Nuclear material always works because its enriched. So how can it not work if its permanently radioactive for thousands of years? Nuclear material is like the tipping point of efficient long term energy supply, as if it would ever fail to work lol.
And you say it doesnt work. What you should have said is that we humans fail to use it properly *cough* the japanese.
Those plants were badly maintained in contradiction to usa and europe where plants are in top order and maintainance.
Not to mention that it was hit by a tsunami and a 8.5earthquake. In such severity, that the only place where it could ever happen is japan by default. Not a single country in the world, knows that many tsunamis and earthquakes as in japan. In developed countries like the western world most places hardly get hit by rigter 3 scale earthquakes. Apart from california perhaps.
So i think the whole worries about nuclear energy a bit overreactive and ignorant to say its dangerous.
I do agree that they should never have made weapons of nuclear material. But thats just how it is and we got to row as we go.
But being worried about nuclear propulsion for spaceflight is really a misplaced standpoint. It has a thousand times more pros then cons. Its just true that scareness wins from consent decisisions. And many governments and people are afriad of using it. Which is hyppcrisy in itself as we already have enough plants and nuclear material on earth to make it go
the way of the dinosaurs, so since we alreaday started on nuclear energy, lets perfect it for other uses, more improtant uses then what we use it for today.
@dhezballah But it costs about 5 cents to recharge a car ( now ) and that technology will get better with battery development ( hydrogen battery etc ) there will soon be almost no recharging, there are new methods of energy production - you tube LIFE initial energy fusion system
You should thank the people who are make new engine types to go to Mars a chemical fuel rocket would never cut it! Anti-matter may be the most effective way (if they find a way to contain it)
We sure are losing alot of pieces. Why not have a large Aircraft carrier size space craft in orbit and leave straight from orbit. The craft never lands. Use a smaller craft to land and return to orbit from Mars and the moon.
I find that alittle hard to believe. Consider the space station. We have ion engine technology. We are one of the richest nations in the world. I'm tired of hearing about money problems. Take it from Iraq. Thanks for the reply.
We still don't have the technology to build a carrier sized spaceship. You would have to assemble it in space, and then, get all the air for it up into space, fuel, and more.
it jetesons more times than windows needs to restart a pc. They are probably using windows on their command center computers and the spirit of habitiuary windows compuer restarts has translated into jetesoning things.
I think NASA is yanking our chains with this jeteson malachy and hollywood style animations. Project Orion showed real promise and that was 40 years ago, the idea really solved issues but it was scrapped along with the cold war and with that real space exploration.
yes, i saw that not too long ago. it was amazing. it really shocked me that the rovers found sources of water from millions of years ago on marses surface.
thats a really good point. the NASA scientists only had a certain amount of time in order to get Spirit launched when the earth and mars were lined up.
So complicated @_@
DannyCeil 5 months ago
I don't trust nuclear reacters in space - they dont even work on earth
austpom333 9 months ago
@austpom333
Nuclear material always works because its enriched. So how can it not work if its permanently radioactive for thousands of years? Nuclear material is like the tipping point of efficient long term energy supply, as if it would ever fail to work lol.
And you say it doesnt work. What you should have said is that we humans fail to use it properly *cough* the japanese.
Those plants were badly maintained in contradiction to usa and europe where plants are in top order and maintainance.
Armigo91 9 months ago
@austpom333
Not to mention that it was hit by a tsunami and a 8.5earthquake. In such severity, that the only place where it could ever happen is japan by default. Not a single country in the world, knows that many tsunamis and earthquakes as in japan. In developed countries like the western world most places hardly get hit by rigter 3 scale earthquakes. Apart from california perhaps.
So i think the whole worries about nuclear energy a bit overreactive and ignorant to say its dangerous.
Armigo91 9 months ago
@austpom333
I do agree that they should never have made weapons of nuclear material. But thats just how it is and we got to row as we go.
