Oh man ! Look at those spacemen go ...

The Guardian ^ | Jan 18, 2003 | Duncan Campbell

[kanawa]

Oh man! Look at those spacemen go ...

Duncan Campbell in Los Angeles Saturday January 18, 2003 The Guardian

The United States hopes to send an astronaut to Mars in a nuclear-powered rocket, according to a senior Nasa official. Under the space agency's ambitious plan, humans would be sent on a two-month journey to Mars in a spaceship travelling at three times the current speed of space travel. President George Bush may announce the plan, named Project Prometheus, at his State of the Union address on January 28, according to a report in the Los Angeles Times. It would commit the US to the exploration of Mars as a priority and herald the development of a nuclear-powered propulsion system. The first voyage could take place as soon as 2010.

"We're talking about doing something on a very aggressive schedule to not only develop the capabilities for nuclear propulsion and power generation but to have a mission using the new technology within this decade," said Nasa administrator Sean O'Keefe.

Currently, spacecraft travel at 18,000 miles per hour. The goal is to build a new vehicle which uses small nuclear reactors to give the engines a greater thrust and circumvent the problems of fuel supply.

This would mean that the craft could reach Mars within two months as opposed to the six-or seven-month journey time currently projected.

"We've been restricted to the same speed for 40 years," Mr O'Keefe said. "With the new technology, where we go next will be limited only by our imagination."

There may, however, be limitations of a different kind. With the US entering a recession and facing the potential costs of war with Iraq, Congress may be disinclined to sign a blank cheque for a multibillion-dollar project with no guarantee of success.

When George Bush senior proposed a similar scheme to explore Mars in 1989, he was rebuffed by Congress and there was little public enthusiasm for the idea.

Part of the attraction for President Bush in announcing the project would be the stimulus it might provide for scientists and engineers. Many of the pioneers of space travel are now retiring and have not been replaced. Numbers of students enrolling in science and engineering courses have also declined. Some experts believe a Mars project might improve the industry's image.

There is a precedent for announcing such a project at a time of national crisis: President Nixon launched the space shuttle programme during a recession as way of boosting the economy in California.

But, according to the report, no final decision has yet been made on whether President Bush will highlight the project, as there has been criticism of his budget plans. Announcing such an expensive plan might appear provocative.

Nasa is expected to ask Boeing to assist in the design of the new rocket. The project could provide a significant boost for employment in the aerospace industry in southern California.

Nasa announced last year that it was preparing to spend $1bn over the next five years on developing a nuclear rocket.

The project throws up many questions about the effects of such travel on humans. Already astronauts are returning to Earth with a decrease of up to 30% in their muscle mass and 10% in their bone mass.

The more arduous flight to Mars would increase such problems. There would also be medical concerns about radiation from the engines.

[kanawa]

An inspiring quest that could bring all Americans together.

[Support Free Republic]

DONATE TODAY!!!. SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

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

[Young Werther]

This can be funded under the umbrella of anti-terrorist actions. If the troglodytes of the third world want to bring the US down and re-establish the marvels and magnificense of the caliph ruled world of the 10th Century then we need to win the hearts and minds of the civilized world with a display of intellect and virtue that transcends the earth bonds....

[DWSUWF]

THIS is something WORTHWHILE.

THIS I don't mind paying some taxes for.

[RightWhale]

Announcing such an expensive plan might appear provocative.

Such a program could help the economic recovery. It would inspire more students to register for math, science, and engineering classes, and employ some number of hi-tech people who are unemployed right now. This should be merely the beginning of the exploitation of celestial resources, not just a one-off shot like Apollo.

[Brett66]

This appears to be the VASIMR plasma propulsion system. Dr. Chang Diaz, who has developed this for years, is ready to build a 10KW module to attach to the ISS as a proof-of-concept. For a Mars mission, we will probably need use of a space rated nuclear reactor in the 12MW range. The development of the power source will take longer than the development of the actual propulsion system, but there should be no technological show-stoppers. The Russians were launching space-based nuclear reactors back in the 70's.

[TexasBarak]

Let's do it! I'd also gladly send in some extra with my taxes to fund such a project.
BTW, Robert A. Heinlein stated in one of his books that Mars was only a week away at a constant 1G acceleration (probably only when its at it's closest approach, though).

[Verginius Rufus]

Sheila Jackson Lee has certainly earned a place on board.

