From: bondage@frontiernet.net   
      
   Sander Vesik wrote:   
   >   
   > Henry Spencer  wrote:   
   > >   
   > > The latter.  If memory serves, even at SSME pressures, flame temperature   
   > > is limited more by dissociation of the reaction products than by energy   
   > > available.  To put extra energy into the exhaust of a good rocket engine,   
   > > you need to use non-thermal means.  (Running an electromagnetic thruster   
   > > on the exhaust of a NERVA, with the reactor supplying the power, has been   
   > > suggested.)   
   >   
   > Would "microwaving" the output of a LOX/LH2 engine work? After all, the   
   exhaust   
   > is water, and you already have fast-spining turbopumps powered by gas   
   turbines   
   > to which you only need to attach more stuff. Or is this a crackpot idea?   
      
      Why try to an additional load on turbines that are working like hell   
   just to deliver propellant?   
      
      And remember, the faster the exhaust jet, the better...which means it   
   won't be in front of any microwave source for any meaningful length of   
   time...but you now have the additional weight of all that marginally   
   assisting gear. I don't pretend to be able to do the engineering   
   analysis, but I'd bet you get a net performance loss....   
      
      Now, some of the ideas for O2 injection downstream of the combustion   
   chamber in an afterburner-like manner, that would be worth something on   
   some missions.   
      
   --   
      
      You know what to remove, to reply....   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)