But being worried about nuclear propulsion for spaceflight is really a misplaced standpoint. It has a thousand times more pros then cons. Its just true that scareness wins from consent decisisions. And many governments and people are afriad of using it. Which is hyppcrisy in itself as we already have enough plants and nuclear material on earth to make it go
Armigo91 9 months ago
Reageren op deze video...
the way of the dinosaurs, so since we alreaday started on nuclear energy, lets perfect it for other uses, more improtant uses then what we use it for today.
Armigo91 9 months ago
@dhezballah But it costs about 5 cents to recharge a car ( now ) and that technology will get better with battery development ( hydrogen battery etc ) there will soon be almost no recharging, there are new methods of energy production - you tube LIFE initial energy fusion system
austpom333 11 months ago
It rely is time to find a way to get into space without fossil fuel - what about a motor with a whole lot of helicopter blades
austpom333 1 year ago
@austpom333 Nuclear or plasma reactors are the best cheap options...
MoOtJeMan 9 months ago
You should thank the people who are make new engine types to go to Mars a chemical fuel rocket would never cut it! Anti-matter may be the most effective way (if they find a way to contain it)
CookieMonzta1995 1 year ago
We sure are losing alot of pieces. Why not have a large Aircraft carrier size space craft in orbit and leave straight from orbit. The craft never lands. Use a smaller craft to land and return to orbit from Mars and the moon.
roroapollo2 2 years ago
Because we have not the ressources nor technology to build such a huge spacecraft?
Helge129 2 years ago
I find that alittle hard to believe. Consider the space station. We have ion engine technology. We are one of the richest nations in the world. I'm tired of hearing about money problems. Take it from Iraq. Thanks for the reply.
roroapollo2 2 years ago
We still don't have the technology to build a carrier sized spaceship. You would have to assemble it in space, and then, get all the air for it up into space, fuel, and more.
Helge129 2 years ago
it woulfd cost trillions. and it wouldnt be necasery
SpartanW98 2 years ago
Coming apart in a million piece....
WhatCanIsay100 2 years ago
it jetesons more times than windows needs to restart a pc. They are probably using windows on their command center computers and the spirit of habitiuary windows compuer restarts has translated into jetesoning things.
TTTopGun 2 years ago
It has to jettison stuff. That makes it more fuel efficient. When you jettison stages, you get rid of that extra mass that you no longer need...
ZaneKaminski 2 years ago
I think NASA is yanking our chains with this jeteson malachy and hollywood style animations. Project Orion showed real promise and that was 40 years ago, the idea really solved issues but it was scrapped along with the cold war and with that real space exploration.
TTTopGun 2 years ago
Comment removed
TTTopGun 2 years ago
NICE yoyo despin!
r0ck3tsm0k3 2 years ago
Haha nice sound effects :)
Revilo2990 3 years ago
0:17 smoke and fire
jacobstout 3 years ago
This was from "Roving Mars", and this segment in particular was really spectacular with IMAX sound.
fenny1 3 years ago
they have it on DVD now
Smacbros 3 years ago
What's the DVD called? Roving Mars?
Danny77uk 3 years ago
Yes, they also have a book called Roving Mars.
I read the book, and it has much more detail then the movie
Smacbros 3 years ago
yes, i saw that not too long ago. it was amazing. it really shocked me that the rovers found sources of water from millions of years ago on marses surface.
fluzzyfeatherfuzz 3 years ago
I read the book like 3 times, its really cool. Geyt it @ ur local borders
Smacbros 3 years ago
Cool, was this the spirit or opportunity launch?
2macbros 3 years ago
spirit. MER-A
ZRKFilms 3 years ago
I wonder if they have an opportunity animation.
It wold be easier to tell, because the opportunity rocket would have bigger boosters than the spirit rocket
2macbros 3 years ago
why?
Abrams108 3 years ago
Becuase Mars was farther from Earth when Opportunity was launched, And the rocket needed the bigger boosters to give it the extra push to get there
2macbros 3 years ago
thats a really good point. the NASA scientists only had a certain amount of time in order to get Spirit launched when the earth and mars were lined up.
fluzzyfeatherfuzz 3 years ago
i like the updated MER Launch!
Zachmister 3 years ago
i saw this in masi in a imax im in 3rd grade i love it exsept all that noise from it
lollyprincecces 3 years ago