This new year starts with interesting news. The work on the PNN spaceship is proceeding at slow pace on request of Laureti himself because he has some personal commitments to attend to, however if everything goes well the construction has been postponed to next February so the waiting is not too long.
Meanwhile Laureti has shared an article (original in Italian here) in which he describes how a F432-powered spaceship could reach Mars surface and come back on Earth without using a nuclear generator. You might ask why ASPS wants to complicate its life since PNN is greedy for electric current and the answer is that Italian laws forbid the use of nuclear energy, so the Association has to find an alternative. The hypothesis are intriguing and I personally think that if ASPS will manage to send a spacecraft to Mars without using rockets and nuclear generators the historical significance of the event will be even bigger: from day to night it will be possible for mankind to travel in space with an unprecedented easiness, faster and farther than eighty years of astronautics have ever allowed.
But that’s the future, for the moment here’s the full translation of the article:
Premise: the incredible possibility for a PNN spacecraft, whose essential scheme is given in the underlying figure (this “little cart” is actually under construction with time and resources available to ASPS)
derives from the fact that the tests that have been carried out so far have indicated this unusual anomaly for a mobile that violates the action/reaction principle.
The starting point is that if PNN violates Newton’s third principle one can’t expect that the law of inertia and the second principle of dynamics aren’t different. The tests carried out so far indicate this and the final confirmation test will only be the one with a configuration similar to figure a.
However if inertia law is not linear we won’t need, as you’ll see, huge resources to reach Mars.
What also works against us is to be part of a country – Italy – where nuclear energy has been rejected by 2 referendums. Private Italian entrepreneurs who would want, and could, undertake a space flight to reach and land on Mars couldn’t have nuclear reactors to produce electric energy or RTG batteries (unlike the majority of NASA martian rovers). Let alone to have access to RTG technology and improve it when Italy, land of E.Fermi (who built in America the first nuclear reactor), has renounced to nuclear.
In short, it is to cry about the opportunities that must be abdicated in a country of ideological cunnings where nuclear power plants are closed after failures in those of countries who don’t even dream (Russia) of doing something similar. The extremist environmentalism lodges only in Italy and its goal is probably to go back to the golden age of the polished stone. That the E-cat does not work and has been for some years an illusory whining and a crazy rip-off as desired energy by those who voted against nuclear classic is for me the right revenge of the spirit of the nuclearist E.Fermi whose works are prohibited in this country.
Since we, differently Italians, only have rechargeable batteries we must use everything available to always keep at full charge the batteries to be used for PNN, that is we have to expiate the ecologist punishment of reaching Mars without nuclear energy.
I reiterate what I said earlier: if the law of inertia and the thrust were by chance confirmed as that of this video – the prototype F432 placed on an arm of a scale – we could reach Mars and return to Earth even without nuclear reactors.
The basic idea for the DPS that will recharge the batteries is the wind turbine, that is using wind propellers while landing on a celestial body with atmosphere… only that the wind does not blow against the turbines but the opposite.
Of course, the landing site must have an atmosphere.
In detail, a PNN system equipped with propellers (in the guise of a drone) impacting a planetary atmosphere (with the necessary attitudes and speeds to avoid self-destruction) can produce electricity without the need of RTGs.
Without planetary atmosphere, the DPS can not be used.
As said, in a preliminary hypothesis the propellers would resemble those of the drones but they would operate in reverse as generators of electricity when a PNN system decides to land on a planet with an atmosphere.
After all, the DPS turn a disadvantage into the advantage.
Mars, like the Earth, has an atmosphere even if very weak.
I recap the whole departure sequence from Earth and the flight with landing on Mars and return to better understand the essential procedure of something that is still largely at theoretical level in the many details it’s composed of.
Phase A: Departure from the Earth
If the inertia law is what it seems at the moment, that is non-linear with the thrust that increases with time, for the purpose of take off one only has to wait. At present in order to not risk overheating damages I activate F432 for about 40 seconds with a power between 400 and 500 Watts. It’s temporally too little to achieve take off and obviously I lack of a series of instrumental checks that because times, expenses and the nonexistence of instruments themselves I can’t do.
In the end, in the take off from Earth there is the advantage that we can power the system through an external electric supply while it’s still lying on Earth surface, hence without using the on-board rechargeable batteries.
