4 ms·

How does it get powered?

ahi 16y ago
nuclear battery, more or less http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_gen...
kenj0418 16y ago
From radioactive decay of plutonium. According to Wikipedia, its power cell is expected to last until at least 2025. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_1#Power http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_1#Power
mturmon 16y ago
Here's some more about the RTGs: http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/spacecraftlife.html http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/spacecraftlife.html They used to provide about 470W, now it is down to the mid-200s.
- dublinclontarf 16y ago
  Could one of these ("nuclear batteries") be used to power one of those exoskeletons from Lockheed or Raytheon?
  - burgerbrain 16y ago
    It's been a while since I worked the numbers, but I believe that humans regularly put out more power than that during daily activities. Assuming the exoskeleton was extremely efficient, it wouldn't really get you all that much advantage.
    - cullenking 16y ago
      A cyclist working hard will put out 300ish watts, so, during daily activities, unless you are talking extremely short bursts like lifting/jumping, we put out much less. Store a good amount of power in some capacitor system and that would be enough to power an exoskeleton I bet.
  - mturmon 16y ago
    The mass of a Voyager RTG putting out 158W is about 38 kg (84lb). (It looks like Voyager used 3 of these RTGs.) Seems like they would be too heavy for your purpose. It seems the Galileo RTGs were more powerful: 300 W in 56 kg (123 lb). This is still pretty heavy but maybe getting in there.
bfe 16y ago
Solar panels have only been practical out to missions to Mars or the asteroid belt at farthest. For any more distant mission, nuclear power has been the only feasible power source, in the form of RTGs at least. Spaceborne nuclear reactors have long been contemplated for providing much higher levels of power.

ahi 16y ago

nuclear battery, more or less http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_gen...

kenj0418 16y ago

From radioactive decay of plutonium. According to Wikipedia, its power cell is expected to last until at least 2025. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_1#Power http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_1#Power

mturmon 16y ago

Here's some more about the RTGs: http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/spacecraftlife.html http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/spacecraftlife.html They used to provide about 470W, now it is down to the mid-200s.

dublinclontarf 16y ago
Could one of these ("nuclear batteries") be used to power one of those exoskeletons from Lockheed or Raytheon?
- burgerbrain 16y ago
  It's been a while since I worked the numbers, but I believe that humans regularly put out more power than that during daily activities. Assuming the exoskeleton was extremely efficient, it wouldn't really get you all that much advantage.
  - cullenking 16y ago
    A cyclist working hard will put out 300ish watts, so, during daily activities, unless you are talking extremely short bursts like lifting/jumping, we put out much less. Store a good amount of power in some capacitor system and that would be enough to power an exoskeleton I bet.
- mturmon 16y ago
  The mass of a Voyager RTG putting out 158W is about 38 kg (84lb). (It looks like Voyager used 3 of these RTGs.) Seems like they would be too heavy for your purpose. It seems the Galileo RTGs were more powerful: 300 W in 56 kg (123 lb). This is still pretty heavy but maybe getting in there.

bfe 16y ago

Solar panels have only been practical out to missions to Mars or the asteroid belt at farthest. For any more distant mission, nuclear power has been the only feasible power source, in the form of RTGs at least. Spaceborne nuclear reactors have long been contemplated for providing much higher levels of power.