Could NASA Get To Pluto Faster? Space Expert Says Yes - By Thinking Nuclear

As NASA's New Horizons spacecraft winds its way on a nine-year journey toward Pluto and the outer solar system, at least one expert wonders why such missions need to take so long.

Paul A. Czysz, a 30-year veteran of the industry, continuing consultant to the U.S. military and professor emeritus of aerospace engineering at St. Louis University, thinks NASA can curb the travel time to the outer planets from nearly a decade to a matter of weeks...continues spacedaily.com

Well if they just started going nuclear we do much better in space travel we need this but there will be some strong hurdles to over come, not technological but the ignorant people who think that all nuclear is dangerous and wrong to do.


mod edit to use "ex" instead of "quote"
Quote Reference.
Posting work written by others. **ALL MEMBERS READ**


[edit on 1-2-2006 by sanctum]

Yes next we'll have space pollution and space-age hippies

Well the New Horizons spacecraft uses a radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG). I know that isn't quite the same as a nuclear powered craft though. One thing the "space expert" doesn't talk about is the size and weight of the nuclear reactor. I'm guessing it would be too big and or heavy for this probe. And by the sounds of it, it doesn't seem like an efficient reactor will be ready by 2050, so how does that help the Pluto probe get there faster right now?

you dont need a reactor. use a nuclear pluse rocket
that would get it there fast



DON

[edit on 31-1-2006 by EVIL ILLUMINATI REP]

This guy has his head in the clouds...It seems all he's doing is waiting for the miraculous year of 2050, So he can hop in is super cool spaceship and fly at super stellar speeds through-out the galaxy.

I'm all for Nuclear power in space, but I think this guy is putting Russian rocket tech on a platform, that is far to high.

I'll have to agree with Murcielago here on this one. The Russians are allegedly 35 years ahead of us on nuc. propulsion? If that's the case, why wern't they touting such an amazing technological advantage (As they would have) during the cold war?
I certainly don't claim to comprehend what kind of science would be behind this system. I do have a hunch that the first Ion drive was launched a year (?) ago by the ESA and that RTG was just launched by NASA, we are in the infancy of the next stage of propulsion. But I am going to pull a prophecy here, and state that by 2050 we will NOT be going 1/10th the speed of light.
Hell, we'll be lucky to be alive by 2050

[edit on 1-2-2006 by TheGoodDoctorFunk]

Originally posted by TheGoodDoctorFunk
I do have a hunch that the first Ion drive was launched a year (?) ago by the ESA and that RTG was just launched by NASA

Just to correct some minor things. The first Ion Thruster was used 8 years ago on NASA's Deep Space 1, and then another one was used on the ESA's SMART 1 probe, luanched 3 years ago.

The first RTG was used in 1961 and they've been used on every deep space probe (Like the Pioneer and voyager probes). They've gotten better since i'd imagine.

Anyway I just wanted to clear that up.