[ZOOKER]

Such a power plant would violate the Space Treaty, would it not?

I know the US and USSR skirted the edge of the treaty with power sources that used radioactive decay, but this sounds like a fission reaction.

I don't want to throw a wet blanket on this idea (I support it), I merely point out that there will be opposition.

[fourdeuce82d]

There would also be medical concerns about radiation from the engines. I'm more concerned about the effects cranio-colonic insertion has had on the author's cognitive function.

One major, major problem- the luddites will lose their tiny little minds- they tried to get Cassini shut down because it carried some radio-isotope generators. I'm all for a nuclear rocket- I think it would be great- I'd rather have my tax dollars spent on that than on a lot of other things. But I fear the knuckle draggers will put the kibosh on it.

[Windcatcher]

I'm much more concerned about the solar radiation than from the radiation from the engines. One major reason to use nuclear engines to cut down the trip time is to lessen the solar radiation exposure. While our ozone layer protects us fromm UV, it's the gamma rays and cosmic rays that REALLY cause damage. There's no substitute for 25 miles of AIR to scatter all those particles :)

The environmentalists will, of course, blow a gasket, regardless of the risk or lack thereof. Time to limber up the "wacko" word...

If an actual Mars mission is announced (instead of merely developing spaceworthy nuclear tech) the statists will freak too:

"How can we pay for reparations if you blow it on this?"

"I want my free healthcare!"

"We need to spend this on [insert pet program here]"

Of course, such a (likely expensive) mission would eliminate the possibility of such Great Society programs...maybe this is Bush's plan :)

[orbital]

I think it would be great if the USA went ahead with a Mars mission. There was a time when it used to achieve the impossible. I'm not just talking about the Apollo program (although I am still impressed by seeing someone plant a flag on the moon) but also the USAF space program of the 1940s and 50s and the Mercury program - sit in a capsule on the top of what is basically a firework, then orbit through a vacuum at several kilometres per second, with outside temperatures changing at a couple of hundred degrees every hour, and then re-enter hoping the parachute doesn't fail (these people were heroes). Now, the best that seems to occur is that another satellite is put in orbit.

Mars Missions have been on the cards before. George Bush Sr. mooted this possibility with NASA, but NASA produced an estimate of the cost that was too expensive. It doesn't need to be this way. Get rid of bureaucracy, and the costs will plummet.

Incidentally, Duncan Campbell is a second-rate hack. Recognise the sarcasm of his 'Oh Man! Look at those spacemen go..'

[SauronOfMordor]

A more interesting project would be a nuclear-powered spaceship which could go from low-earth-orbit to the moon, land, deliver supplies to a permanent moon-base/mining-colony, return to earth-orbit, and do it again and again. Coupled with an economical surface-to-orbit spacecraft to replace the shuttle (maybe a variant of Aurora), it would allow us to extract resources from the moon

Another variation: once we've got something that can take us to Mars, it's a short additional trip to connect up with a metal asteroid in the asteroid belt, and tow it back to earth orbit for space-based mining/manufactoring

[boris]

Not in my lifetime, or in yours.

I joined the Aerospace industry in 1975, with the intent of working on nuclear rockets to send people to Mars.

I have recently given up the delusion.

Mr. Bush's father also gave lip service to such a mission, calling it the "Space Exploration Initiative." We began work on re-acquiring the nuclear-rocket technology we threw away in the 70's when NERVA/Rover/Kiwi were cancelled.

Then Mr. Clinton took office, and his first official act (aside from gays in the military and ahem in the sink) was to cancel SEI and the nuclear rocket program.

A nuclear thermal rocket could not be built or tested in the United States under the current environmental hysteria--even at a godforsaken site like Jackass Flats, NV (where the first ones were tested). They'd probably have to "farm it out" to the Russians, and we have seen how "well" they perform on the Space Station...

--Boris

[StormEye]

"There would also be medical concerns about radiation from the engines."

More anti-nuclear nonsense from a jerk who knows nothing
about the subject he's discussing.

[SauronOfMordor]

This appears to be the VASIMR plasma propulsion system.

VASIMR

[RightWhale]

Such a power plant would violate the Space Treaty, would it not?

Which Space Treaty? Not the UN 1967 Outer Space Treaty. Maybe one of the others.

[6323cd]

That thing have a hemi in it? ;)