Alain Sepeda <[email protected]> wrote:
> I take Rossi's statement as an indication that they can see openings to >> create a propulsion unit for airplanes. >> > ... > > As I understood, the term "Jet Reactor" seems more to mean a "Brayton > turbine", probably closed cycle like the old nuclear reactor planes. > All gas turbine engines are Brayton turbines. See: https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/brayton.html I agree the fission powered turbine engines might be a model for cold fusion engines. However, this is tiny, tiny fraction of the total energy market, and it can only be addressed by experts at places like GE and Rolls Royce decades from now. I do not think Rossi should devote attention to it now. It is a distraction. Here is what I mean by "distraction": Imagine it is December 17, 1903. Wilbur Wright writes in his diary: "we were planning to fly today but instead we decide to spend the whole day brainstorming about retractable landing gear on airplanes." - Jed
