Slashdot Mirror


NASA Looks At Reviving Atomic Rocket Program (newatlas.com)

Big Hairy Ian shares a report from New Atlas: When the first manned mission to Mars sets out, it may be on the tail of an atomic rocket engine. The Space Race vintage technology could have a renaissance at NASA after the space agency's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama signed a contract with BWXT Nuclear Energy to develop updated Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) concepts and new fuel elements to power them.

Today, with NASA once again considering the challenges of sending astronauts to Mars, the nuclear option is back on the table as part of the agency's Game Changing Development program. Under this, NASA has awarded BMXT, which supplies nuclear fuel to the U.S. Navy, a $18.8-million contract running through September 30, 2019 to look into the possibility of developing a new engine using a new type of fuel. Unlike previous designs using highly enriched uranium, BMXT will study the use of Low-Enriched Uranium (LEU), which has less than 20 percent of fissile uranium 235. This will provide a number of advantages. Not only is it safer than the highly enriched fuel, but the security arrangements are less burdensome, and the handling regulations are the same as those of a university research reactor. If NASA determines next month that the LEU engine is feasible, the project will conduct testing and refine the manufacturing process of the Cermet fuel elements over the course of a year, with testing of the full-length Cermet fuel rods to be conducted at Marshall.

Slashdot reader Big Hairy Ian adds: "At the very least it looks much more feasible than Project Orion."

2 of 122 comments (clear)

  1. Simple Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Aside from the fact that my tax dollars are being wasted on this when they could go to paying down the national debt, how does this affect me or anyone else at all? Going to Mars is so difficult that there will never be a way to send more than a few people there at a time. How does sending a few people to Mars affect anyone's life in a meaningful way? There are so many more worthwhile things we could be doing, such as curing cancer, solving world hunger, or reducing our impacts on climate change. It should be evident to anyone capable of logic and reason that atomic rockets and sending people to Mars are complete and utter wastes of time and money. Now, I'll be censored to -1 for asking how this affects anyone at all, but it's a question that needs to be answered. I strongly doubt that anyone on this site is capable of answering my question, which is why it will be swept under the rug by censoring it to -1. Can anyone explain why this matters or is worthwhile? I think not!

  2. Re:Waste of Money by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: -1, Troll

    Instead of going to Mars, let's use our resources to do things that actually benefit people, such as stopping global warming.

    Which will require going nuclear. We tried burning liberals for power, but they proved even smokier and harder to keep lit than that German lignite.