NASA looking into Nuclear powered space vessels
(archive.ph)
Comments (27)
sorted by:
Although they are a pile of shit and should be shut down as an organisation, does this run afoul of the UN treaty concerning radioactive materials in space or does that strictly concern weapons only?
As once it's up there, would be fairly easy to turn it INTO a weapon..
We already have satellites with a uranium power source flying around. Problem is that heat is a huge problem in space as you can't dump heat that easily (you can only radiate heat which isn't all that effective).
The ban applies to nuclear explosions. As long as they're not bring back Project Orion, it'll be fine.
That is a good point. We could travel through space, or nuke others more easily. Likely both will happen.
Yeah that treaty was in place so both the US and the USSR at the time couldn't have orbital nuclear platforms for obvious reasons. If I remember right biological is also included.
Though the 'rods from god' of putting tungsten rods in space is completely legal in the treaty...
True, but the Rods from God requires getting several hundred tons of tungsten up into orbit along with the launch platform. Probably would be easier if you built them in space with asteroid materials rather than ship everything up there.
I was told several years ago by Reliable Sources(tm) though that rocks thrown from the moon could already destroy the world!
Edit: Here's the link to Literally Who's insanity on this for people who forgot/don't know.
Thank you, I forgot the name of the story, but wanted to tell that joke.
Dude just got done reading some Heinlein and forgot it was fiction.
He's technically correct, but... this is why the treaties against militarizing space exist.
when war brakes out do you think deals brokerd in times of peace will still hold? desprate times will bring out the worst and most despicable in people.
Very true, though if you're at that point of the tech tree, the fuck are you doing!? You can mine and manufacture in SPACE! Start claiming shit and build a fleet of spacecraft then waste time building rods lol.
I think I remember this. It was talked a lot during the early 80's when Star Wars was an actual thing.
Fairly certain most satellites are sent up into space with nuclear reactors on board powering them, so I don't think it would.
They're called RTGs, and yes, they are used in some spacecraft where solar panels wouldn't get enough sunlight.
The Outer Space Treaty restricts nuclear weapons and WMDs specifically. Nobody's bothered to figure out if reactors count as weapons or not (I'm betting on not), even though a sufficiently damaged reactor in orbit is basically a slow-motion dirty bomb, because nobody builds reactors for use in space. There's been maybe one or two very tiny reactors, and a bunch of RTGs (generators powered by heat from decay, rather than artificial fission reactions), none of which come anywhere near the scale they're proposing here. No need to legally get ahead of technology that doesn't yet, and may not ever exist.
“Botany Bay… Botany Bay! Oh, no!”
Kahn you feel the fear tonight?
As a qualified rocket surgeon (500+ hours on ksp, played children of a dead earth and I even played aurora 4x for 30 mins) nuclear powered vessels are essential for upstarting a space based economy. With regular bitch chemical rockets your fuel is most likely going to be produced planetside, then brought up to orbit by another rocket, thats a lot of waste and effort just to relief the fuel shortage for a short time. Nuclear fission rockets are many times efficient so the ammount of fissile material you have to restock is much more sensible, also the other propellant needed (hidrogen) is found on water, idk how the fuel creation process is done, but I feel like extracting hidrogen out of the moon/Mars is going to be easier and more efficient than to set up a refinery so you can manufacture kerosene
It gets better. Gene Roddenberry based his warp drive on the ideas of nuclear powered ships.
Well, maybe "ftl warp drive" wont exist irl, but thats no problem when it comes to exploring other stellar systems, the most viable way to reach the closest star within a life time would be the antimatter based drives. Antimatter production requires a lot of power and the magnetic confinement method of storing it is also power intensive, all of these just for it to decay very rapidly. If you manage to over come these problems, you have the most powerful drives ever created (more than chemical rockets) while being the most efficient (more than electromagnetic plasma drives)
Nothing like a makeshift EMP bomb blasting half the country's electrical grid out when the duct-taped lowest-bidder piece of shit NASA commissions explodes in the mesosphere.
But enough about the entire US military...
Agreed, but that takes a lot to actually have an active nuke.