Electric Propulsion Magnets Ready for Space Tests

Rocket equation applies to more than just chemical fuel. The article quoted 1T for about a watt of input, which is ludicrously efficient. So the higher field means more thrust. Less input power means less power generation hardware mass and less cooling hardware mass, which will compound with the higher thrust for a very favorable specific impulse. Very exciting, and I wish them well!

Surely a n00b question, but: why superconducting electromagnets?<p>I get that means zero electrical resistance and stronger magnetic field at rest, but ultimately the engine is doing work accelerating ions, which will be &quot;felt&quot; as resistance in the electrical system. The total energy must be conserved. I would imagine (?) that work done accelerating the ions is far greater than the losses to heat in the magnetic coils.<p>Or maybe that&#x27;s not right?

Would sure be nice to have some numbers on expected thrust, weight, and ISP, in order to have some kind of context in which to understand this!

<i>&gt; very stringent stray magnetic field requirements of the ISS.</i><p>I&#x27;m sure that others, here are far more conversant with the tech, but it&#x27;s my understanding that one of the attributes of superconducting magnets, is that the very strong field is extremely localized. It doesn&#x27;t extend too far from the magnet.

How long will it be before this new space propulsion capability can be scaled in order to put the ISS on the moon instead of in the ocean?