.
There was a rumor they launched another "Oreshnik" trying to hit a target in Ukraine, recently. Well, apparently it did not even reach the target.
Russia leeches on researches of USSR.
A man who used to sell donated food to starving people, is not a man to make science flourish.
 
When someone says they have a tech that will improve a tech THAT HASN'T HAPPENED YET, don't believe anything you hear (or read)...

No one has actually travelled to Mars yet - to now read that there is a tech to make that happen faster... well... I suggest you take it with extreme caution...
 
One of the biggest hurdles for new propulsion technologies is power generation. This plasma engine requires 300 kW—far beyond what current spacecraft can provide with solar panels alone. That means nuclear reactors in space will likely be necessary for long-term use. It’s exciting but also raises big questions about safety, logistics, and international regulations for nuclear-powered spacecraft.
 
More broadly, NASA, ESA and other space agencies and R&D labs have been testing various propulsion systems for decades with promising results but none have come outside the lab.

I have been watching these for years and years on documentaries over and over with great optimism from the scientists and engineers developing them but the sad thing is getting them outside the lab is totally another matter.
Did you miss this one? https://science.nasa.gov/mission/deep-space-1/
It was out of the lab and very, very successful.
 
Sounds promising.

But then you have to explain to me how we're going to set up a habitat on Mars before sending anyone there - and make it livable considering there's no breathable oxygen, water or arable soil. To go there is a suicide mission.

A rocket that goes there needs just as much resources just to come back to Earth.
 
The ion propulsion system operates by taking, for example, 1 kg of xenon gas, which is stored under high pressure in a 1 kg metallic tank. The xenon is ionized by bombarding it with electrons. Electricity from solar panels is used to create an electric field, which propels the ionized xenon gas backward, generating forward thrust for the spacecraft. The efficiency of solar panels is approximately 20%, the ionization process is about 65% efficient, the acceleration process is around 92% efficient and the neutralization process (to prevent the spacecraft from becoming charged) is 95% efficient. Therefore, the total efficiency of the ion propulsion method is 0.2 * 0.65 * 0.92 * 0.95 = 11.4% total efficiency.

If, instead of using 1 kg of gas in a 1 kg tank, 2 kg of magnetic neodymium spheres (each with a diameter of 1 cm or different diameters for each occasion) are used inside a plastic tube and superconductor electromagnets are employed to produce a 1 Tesla magnetic field (solar panels give more than enough energy for 1 Tesla I have make the calculations) with the ambient temperature in space being only a few Kelvin that makes superconductivity feasible without complex cooling systems. According to my calculations this setup could produce a thrust of 50 N for each neodymium ball, resulting in an acceleration of 12.7 km/s for the ball. The total efficiency in this case would be 0.2 (solar) * 0.95 (superconductor electromagnet) * 0.9 (magnetic to kinetic force) * 0.95 (additional losses from friction) = 16.2% total efficiency with the added benefit of having double the mass of "fuel" and a lighter overall system, as the mass of the empty gas tank remains even after the gas is depleted.

Using superconductor electromagnets, which are already employed in elevated trains in Japan at normal ambient temperatures, becomes more feasible in the cold environment of space. This method offers 50% more efficiency with 100% more fuel mass. It is analogous to using a propeller versus sailing with the wind, as the neodymium magnets are inherently natural magnetic and do not require energy to magnetize. This innovative concept for spacecraft propulsion (which I thought now while I was reading this article) is available for free use as I have not patented it and I am not going to do it in the future :)

Another method used by spacecraft for propulsion involves the deployment of solar sails, which utilize the pressure of real photons from sunlight to produce a small but constant force. However, the farther the spacecraft is from the Sun, the weaker this force becomes. Instead of relying on real photons, a mechanism could be developed to harness virtual photons from quantum fluctuations of the vacuum, similar to the Casimir effect.

The Casimir effect involves two reflective (uncharged) metal plates that utilize the difference in pressure of virtual photons between the outside and inside, creating a force that causes the plates to move when they are very close to each other, on the scale of nanometers. In a spacecraft, instead of using two reflective plates, they could use a single but absorbing plate. This could be tested by measuring whether a cone painted with Vantablack—a material known for its efficient absorption of photons due to its carbon nanotube composition—also absorbs and virtual photons. If this occurs, the cone would experience a tiny but constant force from the difference in pressure caused by the absorption.

If successful, this black cone, which absorbs virtual photons, could be placed inside the spacecraft for propulsion production, similar to solar sails and rotated to manipulate its direction and it doesn’t require any type of energy to work.
 
Last edited:
Everything people think they know about Mars, or have seen images of Mars, is in actuality just Devon Island. No one is getting off this rock. Firmament. Proven since 1955 Operation Deep Freeze and confirmed once more by Operation Dominic in 1962. We can’t go to the moon but we can colonize Mars.. It’s all been a lie.
 
When someone says they have a tech that will improve a tech THAT HASN'T HAPPENED YET, don't believe anything you hear (or read)...

No one has actually travelled to Mars yet - to now read that there is a tech to make that happen faster... well... I suggest you take it with extreme caution...
You're my hero. For decades, graphene and nanotubes was said to takeover the world and nothing has happened ever since.
 
Predictable comments. Anything that isn't from the USA is rubbished.
That is, until the Sputnik or Gagarin moment, when the propaganda falls apart.
The Russians have been researching nuclear/plasma engines for many decades.
China isn't far behind.
 
Sounds promising.

But then you have to explain to me how we're going to set up a habitat on Mars before sending anyone there - and make it livable considering there's no breathable oxygen, water or arable soil. To go there is a suicide mission.

A rocket that goes there needs just as much resources just to come back to Earth.
the theory is there are pockets of frozen water on mars to help.
 
Everything people think they know about Mars, or have seen images of Mars, is in actuality just Devon Island. No one is getting off this rock. Firmament. Proven since 1955 Operation Deep Freeze and confirmed once more by Operation Dominic in 1962. We can’t go to the moon but we can colonize Mars.. It’s all been a lie.
:rolleyes: Conspiracy theorists are everywhere.
 
Predictable comments. Anything that isn't from the USA is rubbished.
That is, until the Sputnik or Gagarin moment, when the propaganda falls apart.
The Russians have been researching nuclear/plasma engines for many decades.
China isn't far behind.
:rolleyes: As if the USA/NASA has not been researching NEP for decades?
  • The United States has been intermittently investigating the use of nuclear propulsion for in-space applications for almost 70 years.
  • NASA and the Atomic Energy Commission (now part of the DOE) made significant investments and progress at the dawn of the Atomic Age, starting in 1955 as the Los Alamos National Laboratory’s Project Rover and then transitioning to the Nuclear Engine for Rocket Vehicle Applications (NERVA) program, between 1961 and 1973.
  • The Atomic Energy Commission and U.S. Air Force started the Systems Nuclear Auxiliary Power (SNAP) program in 1955, and it continued as a partnership between the AEC and NASA through 1973. Many of the technologies developed under SNAP were for radioisotope power generators, but there was also significant fission power system work, culminating with SNAP-10A in 1965 – the first and only U.S. nuclear fission reactor in space.
  • Multiple NTP and NEP technology development efforts have existed since the end of the NERVA and SNAP programs. Highlights include the SP-100 program, the Space Exploration Initiative, the Space Nuclear Thermal Propulsion program, and Project Prometheus.
[HEADING=1][/HEADING]
No one in the comments is saying that anything that isn't from the USA is rubbish. Perhaps you should re-read them.
 
Sounds like a "magnetoplasmadynamic" thruster.

Even if this reaction engine is more powerful than the ion thruster, the still unsolved problem is how to store the needed energy without adding too much mass to the spacecraft.
Space probes can get away with a radioisotope thermoelectric generator and/or a solar array, because they are small and are not required to go as fast as possible.
At this time it seems that the only practical solution is a small nuclear reactor aboard the spacecraft.
 
Predictable comments. Anything that isn't from the USA is rubbished.
That is, until the Sputnik or Gagarin moment, when the propaganda falls apart.
The Russians have been researching nuclear/plasma engines for many decades.
China isn't far behind.
The thing here is to sustain those developments, The Soviet Union couldn't do that further down the road and lost the race to the US. It wasn't just the landing on the moon, also probes sent nearby and faraway planets; the former ones have been operational far longer than expected. Cassini, for example, went to Saturn also lived longer than expected. That's the point.
 
Back