IVO Quantum drive seems to be showing a reduced orbital decay. Around October 1, 2025, the rate of orbital decay has slowed.
From Sept 23 to Oct 1, 2025 It dropped 900 meters in 8 days.
From Oct 2 to Oct 9, 2025. It dropped 200 meters in 7 days.
Semi Major Axis (SMA) – Main way to measure altitude
Sept 23, 2025. 507.6 kilometers
Sept 25, 2025. 507.4 kilometers
Sept 27, 2015. 507.2 kilometers
Sept 28, 2025. 507.1 kilometers
Sept 30, 2025. 506.9 kilometers
Oct 1, 2025. 506.7 kilometers
Oct 2, 2025 506.6 kilometers
Oct 3, 2025 506.5 kilometers
Oct 4, 2025 506.5 kilometers
Oct 5, 2025 506.5 kilometers
Oct 6, 2025 506.5 kilometers
Oct 7, 2025 506.4 kilometers
Oct 8, 2025 506.4 kilometers
Oct 9, 2025 506.4 kilometers
Non-Propulsion Ways the Orbital Decay Slows Temporarily
A temporary reduction in upper atmospheric density would slow the orbital decay. It would directly lowers aerodynamic drag on the satellite. This density variation is a natural consequence of space weather dynamics and does not require active intervention like propulsion.
Solar extreme ultraviolet (EUV) radiation ionizes and heats the thermosphere, puffing it up and increasing density by 20–100% during active periods. Lower F10.7 → cooler, denser contraction → less drag.
September saw elevated activity (monthly F10.7 ~130 sfu), with flares and coronal activity noted mid- and late-month (e.g., farside blasts visible ~Sept 27). Early October quieted (low flare chance by Oct 7), likely dipping daily F10.7 below September averages, reducing heating and density by ~10–20%.
Late September had moderate-to-strong storms (G2–G3 watches Sept 1–2, ongoing activity mid-month). Early October started with a G3 storm (Oct 2, high-speed solar wind stream), causing brief density spike (explaining small drops Oct 2–3). Post-storm quiet (Kp ~4 on Oct 6–8, low activity forecast) allowed rapid cooling, dropping density ~30–50% below storm levels and stabilizing the orbit (no decay Oct 4–6).
Richard Mansell and IVO Have More Precise Readings
IVO would know when and how long they are turning on the device and would know if there was brief periods of actual propulsion.
If the device can produce 1.75 millinewtons of thrust then being able to turn it on for 390 seconds or so would cancel a 112 meter daily drop.
The goal of this mission is to test the Quantum Drive and Mike McCulloch ‘s theory of QI. It had been looking bad for the satellite and drive as communication was established by there was no slowing of the orbital decay. The orbital decay accelerated but now there seems to be a positive change.
If the IVO propellantless drive can successful in raise the orbit of the OTP-2 Rogue Space satellite (Norad tracking Satellite 63235), then it could be a gamechanger for fast interstellar travel and fast travel around the solar system. Being able to operate a propellantless drive to generate propulsion with a nuclear fission power source would allow acceleration for years.
This is controversial because if it is successful and validated then it will change what is accepted physics.
The experiment will need to raise the orbit of the satellite as evidence that the propulsion successfully works. Celestrak is monitoring the satellite.
If it works for this test for a few minutes or hours, there still needs to be confirmation that it works for years.
If it works then a multi-decade nuclear power source would be able to provide constant acceleration for decades. This would enable reaching very fast speeds.
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
When was this thing activated?
It has been operating for minutes at a time.
But I mean, when did it first get turned on
They are turning it on and off and have been for maybe 2 months.
An classical reactionless drive can easy become an Perpetuum mobile.
How? Simply put two on each end of an long boom inside a vacuum chamber.
Supply power to spin this up, if acceleration is constant with an fixed input power, the energy in the system will start to rise faster, KE=0.5*M*v^2.
At some point your generating more kinetic energy than the engines consumes.
Spin it twice as fast and your generating 4 time as much energy. You can use a generator to tap this 🙂
In space you would need two booms but no need for an vacuum chamber.
Indeed. But this is a potential case of Eppur Si Muove (and yet it moves).
