How can this work?
Just where does the energy come from to ionise the air the satellite will be passing through? That would appear to require fuel of some sort.
DARPA is on the verge of reaching a new low - an orbital one - as the Defense Department's research arm moves its Very Low Earth Orbit (VLEO) Otter satellite program into the production phase. The Otter Program is moving along to phase 2 with the award of a $44 million contract to Florida-based Redwire, the company announced …
It is presumably solar powered, giving effectively unlimited lifetime.
However there is an obvious problem.
The more power you need, the bigger the solar panels have to be.
The bigger the panels are, the more aerodynamic drag there is.
The more aerodynamic drag, the more power you need.
This will require careful balancing!
Really hope that we are not going to have Bussard Ramjets in VLEO; as Mr Niven pointed out, fusion drives make for very nice weapons.
Generally very low orbit birds do not have a good repeat time on target, the orbit and narrow swath of the sensor gives good resolution of a small area. However, if cheap enough to do many, or if (as under discussion here) you can afford to use propulsion to modify the orbit, then you can have it returning soon-ish* to see the same area.
[*] changes to along-track timing (and resulting longitude when orbit shifts w.r.t rotating Earth) are fairly cheap, but modifying the inclination is a huge drain on engine capacity.
Between Otter at the top of the range and Solar Impulse* at the bottom, when do we stop calling them satellites and start calling them aeroplanes?
* okay, they had trouble making uninterrupted circumnavigations, but come on, the man is called Piccard, that has to count for a few bonus points.
"when do we stop calling them satellites and start calling them aeroplanes"
An aeroplane is one that stays up due to aerodynamic lift. That's the definition of space (ie the Karman line): the altitude at which the speed required to maintain aerodynamic lift reaches orbital speed.
The point of the propulsion is to overcome atmospheric drag. If the atmosphere is thinner, what do you think that might do to the demands on the propulsion system?
Also, DARPA projects can benefit humanity as a WHOLE. GPS being made accessible to all, for free, in the wake of the KAL007 tragedy being a prominent example.
Extremely rarefied atmosphere... You suck it in, ionize it and shove it out at high speed behind you... What could go wrong?
I get it, big sky, a few small satellites, not many ion contrails... That environment is probably already chuck full of ionized Ozone... I guess???
But, I would love to see if someone seriously did a study to show that...
You suck it in, ionize it and shove it out at high speed behind you... What could go wrong?
If you suck in neutral gas molecules and atoms, ionize them (strip electrons from them) and accelerate the ionized gas out the back you are going to accumulate a fairly decent negative charge which is going to make the accelerating stage increasingly harder.
That part of the atmosphere isn't exactly a tranquil void as I understand extreme terrestrial electrical storms can extend up to these altitudes (sprites?) which could easily affect VLEO satellites - more so if they were highly charged, I suspect.
I can imagine an ion thruster might be designed that recombined the stripped electrons with ionized gases after the acceleration phase - a bit like an after·burner or catalytic converter. :)
Electron guns are easier than ion guns, I think.
For a trivial thrust, streamlining, convenience, and reference Puppeteer engineering you might make it parallel to the ion beam.
Crossing the beams would suggest misalignment, and a reduction in effect.
* The Kzinti held it. The bottom of the Canyon continued to hold some.
Wood burners are like mini black holes. You drop a bit of mass in them and get bathed in toasty radiation.
(And WTF is the story with those fans that people think are blowing the hot air around? They can't work, can they? Sure, it'd be nice to have the warm air forcibly propelled into the room somehow, but the blades are only spinning because the hot air is pushing on them, not the other way around, Shirley?
Can anyone correct me on that?)
Wood burner fans work by converting heat into electricity using a Peltier module, which is a thermoelectric device. The fan's base is placed on the hot stove, and this heat is transferred to the module. As the base gets hot while the top (often with a heatsink) stays cooler, the temperature difference generates an electrical current that powers the fan's motor and blades. This process is self-powered and doesn't require any external batteries or mains electricity, making it an energy-efficient way to circulate warm air and heat a room more evenly.
No one said it was free energy, it's using the existing output from the stove to drive the fan.