Four years from now, if all goes well, a nuclear-powered rocket engine will launch into space for the first time. The rocket itself will be conventional, but the payload boosted into orbit will be a different matter.

27 points

KSP is finally starting to become reality! For those who haven’t played, there is an equivalent engine in the game called the “Nerv” which functions on the same principle, and is an incredibly useful engine. It’s cool to see this idea finally be developed into a real system

permalink
report
reply
6 points
*

It’s incredibly useful in the game because it runs on the same liquid fuel that jet engines and rockets use (rockets also need oxidiser). It wouldn’t be as useful without that crossover.

Edit: I just realised that’s pretty much what’s happening here. The nuclear rocket uses hydrogen, and while it isn’t the most common rocket fuel these days hydrogen + oxidiser would be a functional rocket fuel. You could even run jets off it.

KSP also uses hydrogen fuel cells, which I think use liquid fuel to generate power. So it’s all pretty close.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Yeah is basically the exact same, originating from the same theory. I’m pretty sure liquid fuel in KSP is canonically liquid hydrogen too

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

So excited to see nuclear thermal propulsion actually flying. We were so close with project NERVA back in the 70s

permalink
report
reply
10 points
*

Sounds risky AF

  • If the rocket explodes, nuclear fuel could fall back to earth
  • If not de-orbited properly, the nuclear fuel could end up scattered across a country - This already happened… multiple times… in 1973 1977, 1983
  • If something goes wrong in orbit, now we have radioactive space junk… numerous accidents have already happened many times
permalink
report
reply
8 points

The higher orbit should mitigate most of those issues. There’s more space, so a dead craft is less of an issue. It takes long enough to reenter that most of the radioactivity will have decayed. The biggest issue would be a launch failure.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The biggest hazard is launching the payload, if it fails it falls out over a large area causing contamination of the nuclear fuel. The high orbit of the test vehicle lowers the risks for the other outcomes you identified, and they are planned to remain in these so called “disposal orbits” for many hundreds of years. Things can get very very far apart in space. The Russian recon satellites were operated in low earth orbit and their failures were well documented and even attempted to mitigate by the soviets, though they did fail with very bad consequences at least three times.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

As with any technological advancement , there are risks, but if humanity is ever intending to become a spacefairing species, we will have to make peace with nuclear energy. It’s the only technology that comes anywhere close to making interplanetary travel feasible at large scale.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I’m really excited for the potential for truly massive deep space probes, even though my favorite propulsion system is solar-thermal

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Definitely a mission to keep an eye on, but when Orion drive?

permalink
report
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 556K

    Comments