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."
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."
While you dorks are discussing atomic rockets, I'm going out to get some pu tang. Have fun not getting laid today (or ever).
We need to make more nuclear weapons and detonate them over Muslim countries and Africa. Let's put the weapons grade uranium to good use by ridding the world of ragheads and niggers.
There are far superior commercial alternatives. NASA should be paying companies like SpaceX to launch them into space rather than inefficiently developing their own rockets. This is a waste of money when there are viable commercial options.
Instead of going to Mars, let's use our resources to do things that actually benefit people, such as stopping global warming. There are so many more useful things we could be doing than building rockets for a useless manned Mars mission.
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!
This is basically strapping a nuclear weapon to yourself and accelerating to massive speeds. What could possibly go wrong? This is precisely why we need hydrocarbons to supply power for rockets and planes. Although nuclear fuel has the capability to power those vehicles, it is simply much too dangerous.
So what happens if there's a fault and the RSO hits the self-destruct button?
are pushing science. That doesn't help humanity nearly as much as real degrees like BA degrees in things that matter. I have a BS in engineering, and I know damn well I've never done anything to help humanity.
Yes ! Yes! Yes!
How can I opt out of funding worthless projects like this with my tax dollars while remaining an American citizen? Thanks in advance.
Those political donations from BWX really paid off!
Why else is a company that has had nothing to do with rocketry of any kind doing this instead of NASA, the Air Force or a University?
It's kind of sad because it would be nice to see an atomic rocket instead of vanishing pork money funding a very expensive undergraduate level literature survey.
Look at what a horrific disaster all those exploding reactors have been on navy ships and submarines!
When will people realize the horror of nuclear reactors! Radiation! Radiation!
Not to mention the ecological disaster that there would be if evil radiation were to leak in space!
Do people not realize it is the one truly pristine environment left?
Every single ONE of the radioactive RTGs that we have sent up on rockets has caused untold deaths! The chemical rockets on the other hand make rainbows brighter and butterflies more colourful!
The horror..
Posts on Usenet are Discussion I'm for t he project. a&rea. It is the guest and never get 'superior' machine. implementation to surveys show that be 'very poorly a change to
To the fucking moon. No females there to whine about, bitch kid.
Nuclear thermal rockets for maximum delta-v! (it also sounds like the subcultural term for cuckold porn from the far east!)
"When the first manned mission to Mars sets out, it may be on the tail of an atomic rocket engine."
uhh, that's just silly, unless you really want to kill all biologics.
not the tail. try: it may be on the nose of an atomic rocket engine. FTFY
Exactly.
What could go wrong ?
Rockets have, at best, 98% reliability (Using old and proven tech, new one is muuch wooorse.).
that means that 2% of the time, they explode and get dispersed in the atmosphere, low or high, soon or late.
So it's a very very very very very very bad idea to send fissile material to orbit and then to escape velocities.
(the small quantities of the mars rovers and similar RTG powered probes are only comparable to a very weak Hiroshima in mass)
aaaaaaa
WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! /Why not vacation in beautiful Bellingham, Washington?
.
Just takes a lot of people with BIG BRASS BALLS!
love is just extroverted narcissism
FINALLY !
It's been about 50 years that the NERVA program has been on hold - mostly because of the atmospheric nuclear test ban treaties of the time, and also the space nuclear bans related to those test bans.
Check out these 2 sites / articles for some history of a WORKING nuclear powered rocket engine - - -
NERVA testing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
and - http://www.daviddarling.info/e...
I was in high school, and missed out on actually seeing one of the tests at Jackass Flats in early 1967 because I was underage and couldn't get the security clearance needed - really sucked.
redneck geek
in space. Irradiate U-239 and convert some of it into Plutonium. As long as you aren't launching large amount radioactive material everything should be safe.
Can the engines run on reprocessed spent fuel rods from nuclear reactors?
Nuclear thermal is a nice technology for some missions (but probably not Mars where the delta-V isn't all that high). The problem is that I don't see it as political realistic. There are political issues with radioisotope generators on deep space probes - for example the proposed Europa lander will have a very limited lifetime because it will only have chemical batteries.
I think a NTR could be launched safely if it hasn't been turned on yet, but I also think that there is not a snowballs chance in hell of it being politically acceptable.
Its also not all that useful. You can do Mars and Venus without nuclear propulsion. The outer planets are probably better served with electrical propulsion since the travel time is so long that multi-year acceleration isn't out of the question. As long as that acceleration is not too far from the sun, solar will work.
I'm personally a big fan of developing space nuclear technology, I just don't think its likely to happen.
When I took Intro Chemistry at San Jose State University (before they kicked me out for playing too much Magic: The Gathering into the wee hours), we had a tour of the research reactor in the basement of the science building. We were reassured that the reactor was completely safe. If it ever did go kablooey (extremely unlikely), it would only blow up the building. Rest assured that I went into computers instead of nuclear science.
Should I be scared?
I appear to have a Nuclear Thermal Propulsion daemon running on my computers, called ntpd.
Am I unbeknownst to me somehow part of a large beta program? Is my laptop suddenly going to start accelerating toward Mars? Should I hide in my underground bunker?
Why is thorium never consider. It is a safer fuel, liquid in reactor use, easy to contain when things go bad, being a liquid you can drain it off into several containment vessels and the waste product much easier to contain as most of it is lead.
Why? Same reason we use uranium; can't make a bomb. Almost all thorium byproducts are at the end of the fission scale, but Thorium is fairly easy to find in nature; easier than uranium.
Hell the lead might make good ejection mass for a ship in flight. Solar wind would in time drive it out of the system, just don't point your exhaust at a planet. That would be rude.
So the truth. uranium mining has stopped in the USA since the second Russian revolution. We have been processing their nuclear bombs in our reactors; we paid well for the privilege but we've used up all they are willing to part with. We are out of fuel. This was all discussed two years ago in Wall Street Journal. Yes I am well read.
Somebody, like in the old days, NASA, needs to get the ball rolling again. This time not for weapons. We have all those old nuclear power plants without fuel rods. We can't ship them to France (they have a nice breeder reactor), hell you can hardly ship them at all as people scream 'not in my backyard!' I want the power, not the clean up. I can't understand what the issue is. We have aircraft carriers with two to six reactors on board. What is the issue with them transporting fuel rod? Not safe enough?
So what is likely to happen (mining->refinement->new weapons=more job), (old weapons->conversion industry->power plants=more money) NASA pays for pie in the sky. Same thing that created the ICBM; we called it the Apollo missions which ended when the last of the ICBM programs were done. Congress is hiding their under the table support for the the nuclear power industry via NASA and pie in the sky. So is China by the way.
All right I admit the technical expertise to make nuclear weapons is going away and creating and maintain reactors is too. With idiot nations (Iran,N Korea, India, Pakistan) all working on bombs we should still have the ability. Just don't hid it under NASA's skirt.
Pyongyang, August 10 (KCNA) -- General Kim Rak Gyom, commander of the Strategic Force of the Korean People's Army, released the following statement on August 9:
As already clarified, the Strategic Force of the KPA is seriously examining the plan for an enveloping strike at Guam through simultaneous fire of four Hwasong-12 intermediate-range strategic ballistic rockets in order to interdict the enemy forces on major military bases on Guam and to signal a crucial warning to the U.S.
On Tuesday, the KPA Strategic Force through a statement of its spokesman fully warned the U.S. against its all-round sanctions on the DPRK and moves of maximizing military threats to it. But the U.S. president at a golf links again let out a load of nonsense about "fire and fury," failing to grasp the on-going grave situation. This is extremely getting on the nerves of the infuriated Hwasong artillerymen of the KPA.
It seems that he has not yet understood the statement.
Sound dialogue is not possible with such a guy bereft of reason and only absolute force can work on him. This is the judgment made by the service personnel of the KPA Strategic Force.
The military action the KPA is about to take will be an effective remedy for restraining the frantic moves of the U.S. in the southern part of the Korean peninsula and its vicinity.
The Hwasong artillerymen of the KPA Strategic Force are replete with a strong determination to fully demonstrate once again the invincible might of the force, which has developed into a reliable nuclear force of the Workers' Party of Korea and the world's strongest strike service, through the planned enveloping strike targeting the U.S. imperialist bases of aggression.
The Strategic Force is also considering the plan for opening to public the historic enveloping fire at Guam, a practical action targeting the U.S. bases of aggression.
This unprecedented step is to give stronger confidence in certain victory and courage to the Korean people and help them witness the wretched plight of the U.S. imperialists.
The Hwasong-12 rockets to be launched by the KPA will cross the sky above Shimane, Hiroshima and Kochi Prefectures of Japan. They will fly 3 356.7 km for 1 065 seconds and hit the waters 30 to 40 km away from Guam.
The KPA Strategic Force will finally complete the plan until mid August and report it to the commander-in-chief of the DPRK nuclear force and wait for his order.
We keep closely watching the speech and behavior of the U.S. -0-
It seems that less enriched fuel would require a larger, heavier engine. They may actually build one, but up front after thinking it out, or eventually after seeing the practical problems, they will discard the LEU engine concept.
E Proelio Veritas.
as in, how many million tons of chemical fuel to boost the reaction mass (water) into low orbit?
Nuclear engines do not have higher specific impulse than LH2-LOx and thus, the reaction mass will be GREATER and require a larger chemical rocket to hit LEO.
Thus a nuclear engine will have to be a low delta-v ion/magnetic drive.
So, reaction mass will go up separately, on Chemical rockets and will be even MORE expensive.
Is less than what it cost to refuel a shuttle SRB
There are existing reactors in the hundred-kilowatt range and potential for development of megawatt range reactors, which are feasible for space - spent about 3 hours today just reading up on VASIMR and MPD engines, which - when combined with modern designs for nuclear reactors - will open up speedy access to the entire solar system, and far beyond. Check this list of reactors - old, new and potential - and the energy outputs we've already achieved: http://www.world-nuclear.org/i... The future of space exploration, is through nuclear reactors and advanced ion engines. This could have been done decades ago - the technology is more than ripe enough, to actually go ahead and do this - now.
Captain Scarlet! You are needed urgently!
NASA needs to change their focus. They could do a lot of good by managing the land for space launch and perhaps working to provide things like indestructable launch pads - something like massive volcano shaped reinforced concrete structures. That could greatly speed forward progress. Then they need to stand aside and cheer as new companies not afraid to crack an egg now and then return us to the progress rates of the 50s and 60s.
You be the judge...
https://www.opensecrets.org/pa...
Just another day in Paradise