RegularJoe@lemmy.world to science@lemmy.worldEnglish · 7 months agoAn in-space propulsion company just raised a staggering amount of moneyarstechnica.comexternal-linkmessage-square11fedilinkarrow-up137arrow-down13cross-posted to: spaceflight@sh.itjust.works
arrow-up134arrow-down1external-linkAn in-space propulsion company just raised a staggering amount of moneyarstechnica.comRegularJoe@lemmy.world to science@lemmy.worldEnglish · 7 months agomessage-square11fedilinkcross-posted to: spaceflight@sh.itjust.works
minus-squareMonkderVierte@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·edit-27 months agoAnd far more efficient than chemical propulsion.
minus-squareBimfred@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·7 months agoBut exactly because of that, they don’t have yeet. Long periods of low thrust are great for long duration missions, like satellites, stations and interplanetary probes, awful for a TLI burn.
And far more efficient than chemical propulsion.
But exactly because of that, they don’t have yeet. Long periods of low thrust are great for long duration missions, like satellites, stations and interplanetary probes, awful for a TLI burn.