[GulliverSwift]

Nuclear power? Sounds like Star Trek.

"Capt'n, I'm givin' her all she's got!"

...........

...........

"Uh, that's fine, Mr. Scott. Keep up the good work."

[Support Free Republic]

He Pledges his Allegiance to the Left
	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[bonesmccoy]

Better engine technology is a requirement of developing interplanetary travel. We need more power!

[Professional Engineer]

Antimatter propulsion, solar and magnetic sails all make great stories, but such futuristic concepts don't do anything to get humans out to the moon, or Mars, or to various local comets or asteroids within the foreseeable future.

These concepts don't get you to any of these places period. Solar or magnetic sails can't get you out of a planet's gravity well.

[KantianBurke]

What would the risk be if there was a shuttle breakup akin to the recent disaster?

[RightWhale]

Permanent moon bases and Mars bases will probably have to be nuclear-powered. Especially at first. Later they may be able to lay enough solar panels. Which power source will be used? Depends on economics, not just cost but also weight or manufacturing cost if they start manufacturing things on the moon or Mars. This is a technical question, one of many that cannot be answered now and won't be until it is time to cut metal.

[Grig]

What would be cool is if you could go fast enough, using so little hydrogen that you can scoop up enough free hydrogen to replace what you were using. Probably not realistic though.

[Liberal Classic]

We need nuclear propulsion such as NERVA or Project Orion for space exploration.

NERVA solid-core propulsion reactor:

Project Orion, uses low-yield explosions against a pusher-plate for propulsion:

Technologies like these would allow us to go to Mars, were there anything there of interest, in a matter of weeks not months. This is highly important to the survivability of the crew because simply put the shorter the trip the less exposure to radiation. The less exposure to radiation the less shielding material will be needed in the craft making it more practical, and so forth.

The heavy-lift of Project Orion could be used to lift a complete moon-base to the site at one time, equipped, stocked with warheads, and fueled.

[Jaxter]

[djf]

I think the real problem is getting off of Mars if we get there. What's Mars gravity compared to Earth? Like 50 percent? Far more than the moon.

[techcor]

Israeli scientists discovered about 3 years ago that americium 242m a meta-stable nuclear isomer was 100 times as powerful as plutonium and was powerful even in then strips. It was published in an article called "Two weeks to Mars". Much less would have to be used and it would still be more powerful than the uranium.

Another process call "coherent nuclear resonant scattering" or something like that, involves a crystal made from iron imbedded in an iron-boride crystal. When a 60 gauss magnetic field is applied it absorbs x-rays , when the field is reversed the x-rays pass on throug. A light-sail made of this could be charged up and not have to rely on external lasers in orbit. Just a couple of ideas to think about.

[LibWhacker]

The nuclear thermal design is a kind of steam engine meant to mollify the luddites in the ecology movement. Screw the philistines! No timid half-measure approaches to space travel!

Freeman Dyson and the Orion team laid the groundwork for true nuclear-powered space travel 40 years ago. And they were preparing to actually do it: Launch a skyscraper-sized space cruiser with a crew of hundreds from the surface of the earth. They would've laughed at you if you asked them build a steam engine.