Game Changer: New Pulsed Plasma Rocket Could Get Us to Mars in 2 Months

Discover the groundbreaking Pulsed Plasma Rocket (PPR) developed by Howe Industries and funded by NASA. This innovative propulsion system could cut the travel time to Mars down to just two months, making space missions faster and safer. Learn how this technology works and its potential to revolutionize space exploration.
Chapters:
00:00 Introduction
00:36 Overview and Innovations of the Pulsed Plasma Rocket (PPR)
02:46 Achievements, Progress, and Technical Details
04:21 Impact on Future Mars Missions and Broader Implications
07:06 Outro
07:21 Enjoy
Best Telescopes for beginners:
Celestron 70mm Travel Scope
amzn.to/3jBi3yY
Celestron 114LCM Computerized Newtonian Telescope
amzn.to/3VzNUgU
Celestron - StarSense Explorer LT 80AZ
amzn.to/3jBRmds
Visit our website for up-to-the-minute updates:
www.nasaspacenews.com
Follow us
Facebook: / nasaspacenews
Twitter: / spacenewsnasa
Join this channel to get access to these perks:
/ @nasaspacenewsagency
#NSN #NASA #Astronomy#MarsMission #NASA #PulsedPlasmaRocket #SpaceTravel #HoweIndustries #SpaceExploration #MarsInTwoMonths #NewRocketTech #FasterSpaceTravel #NuclearPropulsion #InnovativeTechnology #Astronauts #SpaceSafety #FutureOfSpace #MarsBase #InterplanetaryTravel #ScienceNews #SpaceInnovation #RocketScience #MarsJourney #SpaceMission #AdvancedPropulsion #NASAResearch #SpaceTech #MarsExploration #ExploringMars #SpaceFrontier #HumanOnMars #RocketDevelopment #SpaceUpdates

[@dennisleas8996]

Thank God I can listen to this at 2x speed. So much talking, so little real information.

[@JoeBManco]

Good idea.

[@k.sullivan6303]

They are still trying to catch Superman and lash him to the front of a Starship. Then they tie a bag of Kryptonite onto the back of the Starship and Bob's your uncle!

[@dilaton1]

Does the two months include turning around at one month and accelerating in the opposite direction in order to come to a stop at Mars?

[@marcyoungblood5925]

I wondered the same thing.

[@RGF19651]

Probably not.

[@jemelking25]

So much content on taking off and getting there. When are we planning on perfecting landing?

[@rtxagent6303]

SpaceX is doing a lot of work on that now.

[@jemelking25]

@rtxagent6303 I'm tracking that. Just wanna see content on it

[@nikhilkumarsingh889]

UNSTOPPABLE !!!! 👽👽👽👽

[@ioanbota9397]

Its interestyng I like it

[@larrymondello8475]

Thank you

[@man_at_the_end_of_time]

Wait for Boston Dynamic bottnauts to do the exploration on the ground of Mars.

[@TheLastStarfighter77]

There are no chances of fatalities on a mission, and they can set up established habitats well before humans set foot on the red planet 👍

[@Nightscape_]

I wonder if we can actually make this in the next hundred years and finally get humans to other planets.

[@louissayland7031]

Warp speed? ?

[@mikewallace8087]

Earth is the most appealing planet in our galaxy . But we are now in progress of a solar extinction event . Maybe the next life forms can figure it out in million years ?

[@RGF19651]

It may look good on “paper” or in a CAD program. But it is a very long way off before even a prototype can be made or tested. A lot of considerations: First the space ship would have to be built in orbit or on the moon, otherwise a large powerful fuel rocket will be necessary to achieve escape velocity from the earth; secondly, what propulsion will be used to actually land on Mars? A small shuttle like the Apollo missions to the moon? That will not allow for a very long stay on the surface. If the entire craft is to land, then the problem of a fuel based rocket to leave the surface and escape Mars may still be necessary. It’s great to dream, but it’s better to do.

[@marcyoungblood5925]

I was wondering the same thing about launching a vehicle like this and how it would achieve an orbit around Mars or land on Mars.

[@KiwiBrowserSupport]

Why are you thinking so far its not even tested yet. It probably takes much longer time 5-10 years in approval. Until then there will be several massive starship like rockets to send it safely into space

[@billorcg7779]

There is a paper on ScienceDirect. The concept is sort of a “next generation” of Project Orion, the one where they were going to throw atomic bombs out the back and detonate them. This starts with a rail gun to accelerate a uranium+water ice projectile up to 1600 m/s. It goes down a uranium barrel where fission vaporizes the projectile and turns it into a plasma. At the end of the barrel is a highly enriched uranium ring that increases the fission rate and the plasma explodes out the magnetic nozzle. It fires once per second. To accelerate for one month and then decelerate for a month would take millions of projectiles. Each projectile weighs 2.2 kg. I doubt this will ever see the light of day.

[@user-rs6pe4fy1r]

This will never work. The laws of physics are not taken into account, in particular the conditions for fission of nuclear fuel. As soon as a projectile of water or ice with uranium reaches the reactor core, the water will instantly boil away and the density of uranium in the projectile will not be enough for it to react. Even a novice physicist will tell you this nuclear scientist. As a result, the uranium from the projectile will simply be thrown out in vain. The characteristics will be the same as ordinary NTP. For the same reason, the Zubrin engine will never work. This was known decades ago. These messages are aimed at children or uneducated people.

[@brianmcguinness9642]

How much thrust does it provide? Will it get you off the ground, or do you still need a chemical rocket to get you into orbit?

[@rickystarduster]

wake me when there is actually news of getting to mars in a decent time frame such as under a day.

[@Leo-pd4fc]

Even we can travel to Mars as that fast only in 2 months, I still will stay here on our beautiful Home Planet Earth! SpaceX and NASA can go there alone without me. But i'm really impressed wow! 😮😊

[@thomascorbett2936]

I dont really think we need to worry about polluting space .

[@billthetraveler51]

Thank you for questioning the environmental effects of using nuclear fusion in space. It’s like worrying about the environmental impact of adding a bucket of water to the ocean.

[@JohnSostrom]

This does present a slightly off-center thought. At the speeds you are hinting at, how can the ship maneuver quickly enough to avoid a fatal collision with any unknown object? Side thrusters would have to be quite fast at startup and produce massive amounts of thrust.

[@hallahgray3190]

This is great, but let’s see if they actually implement it before finding it snatched away from it.

[@KiwiBrowserSupport]

But when will be its getting tested???

[@meditationsoundscapes5203]

a light sail pushed by orbital or ground lasers. then slowing down is your only problem

[@xizilionyizzexeliqer3897]

I got an idea. Let people who own drones (don't have one) let their drones go there. Maybe virtual reality headset so they can see the planet from their full eye spectrum.

[@alokranjan2814]

Many energy invention are under hood of NASA as for space traveling the process is so dynamic that our eyes and mind simultaneously waiting for and eager to know about latest technology, Space is not Earth it needs every kind of discoveries to sustain in Infinite vastness.

[@jimparsons6803]

Interesting. Wishing NASA well. Y' know, there might be a different solution, maybe. F=ma=(m*v^2)/r, as in Huygens' equation for uniform circular motion. As in a rock on an end of a string being twirled? Where the rock is the mass, 'm.' Mass moving in a circular motion. Water being pumped through a circular tube of 3" ID at a rate of 3 gallons per second, by a centrifugal pump like those found in fire engines that can pump 600 gallons per minute --- if you think of this circular pipe having a radius of about 10' and if the circular tube is folded roughly along its diameter to about 20 degrees then the equation then can be expressed as F = 2*cos(10 degrees)*[(25^3)/10] = 1.5 short tons, about (if you assume a path of 25' or so, not a full circumference then, sounds like. And other than keeping the water in its liquid state and having enough power to run the cited pump at 25 pounds per second and the system doesn't spring a leak (maybe self-sealing like fighter plane gas tanks?), I think that it might work. Nothing fancy here, just High School level Physics or Geometry. Best of luck. So if you have a fresh sheet of paper with a circle drawn on it, you can draw little arrow counter clockwise with little squares next to the little arrows, all the way around (that 'right hand rule'). Fold the sheet along the circle's diameter to about 20 degrees and there you go. Then you can get some flexible plastic tubing, a yardstick (that has on it a marked 18" spot), some tape, cardboard to fold into a 20 degree wedge shape, some string to string everything up and 'there you go, again.' Happy tinkering. & y' can talk over any of this to anyone y' want. High School Physics, that sort of thing.

[@kennethcole1551]

Solar sail can be used as a transport ship around the moon and The Earth using gravity assist at both ends on earth are you up and take your product off and on the moon they take off their supplies and put on the product sample

[@Debbie-henri]

Yes, I'm thinking that eventually engineers will come to the fact that they will need more than one system of propulsion to reach, maintain orbit, and land on other planets/moons. We think in terms of one system now, but a couple may each have their own benefits.

[@thomascorbett2936]

I thought magnets only workwd well on iron .

[@timtruett5184]

Where would the energy come from? Is the claim that there would be a net gain in energy from nuclear fusion?

[@cpmf2112]

He said fission so no net gain there 😂

[@seeker4749]

Just one question why are we talking about something thing that may or may not happen in years to come and may not be successful which hasn't been developed yet? I mean why are we just now being told this ? I'm just asking.. I'm not being disrespectful it's just that yes we've been successful with the ion engine fine and dandy sure but we also have the fusion rocket a few years ago and recently been successful in the stage one development not stage 2 or stage 3 by now or within the next 4 years. By another us agency one that can Power cities and nuclear subs. Under the green energy deal... now this by nasa total completely different engine rocket here a whole new level..no offense but the ILS program hasn't been up to par cause of mishaps.. now this. I just feel concerned about the safety issues lighting one of these on earth.. i mean same chemical make of atoms and so on that earth was made of now fusion elements like a star... I'm concerned I hope for the best and the program but idk

[@JerryMlinarevic]

The solution is rotating magnetic fields (RMF) not this 'thing' that you are describing. RMF can propel a craft close to the speed of gravitons (think speed of light magnitudes) because it is the gravity that carries you along like sails in the wind. First you need to understand magnets and gravity. Give me a fraction of your billions and we can build it tomorrow.

[@gnored]

Blasting nuclear reactors into space. What could possibly go wrong with that?

[@xizilionyizzexeliqer3897]

I prefer 48 hours or 2 months to Alpha Centarui.

[@ACU_misfit]

lol.. You're talking multiples of C 😂 ..someday

[@chinookvalley]

PLEASE do not send anymore chimps, dogs or other animals to space to die alone.

[@cracknoir8397]

We our ancestors probably stuffed up Mars in the first place !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@and3583]

This is great! No more Elon Musk blowing things up!!

[@bluethunder1951]

You mean “ unscheduled disassembly” 😂

[@chinookvalley]

The people who don't want to be held responsible for all the world's woes they caused, will be the first to leave. Let them have their own prison planet, and leave us regular Joes alone. It'll be rough, but at least they will be gone.

[@danmurray1143]

Lets focus on taking out Russia's new space weapons. We can fool with Mars later.

[@svOcelot]

Presumably, there are some scientific folks watching your channel. Your lack of explaining HOW the PPR actually works was disappointing to those folks (like me).

[@semorgh2854]

The only POSIBLE way to travel in space is with ZERO_POINT_ENERGY which means you do not export anything from your spaceship as it is only interacting with Celestial entities with its own ZPE. to make it simple: your spaceship has to act like a little magnet witch interacts with the magnetic field of Celestial entities.

[@mikewallace8087]

Ha Ha , presently a concept dream . Talk about reality .

[@ianburns7302]

Didn’t actually explain how this worked. Just saying nuclear fission over and over again doesn’t explain how it’s achieving propulsion

[@lean_sumek]

Incredibly 😊🥰🤣

[@thomasbaugh8245]

I hear it's full of carbon dioxide so I'm thinking trees an water will fix it unless less there is something else

[@johnfoerster7533]

as so often, the title is (purposefully) misleading: "Gamechanger" -- suggesting: something has already been achieved to be a game-changer. Then, when you click on it, by the time you get to 4:15, you know it's a con: no 'game changer' just: concept being tested. Why can't they just be honest in their titles...

[@helmutzollner5496]

Well, I can love with this exaggeration at least he is not using the "insane" or "crazy" intros. The PPR drive is indeed a game changer if it happens. Important is the concept, the rest is engineering. Overall I missed a but more hard facts, likevtgebtype of fission reactor the concept called for, or how the plasma is created and what is the reaction mass the plasma is made of. He also implies that space ships using this technomigy would have to be much bigger. That is intriguing. Maybe a bit more details would have been great. Also how would a ship like this be built and launched. Would it be a kind of sea dragon monster rocket, or would it be assembled in space, etc. But let's see if there is some more info elsewhere like on Wikipedia.

[@k.sullivan6303]

When a rocket can get us to Mars in 2 hours I will be impressed.

[@user-uc6qu9jo2k]

രണ്ട് മണിക്കൂർ മതിയോ പത്ത് മിനിറ്റ് ആയാൽ കുഴപ്പം ഉണ്ടോ

[@rtxagent6303]

@@user-uc6qu9jo2kthat would be like 60% the speed of light. Nearly impossible especially because acceleration would to that speed even with theorized technology would take a very long time. And by then you would have reached mars.

[@danmurray1143]

2 hours?! 🙁 Reminder: takes a lot of energy the closer to light speed you get. And, don't forget you have to slow back down.

[@Nobody-mc4hr]

Yes I agree . More than two hours is little boaring to travel .

[@drunemeton]

No. Two hours to Mars won’t leave you impressed, it will leave you a thin smear of pink goo over the back half of the cabin you were in. 😂😂😂

[@zk_6312]

Unlikely, you could use this type of propulsion to take off and land so you would still need to carry chemical fuel and rockets.

[@johnishikawa2200]

This one sounds like a winner . I believe that Richard Feynman once said something to the effect that were it not for politics , fission reactor engines would be the most practical for space travel .

[@jfc123]

A lot of words, but not a lot of info or details

[@fionajack9160]

Yep

[@ravicodes247]

First

[@Beardqt]

i'm proud of you

[@ravicodes247]

@@Beardqt Thanks buddy now when I achieved this much I think now I should become nominee for Prime Minister

[@montazvideo]

So no details but a lot of communist buzzwords such as sustainability... Great video!