Talk:Electrodeless plasma thruster

This article is appears to be primarily written as a marketing tool for The Elwing Company and needs to be updated with neutral additions (along with valid citations). For example, Mr. Gregory Emsellem did NOT create or invent this thruster as several engineers [ie Hawley, Asmussen, Morin, Chapman, Whitehair, and Haraburda] were involved in developing this type of thruster back in the 1980s and 1990sP024005 (talk) 19:10, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

you clearly do not seem to understand the technology described in this page and in the awarded patent (which in and of themselves require the applicant to clear several hurdle in terms of innovation versus prior art)

It seems beyond doubt that this technology was a clearcut innovation compared to anything else at the time, no reason to doubt the inventor mentioned in the awarded patent did not actually invent it)

Beyond this page, while definitely worthy of improvement, is far from a marketing tool especially for a defunct or sleeping company. the focus of the page is descriptive of how this class of device is made, how it is different from all other electric propulsion, and most importantly how it operates. 31.10.170.187 (talk) 19:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

the technology described in this article describe a specific technology and engine (just like XIPS is a specific technology representative of the gridded ion engine/ electrostatic class), as such it is not marketing material but a description of a specific technical object. This technology is very different from the one you suggest to add, for instance the plasma is fully ionized as opposed to weakly ionized in the reference you suggest, more importantly the thrust generation mechanism are radically different, in the material you discuss (known as microwave electrothermal thrusters) the plasma simply serve a way to increase the temperature (average non directed kinetic energy of all particles) of the gas flow, in the technology described in this article the acceleration is electromagnetic. I would suggest that you could create a new article that would describe all the spacecraft technologies which happen to be electrodeless and that this article would be filed this "class" article, alongside with the electrodeless thermal device you suggested to add.

AgreeThis is more appropriately an ion thruster and will be added to the electrothermal section of that page. In the future, I recommend you sign your post on talk pages. P024005 (talk) 12:05, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Agree This article should be removed or rewritten to a large extent. For instance the operation principle section is particularly unclear; in step 2 ionization is obtained by several methods (a list of all known methods in fact), then step 3 starts with unclear difference between ionization stage (step 2?) and ionization process (step 3 ?). For me the article sounds more like a declaration of intent or a list of expectations then like a description of some working device.--Henri BONDAR (talk) 11:52, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

if you actually go and read the patent referencing this technology it is in fact very clear that one of the key feature of this class of device is that the ionisation is physically separated from the acceleration area by a maximum of magnetic field.

You are right that it seems since technology can accomodate multiple ionisation stage, (not clear which have been created and tested but to a plasma physicist it makes sense that any ionisation device able to operate with a static longitudinal magnetic field could be combined to the rest of this device)

Also multiple specialist at both NASA and ESA have reported seeing devices of this family operating in their own testing facilites and that their operation was as very different from most other electric propulsion devices... 31.10.170.187 (talk) 19:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

ion thrusters as a class have some or all of the acceleration of ions is separate from the production and emission of electrons (which would be accelerated in the opposite direction by the acceleration mechanism) therefore they require a dedicated neutraliser.

It appears very clearly this plasma device accelerate in the same direction ions and electrons of the plasma and do not seem to require any dedicated neutralizer.

Therefore mixing this device with Ion thruster would be likely to induce readers in error. 31.10.170.187 (talk) 19:47, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Electrodeless plasma thruster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930201153/http://pdf.aiaa.org/preview/CDReadyMJPC2005_1177/PV2005_3855.pdf to http://pdf.aiaa.org/preview/CDReadyMJPC2005_1177/PV2005_3855.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:40, 8 November 2017 (UTC)