I wonder if this means NASA has abandoned nuclear propulsion as a primary source of power for future deep space exploration If they have I suspect it's because of the need to budget for manned programs and if that's true its a tragedy for space exploration.
1 posted on
09/10/2005 8:23:58 PM PDT by
Arkie2
To: KevinDavis
2 posted on
09/10/2005 8:26:35 PM PDT by
Arkie2
(Mega super duper moose, whine, cheese, series, zot, viking kitties, barf alert!)
To: Arkie2
OH come on.
If we stay on earth any longer, the liberals will take over and enslave us to worldwide communism.
3 posted on
09/10/2005 8:30:34 PM PDT by
Crazieman
(6-23-2005, Establishment of the United Socialist States of America)
To: Arkie2
Progress being held back decades yet again?
4 posted on
09/10/2005 8:31:36 PM PDT by
mowowie
To: Arkie2
And so Prometheus goes the way of NERVA. Pity.
5 posted on
09/10/2005 8:31:38 PM PDT by
burzum
(Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people.-Adm H Rickover)
To: Arkie2
I'm 39 and I truly believe that no matter what they say i'll never see a man on Mars...Maybe even another man on the Moon.
6 posted on
09/10/2005 8:33:58 PM PDT by
mowowie
To: Arkie2
As an engineer who gets to fix many of NASA's screw-ups I can say that NASA has definitely gone over the edge away from engineering towards a politically correct jobs program where your minority status is the most important factor in promotions/hiring. It's sad...
7 posted on
09/10/2005 8:34:28 PM PDT by
69ConvertibleFirebird
(Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.)
To: Arkie2
I bet eco-wheenies and peace-nicks put out the lights here. They went crazy over plutonium on Galileo imagine the hysteria over launching an actual reactor. I'd like to see a self sufficient moon colony some day that could take on such projects on their own : they could just ignore the watermelon bunch.
13 posted on
09/10/2005 9:05:17 PM PDT by
Nateman
To: Arkie2
If NASA is really abandoning nuke propulsion, this is criminal.
Once we work out the drives (the part that converts power from the reactor into kinetic energy) a spaceship isn't really much different from a nuc sub. We can do this!
Besides, how else are we supposed to turn Mars into a penal colony for all the terrorists?
17 posted on
09/10/2005 10:26:34 PM PDT by
Ostlandr
(NeopaganNeocon)
To: Arkie2
Yep, at this rate, future historians will wonder why the USA all but abandoned space after 1970.
Other nations will go to the planets and beyond and NASA will still be conducting science experiments in LEO (not the constellation).
18 posted on
09/11/2005 6:57:42 AM PDT by
clyde asbury
(Whoever controls the present controls the future - or so they think.)
To: RightWhale; Brett66; xrp; gdc314; anymouse; RadioAstronomer; NonZeroSum; jimkress; discostu; ...
Well I ratherhave us fund human missions..
19 posted on
09/11/2005 9:54:14 AM PDT by
KevinDavis
(the space/future belongs to the eagles --> http://www.cafepress.com/kevinspace1)
To: Arkie2
"If they have I suspect it's because of the need to budget for manned programs and if that's true its a tragedy for space exploration."
Come on, there are more important things to spend money on, like welfare and louis vuitton bags for "evacuees
/gag
21 posted on
09/11/2005 10:30:48 AM PDT by
adam_az
(It's the border, stupid!)
To: Arkie2; KevinDavis
SO; space exploration is irrelevant AGAIN?
To: Arkie2
"NASA and Naval Reactors have mutually agreed to terminate their partnership to work on Prometheus,"They decided to put the resources in the more promising "Queller Drive".
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson