NASA Tests The XRS-2200 Engine And Its AWESOME

this thing is AMAZING…

Watch this test which may be used in future space missions by NASA.  In 2015, NASA has made a lot of internet and magazine headlines with talks and tests of new kinds of propulsion systems.  One in particular that they tested you may have seen.  it is called an EM Drive propulsion successfully which is a “microwave” based system.  And don’t  don’t use it to make popcorn 😉

Here is an intro on the XRS-2200:

This engine was designed to be modular and was going to power the long since cancelled X-33 Venture Star. I knew I had seen a video of this before but I couldn’t find it anywhere. Found it finally through a dead hotlink to a Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) news release still on their server but it doesn’t turn up under any Google or NASA site searches for Aerospike. This video is property of NASA so if they request it to be removed I will do so. It was filmed in late 2000 or early 2001 and I believe this is 80% of max thrust.

Let’s check out the test in the video on page 2

Next Page »



Pages: 1 2 3

216 Comments

  3. Yost Craig said:

    NASA we all know you are a military compound used to drip fees us your slow disclosure.. Sadly for you a ton of us know about the full disclosure you are trying to keepo from the world for another 100 years… Its not ffonna happen sojust come clean all ready. We know you or the militia have industrialized this system, we know much mostly thanks to the latest wisdom teachings on Gaia app for roku. We know about the breakaway civilization, money slave systems, ALL of your bs. You been to star wars and back we all know you are ttrying to keep us ignorant.. Amnd awhen$#%&!@*hits the fan you can be like we told you.. Yea you told us$#%&!@*we know is bs and that you did it all decades ago… How dumb do you think people are? Keep your trolls off me comment too thanks. If you come clean soon Amnesty maybe possible…think about it!!

    Reply
  8. Jeremy Dugger said:

    In some situations it is impossible to clean area A while still inhabiting it. Though I don’t have nearly the free time to write nearly the detail of this person, I am capable of simplifying his conjecture: humanity is a stain on this planet and should be bleached from existence. As an actual realist, I offer the following:
    A lot of people/companies/governments do dumb things, but with reasonable effort they can be corrected by reasonable people. Furthermore, inflammatory diatribes like this remove reasonable people from the discussion. Rather than remove all of humanity from existence, I would propose to remove the unreasonable people.
    *Yes, I fully realize “reasonable” is a subjective term.

    Reply
  9. Gary Richardson said:

    It’s simply a distraction from what they are really doing since NASA is under the auspices of the CIA. Reverse engineering anyone?

    Reply
  13. Jeremy Cripe said:

    Gerard Frank Schafhaulte gave one of the most eloquent and well thought arguments I think Ive read on the internet ever.

    I think the best response I can muster is that the universe seems to run on pain but creates empathy.

    It’s a cruel horrible joke and laughing may be the only way to cope.

    So while humans are a more enlightened species that also creates greater harm then we have to ask, “have we gotten better?”

    We may kill each other less now but we also have the ability to kill everyone with technology meaning nukes.

    We empathize more with each other but we also pollute enough to kick the ecosystem back to basic cellular life.

    We realize the danger and want to leave but will that allow us more time to become smarter and more empathetic or will it just endanger interstellar or “intrasolar” (is that a word?) life?

    If we cause harm by spreading but also get better at causing less harm with more time then will the trade off have been worth it?

    Reply
  14. Jeremy Cripe said:

    Or to rephrase, should we have more time to get better or should we deal with the harm we caused first, even if it means risking our end?

    Reply
  15. Jeremy Cripe said:

    Also realism isnt just the middle point on a sliding scale between optimism and pessimism.

    At its best its a reaction to optimism or pessimism.

    Jeremy Rifkin thinks that if humans ever mastered fusion then we’d rape the earth clean. That as we are we’d cut down every last tree and boil the oceans.

    But I think in my reaction I think we’d green the earth and at worst we’d turn the Earth into one big stupid monoculture like a nice grassy lawn or we’d evolve and realize that every species has its niche and make the world more vibrant and full of life.

    But this still carries moral implications. One ethicist proposes that we are obligated to make every predatory species extinct. And, I guess, maintain prey populations so they don’t outbreed themselves. But I just feel that we’d be smart enough to find another way.

    Reply
  16. Jeremy Cripe said:

    Put all predators into an induced coma and feed them the necessary organic molecules and sterilize enough herbivores to keep their populations static. But isn’t nature change? Wouldn’t that be something like CS Lewis’s “Hideous Strength”?

    If we clean up our mess is it enough and then we let nature be itself no matter how cruel it is or are we supposed to bring an end to the cruelty? Or is denying what was once invevitable just backing up the system and leading towards a bigger release of pain in order to establish equilibrium?

    Reply
  17. Scott Parker said:

    By which you surely mean NASA pools unconstitutionally stolen tax money from the masses into another black budget project and dresses it up as whatever the$#%&!@*this horseshit is….. And then massive gobble it up without double-checking anything because they mean to be uninformed.

    Reply
  18. Scott Parker said:

    By which you surely mean NASA pools unconstitutionally stolen tax money from the masses into another black budget project and dresses it up as whatever the$#%&!@*this horseshit is….. And the masses gobble it up without double-checking any of it because they mean to be uninformed.
    #KeianhWasHere

    Reply
  20. Marc Troyer said:

    People are stupid. The Emdrive is far far superior to this thing and Nasa has been testing it successfully for years and just submitted a paper for peer review.

