Skip to comments.
NASA wants space flights to be nuclear
TheStar.com ^
| 1/12/03
| GWYNETH SHAW
Posted on 01/13/2003 8:04:21 PM PST by Brett66
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
1
posted on
01/13/2003 8:04:22 PM PST
by
Brett66
To: *Space; RightWhale; anymouse; RadioAstronomer; NonZeroSum; jimkress; discostu; The_Victor; ...
Ping.
2
posted on
01/13/2003 8:05:06 PM PST
by
Brett66
To: Brett66
'bout time. It will do until we work out the bugs in the warp drive.
3
posted on
01/13/2003 8:08:25 PM PST
by
Ahban
To: Brett66
I like the idea.
To: Ahban; Brett66
Too right it's about bloody time. A piece of plutonium not much bigger than your fist can destroy a whole city, yet we still have periodic energy shortfalls. What the hell is going on?
6
posted on
01/13/2003 8:11:00 PM PST
by
droberts
To: Brett66
But it's particularly important if NASA is ever going to send humans to Mars, a trip fraught with risk because of the dangerous ultraviolet radiation to which astronauts would be exposed.
BUMP
8
posted on
01/13/2003 8:27:40 PM PST
by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi . Please Donate or Try Going Monthly!!! Don't Let Them Take the Hot Tub Away ;-))
To: Brett66
I seem to remember a few years ago that NASA was going to test a Nuclear propulsion system out but it was nixed because of all the suposed dangers the anti-nuke folks were screaming about. Can't remember the name, Busard maybe? But in theory we could almost achieve the speed of light over a prolonged period of time. Forgive my ignorance, but from what I remember the Nuclear propulsion system would fire up and then cut off, when the ship reached its maximum velocity the engines would again fire and go off line, and the process would repeat.Doubling the ships speed everytime the engines fired.
I hate to think of the advances we have lost in space exploration/travel just because a handful of folks decided we did not need it. We might have WARP engines by now.
To: JustAnAmerican
10
posted on
01/13/2003 8:42:53 PM PST
by
Brett66
To: null and void
What kind of SPF rating do you think a ship's hull plus wearing a space suit would get?
To: JustAnAmerican; Brett66
I seem to remember a few years ago that NASA was going to test a Nuclear propulsion system out but it was nixed because of all the suposed dangers the anti-nuke folks were screaming about. Probably NERVA or the SP-100 program.
To: Brett66
This title is a bit misleading as they seem to be talking about fission based ion drives and nuclear powerplants or electricial systems on the spacecraft.
They SHOULD be working on the pacticalities of nuclear pulse detonation thrust engines. ORION should have been up in the fifties of LAST century.
We have space cruisers up there already were it not for the eco-fringe movement.
13
posted on
01/13/2003 8:59:55 PM PST
by
Centurion2000
(Darth Crackerhead)
To: JustAnAmerican
In all the proposed propulsion systems I've seen that are considered feasable the heat of the reaction is used to accelerate a working fluid to a very high velocity. Instead of combustion providing the heat, the nuclear reaction does.
To: Centurion2000
Okay, since you're the one who talks the deepest so far, you get the question...
Can you give me a thumb nail sketch on a "nuclear pulse detonation thrust engine"? How does it work? Or are we talking sci-fi here??
IMWLTK
SR
15
posted on
01/13/2003 9:16:07 PM PST
by
sit-rep
To: droberts
It's all in the release, slow or fast.
16
posted on
01/13/2003 9:19:38 PM PST
by
Doctor Stochastic
(God cannot alter the past, but historians can. - Samuel Butler)
To: Reaganesque
What kind of SPF rating do you think a ship's hull plus wearing a space suit would get?High?
To: sit-rep
Nuclear-pulse detonation thrust engines work in the followng way: you produce a bunch of "high-yield" nuclear devices that you eject from the back of the spacecraft periodically, and when the spacecraft is a safe distance away, you detonate the device, and the shock wave propells the spacecraft. Of course, the spacecraft has to be reenforced for this, but the speed that can be theoretically can be reached with this is a lot faster than a conventional rocket. You only use it in interplanetary space, of course, because of the dangers involved. If you think the stink raised over the plutonium used on deep space probes was bad, if this ever gets off the drawing board, expect a lot of outrage.
18
posted on
01/13/2003 9:22:47 PM PST
by
Pyro7480
(+ Vive Jesus! (Live Jesus!) +)
To: sit-rep
An Orion pulse drive would have one God-awful heavy mounted shock / pusher plate on the rear of the craft. Not sure about the materials engineering but it would be strong and a good thermal radiator. The 'bombs' would be shot out the back and possibly ignited with laser fusion or the standard fission type. I think they were talking about 1 per minute up to one ever 10 seconds.
The shock wave from the blast would 'push' on the plate and provide thrust for ship.
Are they possible using today's material science ? Yep. The outer space treaty of 1967 prohibits nuclear detonations in space though. Biggest block to space development for the US ever made.
Any other questions ?
19
posted on
01/13/2003 9:36:33 PM PST
by
Centurion2000
(Darth Crackerhead)
To: sit-rep
20
posted on
01/13/2003 9:37:09 PM PST
by
Brett66
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson