"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 30/09/13 08:41, Nightjar wrote:
On 30/09/2013 08:06, harryagain wrote:
"John Rumm" wrote in message
o.uk...

Bit of a game changer if they can actually do it:

http://www.fusenet.eu/node/400


--
Cheers,

John.


Usual bollix from the USA.
They have only recently been made to work at all in spite of the
billions
expended worldwide for the last fifty years.
And not as radio-active waste free as hoped.

You might see one in fifty years.

That was 50 years ago Harry. Today, the best guess is 20 years although,
TBH, had it been anybody else making the announcement, I would not have
been surprised to see it standing at 20 years away in 20 years from now.
However, given the Skunk Works' track record, there might well be a
commercially viable fusion reactor within a decade.

Id be moreconservative.

A working prototype in 10 years that actually generates power and a viable
commercial unit in 20..

BUT teh small size means that it could be mass produced.

Thats somnething being touted by small modular reactor boys with fissions:
get a design approved, then stack em up to make powerstations 'any size
you want'

It wont be the first time government regulatins have driven designs in a
particular direction.

The old hosepower rating for car tax favoured long stroke sloe revving
engines. They turned out to be quite fuel efficient, which was something
we utterly failed to caipitalise on in the 60s when the car industry fell
to pieces.

Colin Bignell

The efficiency of the ICE is related to compression ratio, nothing to do
with bore/stroke ratio.
That is limited by the properties of the fuel.