    Reply
  22. Marc Troyer said:

    First off a solar sail can not get us to any star within a human beings life time. Lasers could do it almost fast enough but it would require more energy every second of the mission then the United States produces in a year ! Even if we were stupid enough to try we couldn’t even come close and of we did it would still take an entire adult life time to get there.

    Reply
  24. Marc Troyer said:

    They start off by mentioning the Emdrive which has nothing at all to do with this primitive 1950s technology ! I realize people are stupid but fucking come on !

    Reply
  26. Jay Nonya said:

    Gerard Frank Schafhautle, that is a interesting view but I see it different.
    There are 7 billion people and growing and we must use nature to survive unless you think we should stay in the cave man era.
    Since our numbers grow I see earth as a shrinking island and space as the ocean we must cross to get off.
    I see space as a opportunity 🙂
    Right now we destroy the earth chasing oil, fracking gas, and mining rare stones.
    If we master space travel and living we can stop the greed and battles for these items.
    For example 1 planet in our solar system is pure methane (unlimited fuel with out fracking a living planet).

    There are rocks floating out there in space made of everything we dig up here, in fact I read a science paper about how if a star the right size dies the right way it should leave a rock of pure diamond the size of a planet.

    They found water is common in space as most thing are covered in ice.
    So with the right ships and technology we could do well in space.

    As for earth as I said we are destroying it and growing in numbers so it can not be cleaned up as the dirty nations make more money as the destruction is caused by producing items to sell.

    The earth can be hit by a meteorite, a solar flare, a super volcano, wars, a new super virus, mystery rouge planet or sun could pass though our system could even change earths orbit.
    With a million ways earth can take a hit we need to be in space instead of having all our eggs in one basket.

    As for the new land on a new planet..
    Well we may throw off the balance when we arrive but thats nature in pure basic action.
    Life is made to evolve and that happens when the strong breed and the weak die before passing weak genes.
    Point is not to build a bubble on the new planet but to see if we can survive the germs, the new predators, ect.
    While we may bring a germ that kills off a species or 2 we also guarantee our survival which is programmed onto our DNA.
    Also we bring the knowledge of the mistakes made here so we build everything green and friendly since we don’t need to go through the bronze age or fossil fuel age again.

    I think there is plenty of life out there and we will meet at some point so we must advance enough to defend ourselves if needed.
    While I see your point about the destruction I also see that as a act of nature as everything non-human here consumes life to live as well.
    From fossil records we know over 80% of all types of plants are extinct and the numbers are probably no better with animals and dinosaurs.
    So we need to become king of the new jungle (the milky way galaxy) while learning to live green in harmony on new worlds and get our resources from asteroids and dead life less planets.

    I don’t think you see space from my eyes. Picture sports and regular activities on a new planet, for example jet skiing on a planet with 2/3’s our gravity. Sleeping weightless in space, finding new foods and veggies to try native to another planet. They day when families own small ships like cars and can watch the 4th of July from the moon.
    I think the it would be great to live the wild west days of space or be one of the first to survive and build a colony on a new planet.

    Reply
  28. Chad Laibly said:

    Please, stop re-hashing this useless, old tech. Start supporting so we can get anti-gravitics out I the open.

    Reply
  31. Steve Melone said:

    What many of y’all don’t know and many will refuse to accept is this engine is old and reveresed egineered and is already in use. There already are humans on mars and humans that had traveled out of our solar system. Our government lost mulit billions to trillions of dollars for 8 years under Obama where do you think it actually went…. hint this article altho old has hidden truths.

    Reply
  41. Mike Musgrave said:

    Gerard Frank Schafhautle “An organism’s goal is to survive in its ecosystem based on its adaptations to it.” So you’re saying after an organism conquer’s it’s ecosystem, it’s time to just give up? You say we’ve moved passed the days of barbaric slaughter, yet in the middle east there are people dedicated to it? We’ve already destroyed so much on earth, but we’ve learned so much, you don’t think we would take any of that knowledge to our next location? People can say you’re giving an intellectual response, but all I hear is what sounds like a semi religious rambling about the workers and the fire and the plains and the mountains. When plants came along they continuously pumped oxygen into the atmosphere, changing (destroying) the current atmosphere at the time. Ecosystems change over time. Some micro organisms destroy the environment they thrive in. Some maintain a mutually beneficial balance between them and their habitat. Do you really think that the people that go to our next planetary location would just forget EVERYTHING we’ve learned about our own planet? No. So I’m sorry, but there’s no way we can say we would just go to another planet and destroy it. That is a complete lack of faith in the good of humanity.

    Reply
  43. Gary Richardson said:

    Camille Friend this topic brings out the worst trolling from people. It seems they overreact when you disturb their thinking. Carry on!

    Reply
  44. Camille Friend said:

    What does trolling mean? Anyway i totally believe in reverse engineering since at least hilter times . Germany started it. Thats why we went there. Steal the technology. project paper clip. Then we win the war. Manhattan project. Etc. Omg. From horses to stealth etc. Thank you Roswell. Genocide to stealth. A bit quick. Just saying.

    Reply
  45. Jeffrey Batt said:

    Too bad this engine test is from like 15 years ago and George W. Bush cancelled the Space Shuttle replacement program so he could funnel all those billions into bombing a country that ahd nothing to do with 9/11….

    Reply

*

*

Top