My arXiv preprint on a crewed interstellar spacecraft

[spacefan]

Hi everybody,

I would like to share with you a crewed interstellar spacecraft which I have designed and called Solar One.

It employs a combination of 3 propulsion methods: nuclear fusion, beam-powered propulsion , and photon propulsion.

Basically, several compact fusion reactors power a laser system that propels a huge light sail.

Physicist Robert Forward already proposed in 1983 to use a 26-TW laser system to propel a 100-km light sail, a fresnel lens to focus the beam of the laser, and decelerate the spacecraft with a secondary light sail.

I propose something a bit different, which is to use to use for example a 60 TW-laser to propel a 5-km light sail that would deploy from the spacecraft after the acceleration stage, use parabolic mirrors that gradually change their orientation in order to focus the laser beam, and finally use a photon rocket to decelerate the spacecraft .

In theory, it could be possible to achieve 25% the speed of light, reaching the closest potentially habitable exoplanet in less than 20 years.

There are of course many challenges, like building high-energy continuous-wave lasers, reducing the weight of the nuclear fusion reactors (and of course achieving effective nuclear fusion first), and minimizing the effects of zero gravity during such a long trip.

What do you guys suggest to overcome these challenges?

This is my paper and a short video that summarizes all.

 

[berkeman]

Basically, several compact fusion reactors power a laser system that propels a huge light sail.

Your lasers and sail are both attached to the spacecraft ?

https://slideplayer.com/slide/10923321/39/images/27/Example+15+sail+force+on+the+card+by+air+F’’.jpg

 

[etotheipi]

Your lasers and sail are both attached to the spacecraft ?

Although you can get a fan-cart to work if you choose a 'sail' that reflects the air backwards, as opposed to sideways as would happen for the figure you attached. Then the situation is equivalent to the air being blown backwards w.r.t. the cart, and the cart accelerates in the forward direction. Take a look at this:

In this case, perhaps, you could shine an on-board laser at a reflective light sail, and you would get some forward acceleration of the ship. That said, I don't know how effective it would be in practice... most iterations of this that I've seen have lasers on the ground.

 

[berkeman]

Interesting, and you have a good point. But is there some advantage to reflecting the on-board laser(s) off of a sail, as opposed to just aiming them to the rear?

 

[Ibix]

In this case, perhaps, you could shine an on-board laser at a reflective light sail, and you would get some forward acceleration of the ship. That said, I don't know how effective it would be in practice... most iterations of this that I've seen have lasers on the ground.

With a 100% reflective sail you'd get the same thrust as you would with just having the laser pointing the other way and using it as a rocket - the reflected light doesn't disrupt the incoming light the way wind does. But the extra mass of the sail reduces your acceleration - so just using the laser as a rocket works better.

 

[256bits]

I am wondering about the material science that would go into this sail.

26-TW laser system to propel a 100-km light sail,

is 2600 W per square meter. ( for a square sail - rough figure )

60 TW-laser to propel a 5-km light sail

That is 2 million 400 thousand watts continuous per square meter. ( for a square sail - rough figure )

You have addressed that in your paper.

Figure 2: Power density
Source: Kvant Lasers
...
No light sail is able to reflect 100 percent of the light. A sail with a reflectivity
of 96.22 percent and able to withstand 2,770 K (which is the limit for carbon
fibre), could receive a maximum of 88 MW/m2. Such sail could have a density of
2.65 g/cc, a thickness of 1 micron, and a total mass of 10.7 tons

4% absorption ( at the 60TW power level ) gives 96000 W/square meter.
( 4% of 2,400,000 W/m²
Accordingly, your sail should heat up only to around 1150 K.

from Hyperphysics Black Body radiation.

 

[berkeman]

Poof!

 

[256bits]

Poof!

I edited the post - had it the wrong temperature.
Does that seem reasonable for thee things?

 

[Filip Larsen]

Maybe I skimmed the paper too fast, but I fail to see what mission the spacecraft is supporting by being crewed? Sending scientific gear to build up knowledge and even autonomous reconfigurable mining robots to possibly construct something useful while its there makes sense, but crew? And even if sending crew made sense in some way it is notoriously much much harder to design and carry out crewed space missions away from low Earth orbit with a realistic chance of success without loss of mission or life.

If presence of crew is not required for the operation of the spacecraft I would suggest planing for a robotic mission first. If crew really is required, then I think you miss a really really good mission pitch .

 

[DrStupid]

4% absorption ( at the 60TW power level ) gives 96000 W/square meter.
( 4% of 2,400,000 W/m²
Accordingly, your sail should heat up only to around 1150 K.

A thin sail without significant heat resistance would have the same temperature (and therefore the same heat emission) at both sides. That results in a temperature of 960 K.

 

[Vanadium 50]

"If scientists are able to produce more antimatter than the energy used to generate it, this would be the best way to power the laser system of Solar One" unfortunately says it all.

 

[BWV]

"If scientists are able to produce more antimatter than the energy used to generate it, this would be the best way to power the laser system of Solar One" unfortunately says it all.

But AM would just be a form of energy storage, like hydrogen fuel or a battery. All you would need is to build something (off earth) that takes solar energy as an input to create the AM. Efficiency would not (anti) matter much

 

[Vanadium 50]

I was responding to what's in the text: "If scientists are able to produce more antimatter than the energy used to generate it, this would be the best way to power the laser system of Solar One"

 

[BWV]

I was responding to what's in the text: "If scientists are able to produce more antimatter than the energy used to generate it, this would be the best way to power the laser system of Solar One"

Right, this is directed at the OP - all you would need to do is store AM, not produce it. Even if you could produce AM with a positive energy surplus, the tradeoff would be the mass of the machinery to produce AM vs. the energy content of storing an equivalent mass of AM instead

 

[spacefan]

As some of you might know, I have designed a crewed interstellar spacecraft that I call Solar One.
Basically, large flexible mirrors placed near the Sun would propel a one-mile light sail with a 4–crew spacecraft of 300 tons.
To decelerate, an on-board compact fusion reactor would power a photon rocket placed at the front of the spacecraft that would 1) help decelerate and 2) ionize space hydrogen for the nuclear reactor.
A Bussard scoop also placed at the front of the spacecraft would 1) collect those protons (ionized hydrogen) and 2) decelerate the spacecraft .
Solar One would achieve an average of 22% the speed of light, which would allow the crew to reach the closest potentially habitable exoplanet in less than 19 years.
Of course cryo-sleep and artificial gravity must be achieved first.
Here is my paper in arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.11474
And here a short movie of Solar One: youtu.be/JEf7Z_TLmgU
Feedback is appreciated!

 

[phinds]

Right, this is directed at the OP - all you would need to do is store AM, not produce it. Even if you could produce AM with a positive energy surplus, the tradeoff would be the mass of the machinery to produce AM vs. the energy content of storing an equivalent mass of AM instead

If he has a Perpetual Motion Machine, why worry about caveats?