It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Why can't we convert the Nuke, from an attack sub into a means of propulsion for the Next Shuttle?

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 17 2006 @ 11:57 PM
While I understand that the potential for a nuclear disaster keeps us from building it and hauling it up to space, what if we built it in space and launched it from orbit?

Would one of these reactors give off enough energy and thrust to shorten a trip to the moon or mars? Could we make this a safe means of inter-planetary propulsion?

Rockets are boring, can't we show the world we can get there by alternative means? Both Quickly and Safely?

[edit on 17-5-2006 by Low Orbit]

posted on May, 18 2006 @ 12:01 AM
It's difficult to cool a reactor in space.

As far as using a reactor to power a space ship. . . what will you be ejecting as mass?

posted on May, 18 2006 @ 12:03 AM
Could you have a hybrid solar sail/nuke reactor? I'm not sure what I was thinking for fuel, do you have any ideas?

posted on May, 18 2006 @ 02:23 AM
They're working away on earthly Nuke propulsion, but those are thermal transference and the like...
What you're talking about I think is a nuclear Pulse Engine, and as a concept has been around for decades and I have seen some design proposals for a nuclear propulsion space craft, but they are pretty much frozen in limbo due to the international ban of nuclear testing in space. Ironic eh? You can test them all you like here in the biosphere though, as long as you're one of the good guys that is.

Pulsed Fission - Project Orion

The third idea for harnessing nuclear fission for space travel is by detonating nuclear bombs to provide propulsion. This idea is more commonly referred to as a nuclear pulse rocket and was conceived in 1955 under the title Project Orion, which ran through the 1950's and into the 1960's. The objective of the project was to send a manned mission to Mars.

posted on May, 18 2006 @ 09:41 AM
Thanks for the info Twitchy, however, when has the U.S. ever followed an Anti-Nuclear Treaty.

We have been working on this type of propulsion since the '50's and there is nothing new, nothing of interest 50+ years later. I FIND THIS HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS.

All of the reasons I have found on why we do not consider this as a viable means of propulsion for the Next Shuttle have been overcomable.

If the government did have newer Nuclear Powered Probes/Nuclear Powered Space Shuttle designs would they tell us about them?

I suspect for one reason or another that our government doesn't want us to have this technology. does anyone else suspect this?

posted on May, 18 2006 @ 10:09 AM
You could have just added this in with your already ongoing thread on a very similar topic...

Why doesn't Nasa go Nuclear for the Next Space Shuttle?

Closing this one down, feel free to take the discussion back over there.

new topics

top topics

log in