If it raises the orbital height, there is no other explanation than thrust.
Given there is no other source of thrust going on, it would be the drive.
So far we haven’t seen that, though.
Agree, I mostly reacts to the constant thrust=constant acceleration idea.
Yes this is true for rockets as they use reaction mass.
Not for most other stuff, an car’s acceleration slows down pretty fast as you go faster as you need to put more kinetic energy into the car.
You could use solar sails or interact with an magnetic field to get acceleration. Reactionless and don’t brake laws of physic.
This is where you need to be careful with terminology. Sails are propellantless, in that they don’t carry or expel propellant, but they’re not reactionless. There’s a clear momentum exchange between the wind, magnetic field, etc (depending on the type of sail) and the sail. So by definition, there’s an action and reaction force (and conservation of momentum, etc).
Propellantelss systems such as sails can still be physical and maintain the conservation laws. Reactoinless systems, by definition, break the conservation of momentum.
Btw, classic solar sails interact primarily with photons. There are some designs that should interact with the solar wind particles (protons etc). Mag sails that interact with the magnetic field are a separate category (and very different design, IIRC).
Yep. This is why the UFOs are shaped like saucers.
I’m definitely with you on this, Brett. As much as I want it to work, there are other potential causes of the recent changes. I’m all for discovering new truths about physics; that would be great. But it’s going require much more time and review.
While I am a fan of this project and the QI theory, I don’t yet see this as significant. Many reasons why it may be slowing. Let’s see how it’s going after another month or two. A longer duration will give us a much clearer picture of what is happening here and rule out atmospheric effects.
Assuming this all works out, what is the potential maximum thrust of this technology? Nuclear electric levels like the Mach effect thruster?
If this actually existed you could extract energy from the quantum vacuum and you have basically solved entropy. Over eons it might effect the local physics structure of the universe, but its a big universe with lots of quantum vacuum. I look forward to this perpetual motion machine.
The Casimir effect has been experimentally proven since the 90s. There is an actual force there. If you let the parallel plates move freely, they should snap together. So given that force * distance = work, there is an actual vacuum energy there, that can potentially be tapped.
If we eventually figure out a device that can successfully tap it continuously, it would be as much a “perpetual motion machine” as a photovoltaic cell. It’s just another energy source.
All that being said, this particular device is yet to be proven.
Richard Mansell CEO sounds cautiously optimistic. https://x.com/ramansell/status/1975635574469107773?s=61
Doesn’t really mean much if it just has a slower decay, there are too many potential explanations for that. Only actually going UP would be proof, because that has no explanation but the drive working.
Yes. Exactly.
Even the angle by which the satellite is hitting the few air molecules over there will change (temporarily) the profile of the orbital decay.
They could reorient the satellite to have a smaller cross section. Also, solar activity can expand and contract the ionosphere and change the air density. To be definitive, it has to actually raise its orbit. Hell, if it spiraled out of orbit of Earth and went on an interplanetary trajectory that would prove the technology had some validity.
Correct. Changes in the height of the atmosphere due to solar heating would explain this delta. Increasing the Semi Major Axis is what I would accept as potential proof.
Some sort of deliberate fraud is much likely than changing fundamental physics. This is the psychology of magic tricks, that people will believe miracles are real before believing that someone would go to an unusual amount of trouble to deliberately deceive them. The next step would be other parties replicating the results like any unusual results in science. A satellite’s behavior is harder to fake than claims of lab results but scientists and engineers have always been as easily deceived by magicians as anyone else.
Brett, 100% agree. “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”. They really needs to go up to take them seriously
OK, for practical purposes I agree with you. However, in an absurd possibility, the moon is receding from the earth by some miniscule amount (centimeter per year or something within a few orders of magnitude of that). Likewise, could a tidal coupling with the earth and the satellite occur. OK, perhaps some definition of proof is required and, it is my understanding that 10 to the -5th is a common definition, it starts to come down to what level of confidence there is in the so called “proof”. When the evidence becomes strong enough people just accept it as true and move on. From a pragmatic viewpoint, your viewpoint is well taken. From a purist viewpoint ………….