From: "Paul F Austin" <paustin@digital.net>
Newsgroups: sci.military.naval
Subject: Re: Superdconducting electric motor.
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 20:35:04 -0500

dave pierson wrote in message <76lu5u$hi9$1@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>...
>Its not hard to go over 90%, even 95% efficient in motor or generator design,
>witn NON superconducting materails.  So to get that 5 or 10%, lug
>around a bunch of cryogens, and the material to keep them cold?
>
>AND, in case of battle damage to the cooler, the superconductivity goes
>away...
>
>I can't see it, myself....

Energy has little to do with it. _Size_ is the key. Lipscombfish had a huge
propulsion motor (rated about 15,000 horsepower) and it dominated the
engineroom. Superconducting motors are a lot _smaller_ that conventional
ones for a given power output.

--
"An important difference between a military operation and a surgical
operation is that the patient is not tied down. But it's a common fault of
generalship to assume that he is".
Paul F Austin
paustin@digital.net