Comments on: For a Real Blast, Strap a Nuclear Reactor to a Spaceship

By: Chris Thomas

Chris Thomas — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 05:45:12 +0000

Why not simply go the old fashioned route.
and use a ship with the following starting from the base up five N.E.R.V.A. engines.
a radiation shield.
then a support frame with spherical fuel i.e. water tanks in the middle and toridal tanks around the support frame.
with space for landers and an access tunnel between the landers strage and the main life support habitat.
I would put the main supplys storage in frount of the life support habitat with an access tunnel thru to the control room at the frount end of the ship and a micro-meteorite shield at the stem.
this is the best lay-out I can figure at this Time.
I would not go beond this except to say Torch Ship.

By: steven

steven — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 22:53:53 +0000

I have envisioned using a hybrid airship with a hyperion reactor on board and multiple vasimir rockets. Instead of using helium you could use hydrogen in the airship and also use it for fuel. Using the nuclear reactor you could have 20 mw of electric motors powering counter-rotating props to get the airship to quite a high altitude before firing the rockets. It would also be wasy to come back down to earth which is another advantage. To be able to withstand reentry you could use carbon nanotubes for the skin of the airship. All of these technologies are new but they do exit and they could make a efficient and viable ship.

By: Ron Bennett

Ron Bennett — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:12:01 +0000

Nuclear propulsion was talked about and experimented with since the beginning of time, the beginning of time, as I see it, time only started the second I was born. NASA and the Russians tried experimenting with nuclear propulsion in the sixties, I went to a Mars conference in 2005 where the US was talking about nuclear propulsion again, everyone was there including the Russians, at that time the Russians were talking about nuclear electric.

US was more adamant about nuclear propulsion instead of nuclear electric propulsion because it keeps it simple with less things to break down than nuclear electric. Nuclear electric propulsion would need a large Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket, VASIMR, engine, Ion drive etc., etc., to propel it. As been said before water or gas in superheated to steam or gas out exhaust, the hotter the steam or gas the faster you go, the less amount of fuel you need. Nuclear electric like the VASIMR engine would be the way to go in the future because now you are talking about superheated plasma, much faster exhaust speed, according to the builder of the VASIMR, Franklin Chang-Diaz, it will get you too Mars in as little as 39 days.

By: Roadtripper

Roadtripper — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:23:01 +0000

Most importantly, the higher specific impulse of nuclear v. chemical rockets has the potential to greatly reduce mission duration. This makes all the other problems (supplies, radiation exposure, crew psychology) that much easier to solve for a hypothetical long-duration mission. Mars, for instance, would no longer be a 1000-day mission; this technology could easily cut that figure in half.

By: John

John — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 07:05:03 +0000

Google “rd-0410 ntp engine”, that’s the one they’re talking about. Some sites are better than others just check ‘em out.

By: pat

pat — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 19:17:21 +0000

You wouldnt need any of that fancy electronic stuff, just a pipe out the back spewing out steam. you would use plain old water for fuel.

By: Torbjörn Larsson, OM

Torbjörn Larsson, OM — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 18:36:05 +0000

None of these articles explain how electricity can propel a spaceship.

More to the point, Perminov never mentioned “electricity”.

The simplest way is to heat propulsion mass. That will double the specific impulse. NERVA Alpha reference engine had a s.i. of 875 s [austronatix] vs a bipropellant rocket’s 450 s [Wikipedia]. (That is, if you have a reactor at all. The simpler alternative is an Orion explosion drive.)

By: Bill

Bill — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 10:51:37 +0000

They say the EmDrive has completed successful tests of a mass less ElectroMagnetic Drive using normal values of Q for the drive chamber. Formula says if they increase Q
to 5×10 9th power which has been done with superconductors for Physics experiments
they can get 3 tonnes/kw of thrust as long as the thrust does not appreciably accelerate
the vehicle. The Q will go way down if acceleration takes place but in Space a Pulsed drive using this EMdrive while very uncomfortable would work using just a megawatt or so from the Nuclear Reactor. See emdrive dot com for more info.

By: Carl

Carl — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 02:42:43 +0000

@Mark said: “None of these articles explain how electricity can propel a spaceship. Drive a propeller? Hardly. It still needs ionized gas to accelerate across an electric potential or with a magnetic field…”

Isn’t the solar wind a big stream of ionized gas? Seems to me that someone could find a way to use that ‘wind’ to propel a spacecraft using magnetic fields the way we use airfoils to create thrust.

By: seth

seth — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 01:35:07 +0000

The more modern answer a Hyperion nuclear reactors coupled to Vasimir plasma engines for interplanetary travel (moon,asteroids,Mars). Only a tiny of amount of fuel would be required for the Vasimir.

Take a Vasimir/Hyperion assembly, attached it to the space station, fire the whole thing into a 2 month long Mars-Earth orbit pattern.

Launch several more Vasimir/Hyperion units to use as high speed shuttles at Mars and Earth.

Also it would be handy to use a Vasimir/Hyperion tug to move nickel iron and carbon/water asteriods into earth orbit for supplies, construction materials. and a habitat.

For a real out there idea that well you never know look at the emdrive.