However at least two other problems must be solved before we can reach this goal:
A) thermal dissipation through an active system (that F432 hasn’t got). The solution of equipping the system with active thermal dissipation systems must be calibrated with the NON-alteration of impedance. What is easy to do in the absence of rapidly variable fields is not identical in the phase of frequencies of millions of megahertz. The alteration and the non-control of the thermal phase of the impedance have destroyed me several prototypes.
B) conservation of the accumulated PNN thrust energy without an unfavorable exchange against time with the surrounding environment.
Successively the system (which is a spaceship) have to be tied – or better, anchored, as a ship should be – to Earth surface without releasing it and then to release it only when the accumulated thrust is suitable to reach a low orbit without depleting too much the rechargeable batteries.
The accumulation times of the thrust also depend on the mass that the PNN system wants to carry with it with engine thrust being equal. However the batteries can be fully recharged during the journey to Mars through solar panels.
In order to land on Mars DPS can be used since the planet has an atmosphere and DPS produce electric power only through a soft impact in the presence of an atmosphere.
Obviously in departure from Earth the solar panels, the mounts and the wind turbines (whose drawings and the number of blades are only indicative) must be turned backwards due to friction with the Earth’s atmosphere (fig.1)
Phase B: in transit to Mars
With the absence of external friction, both solar panels and wind generators can be deployed.
Phase C: descent on Mars
Folding of solar panels and a configuration (Figure 3) for soft braking.
The orbit around Mars must be duly eccentric (I don’t know how much), that is with the apogee greater than perigee in order to impact Martian atmosphere at the passage on perigee and to put the propellers into action to charge the accumulators, hence to utilize the electricity produced to brake the PNN system through a thrust opposite to the movement direction, reduce its speed and lowering the orbit.
In practice in the passage through perihelion it is necessary to brake with an inverted thrust, lowering the orbit continuously without a loss of energy in the previously recharged electric accumulators. All this requires an exact knowledge of the number of orbits to be made around Mars for the braking and of how much the perihelion must be lowered down to the total immersion in the Martian atmosphere.
In short, complex calculations and a PNN spacecraft structure suitable to not be damaged during braking are required, also because the same procedure will have to be implemented for the return to Earth and the Earth’s atmosphere is considerably denser and therefore more dangerous.
Phase D: departure from Mars
The same criterion for taking off from Earth must be used differently. That is, the PNN system will have to be “loaded with thrust” for the time necessary for take-off and it will necessarily have to bring to Mars a greater number of solar panels to be left presumably on site with related accumulators (and therefore reusable for other trips). Complex calculations and studies of all the necessary components must be made to prepare the necessary and to compensate for any unforeseen events, as we always lack of RTGs and / or nuclear reactors.
Phase E: return on Earth
The procedure is identical to that for landing on Mars, only with the difference that Earth atmosphere is much denser and the risk of structural damages to PNN spacecraft is higher. In conclusion the spaceship must be designed and built by keeping into account the most difficult reentry, the one on Earth. Again we must operate heel and toe, that is multiple passages through apogee and perigee by braking, charging the accumulators and opportunely lowering the orbit at perigee phase.
Examining the single steps it seems to me that one of the essential data to set everything on, apart from the timing of the trip that will always be in acceleration or deceleration (if the inertia law is non-linear), are the calculations to design the foldable solar panels structure, DPS and necessarily the calculation for a soft braking for the return on Earth. In short very complex and expensive problematics that unfortunately ASPS can’t face alone, as a fair number of experts and specialists in various sectors have to partecipate.
Incidentally I add that we can land on celestial bodies without an atmosphere, like the Moon, without deploying the wind generators but utilizing with as much patience as possible a recharge procedure based solely on solar panels, maybe opportunely enlarged.
However the most intriguing conclusion, to whom I can’t still believe because it’s too good to be true, is the non-linear inertia from which it descends, or better, it can be glimpsed, something that could have implications also in energy production.. but it’s too soon to talk about it because the steps must be overcome one at a time.
One thought on “To Mars and back- hypothesis for a PNN spacecraft”
Ho appena messo questa url in coda a quanto in
e ho aggiunto alcune domande.
LikeLiked by 1 person