Leaked papers show NASA's fuel free engine does work

A fuel-free engine, described as 'impossible' to create, may now be a step closer to reality, according to leaked Nasa documents.

Named the EM Drive, the engine could one day have the potential to get a human crew to Mars in just 10 weeks, without using a conventional rocket fuel or nuclear reactor.

The latest report describes a series of successful tests carried out at Nasa’s Johnson Space Center in Texas.

The experimental propulsion system has caused a stir as, according to the laws of physics, it should not work. Traditional rocket engines use chemical fuel, which is combusted and ejected from the thrusters. In the airless vacuum of space, this works by the Newton’s third law of motion – generating thrust by ejecting mass into the vacuum of space, with no air needed. But in the case of the EM Drive, there is no fuel to eject.

Instead, the design generates thrust by harnessing particles of light and bouncing microwaves around inside a closed chamber, shaped like a cone. The movement generates thrust at the slim end of the cone, which drives the engine forward.

The paper, was first leaked on a Nasa Spaceflight forum by Australian user Phil Wilson before being taken down by administrators, reports IBTimes.

It was subsequently published by NextBigFuture, and describes how early tests of the system in a vacuum, recreating the conditions of the engine if it were used in space. Engineers carried out controlled bursts at 40, 60 and 80 watts, reporting the thrust achieved in a vacuum was similar to the performance achieved in air.

The tests managed to generate 1.2 millinewtons per kilowatt (mN/Kw) of power, a fraction of the current state of the art Hall thruster, which can achieve a massive 60 mN/Kw. But the researchers say the lack of fuel consumption could make up for the drop in power.

In the leaked paper, the researchers explain: ‘…for missions with very large delta-v requirements, having a propellant consumption rate of zero could offset the higher power requirements.’

Despite Nasa’s apparent test success, there is no indication the paper has been through peer review – a critical part of the scientific process – and has not been published in a journal.