ROVER NERVA Nuclear Rocket Engine test stand #2

http://www.nuclearspace.com
Project ROVER NERVA Nuclear Rocket Engine testing @ Jackass Flats, Nevada. ID type engine KIWI, Phoebus, NRX, XE PRIME http://www.nuclearspacetechnology.org
LANL film archive

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• rocket nuclear reactor
• nuclear
• rocket
• nuclear engine

[fwgross]

What about the Boron cycle for an ion drive?

11B5 +p = 3(4He2) + 16MeV

Lots of energy produced . Exhause velocity 10000 kps with a specific impulse of a bit over a million.

[jibbi4one]

@fwgross Boron w/ exhaust velocity of 10,000 kps? What is kps?

When you express exhaust velocity it's in typical Specific Impulse (Isp) it's thrust force per unit propellant or fuel weight flow per second. An Isp of a million for Boron Ion Drive is not real. Studies of SEP (solar electric) or VASIMR or NEP are not BEST transport systems for intersellar transport. Real systems for solar system transport are Chemical & Nuclear Thermal. search&see video: Fusion Propulsion for Interstellar Travel

[ProjectFlashlight612]

Nuclear rockets are all well and good, but ion drives are clearly the way to go. Far less risk of rad leaks, vastly more efficient, and once you're in space, you can just kick out thrust forever and let momentum take you to the stars. Er, in about 20 years for somewhere like Alpha C....

[jibbi4one]

@ProjectFlashlight612 I don't want to offend here. REALLY you do need to put down comic books.

And do some science work if you feel the need to provide real energy for propulsion in space. Ion drives are a legitimate source of power but they DO NOT OPERATE in an energy vacuum they need a power source. Ion propulsion to A-Centauri, B-Centauri & Proxima is impossible! Now.

You need to go miniumun 1 C(speed of light) So far neutrinos might travel Faster Than Light (FTL).

So maybe FTL is real.

[MightyMike200]

@jibbi4one Why would you say you have to go a minimum of 1C? That's absurd based on our current understanding of physics. Ion drives are practical for interstellar travel yet but if you can maintain a constant acceleration of a significant fraction of G you can get to the stars in an acceptable duration according to the experience of the passenger.

[jibbi4one]

@MightyMike200 Yes, understand constant acceleration going 1 G principle. To provide this kind of propulsion requires massive energy w/ for example: FUSION.

We are roughly talking in orders of magnitude 63 terrajoules that's 96, 20 megaton A bombs exploding inside the fusion engine of a Nimitz Class aircraft carrier size spacecraft for over 31 million seconds!!!

Dude, that's insane power that human beings do not possess.

Utube search:FUSION PROPULSION FOR INTERSTELLAR TRAVEL-Bantokfomoki

[TheHotelMoxa]

@Alembic25 100 years is a n optimistical figure,with curent budgets cuts at NASA and Roscosmos it is posible that even LEO manned missions and unmanned science probes will became a thing of the past.

Take for istance 2012 in spaceflight,NASA will only launch NUSTAR and Curiosity,if Curiosity fails there won't be any rover for the next Mars launch window in 2014.

[TheHotelMoxa]

@ProjectFlashlight612 actually Ion engines produce little thrust and it builds gradualy

a succesfull mission was Smart 1 and Dawn but it's not feasible for manned spaceflight

[PimpMunkeh]

@ProjectFlashlight612 Ion Drives still need a fuel to "project" an exhaust for thrust. Thus we need a fuel cell to burn in space as space will provide no propellant. They're also slow as hell. The last Ion Engine we shot up into space took an equivalent of 4 days to go from 0 to 60 MPH. THAT'S How SLOW they accelerate. You need a BOOSTER to get you to a great speed, then the Ion Drive to keep that speed. Also, Solid Core Nuke Drives are not all that hazardous. NASA blew one up to test this.

[normellow]

I love radiation .