[Svartalfiar]

Our modern navies seem to think, for large ocean going vessels - aircraft carriers - and vessels with trips that last a very long time - strategic submarines, that nuclear power is the best? Why would space travel be any different?

Nuclear power on a sea-faring vessel uses water (steam) to convert the radiation energy into mechanical energy, turning a propeller in the water. If you were to use a nuclear reactor in space, how are you going to change that energy into something you can use for thrust?

[fremont_steve]

From “Wikipedia”

“A radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG, RITEG) is a nuclear reactor technology electrical generator that obtains its power from radioactive decay. In such a device, the heat released by the decay of a suitable radioactive material is converted into electricity by the Seebeck effect using an array of thermocouples.”

I believe these are the power sources used on the Voyageur space-craft for instance. And we KNOW that it’s going to last till the 23rd century. You DID see Star Trek the Movie didn’t you? :-)

[wideminded]

If you were to use a nuclear reactor in space, how are you going to change that energy into something you can use for thrust?

Nuclear thermal rocket

[PIF]

how are you going to change that energy into something you can use for thrust?

—

Explode it against a preasure plate a ka the Orion Project from the early 60s, before the US went wimpy on nuclear power.

Steam, water - all green, which is in.

LEO per pound costs:
Low - $1672/$2341
High - $5806/$6452

Geo syc orbit per pound costs:
Low - $5051/$7071
High - $13,953/$15,504

How high you want to lift the water depends on the orbit picked for the fueling/refueling - costs are comenserate. The further into the gravity well you go for your fuel (water), the more fuel you need to enter and depart.

Exactly how much water fuel does one need to get to Mars? The faster one goes the more water one needs.

BAH ... Orion or bust.