>
Putin Calls Up 160,000 Men to Russian Army in Latest Conscription Drive, at Crucial Moment...
ELECTION FRAUD AGAIN: Liberal Susan Crawford did not win the election last night.
NATO WENT EVIL IN THE EU: Marine Le Pen, the NATO op to get her, the context around it...
The DOGE of War: TOP 10 MEMES – Watch MAGA
Watch the Jetson Personal Air Vehicle take flight, then order your own
Microneedles extract harmful cells, deliver drugs into chronic wounds
SpaceX Gigabay Will Help Increase Starship Production to Goal of 365 Ships Per Year
Nearly 100% of bacterial infections can now be identified in under 3 hours
World's first long-life sodium-ion power bank launched
3D-Printed Gun Components - Part 1, by M.B.
2 MW Nuclear Fusion Propulsion in Orbit Demo of Components in 2027
FCC Allows SpaceX Starlink Direct to Cellphone Power for 4G/5G Speeds
Combustion engines are tried and true, and however angry they might look and sound in a top-fuel dragster or space rocket booster, the combustion process of oxidizing fuel in air is relatively slow and predictable. Detonation, on the other hand, is as chaotic and destructive as it sounds. It's how most bombs work; you take an explosive fuel and hit it with a jolt of energy, and the chemical bonds holding each molecule together break apart, releasing wild amounts of energy in a shockwave that expands at supersonic speed.
NASA, along with many other groups, wants to harness these explosions for a couple of key reasons. Firstly, detonation engines have a considerably higher theoretical level of efficiency than combustion engines, perhaps as much as 25%; they should be able to produce more thrust using less fuel and a smaller rocket. In the engineering and economics of space flight, that means cheaper launches, more billable payload, and greater distances.