Navy May Help NASA Build Nuclear Reactor for Jupiter Mission

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Feb, 19 2004 @ 08:26 AM
link   
By Leonard David
Senior Space Writer
posted: 07:00 am ET
19 February 2004



ALBUQUERQUE, New Mexico A NASA project to Jupiter and several of its moons may depend on the U.S. Navy to provide the nuclear know-how in building a reactor for deep space exploration.

The Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter (JIMO) program is a flagship mission under NASAs Project Prometheus a multi-pronged effort to develop near- and long-term nuclear electric power and propulsion technologies. JIMO would be powered by a compact nuclear reactor and propelled by a set of ion engines that expel electrically charged particles to generate thrust


NASA and the scientific community are considering adding a Europa lander to JIMO. The high-tech lander could make on-the-spot surface observations at the Jovian satellite. Europa is thought to harbor an ocean under its icy crust.

NASA as well as industry teams and other government agencies have begun to scope out how to build JIMO. Experts in nuclear-power technology gathered at the Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF), held here February 8-11, to discuss how best to re-energize a nuclear space reactor program.


more -> www.space.com...




posted on Feb, 19 2004 @ 08:58 AM
link   
well, thats good. different groups working together. it wud save money at least, nasa wudnt have to deal with the basics, skip right to advanced research.
i think some people might be worried about that 'depend' part. NASA was made civilian for a reason, and it sorta loses that if it depends on the military.



posted on Feb, 19 2004 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Taht is cool, but it would be better fpr them to actually send a human there lol



posted on Feb, 19 2004 @ 10:21 PM
link   
that wud be nice, illget back to ya



posted on Feb, 21 2004 @ 02:29 PM
link   
The US-Navy to provide the nuclear know-how in building a reactor for deep space exploration?

Just when the Yucca-mountains aren't suited enough to dump nuclear wast, the navy showes a way to dump in the (Jovian) ocean.



posted on Feb, 21 2004 @ 02:47 PM
link   
But maybe something else is behind the drive of course
and the Airforce is always helpful

www.defensetech.org...
PENTAGON PREPS FOR WAR IN SPACE



posted on Feb, 21 2004 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stefan
The US-Navy to provide the nuclear know-how in building a reactor for deep space exploration?

Just when the Yucca-mountains aren't suited enough to dump nuclear wast, the navy showes a way to dump in the (Jovian) ocean.



its getting harder and harder to find a reason to hate nuclear power these days, isnt it? i cant believe you could actually pull off such a gross misinterpretation, intentional or not.



posted on Feb, 21 2004 @ 03:34 PM
link   
It's not so much hating nuclear power ...I love it and use it. It's just the wast thats gets to me. Personnally I don't so the need for nuclear propulsion for jovian or other space missions.
Why...you ask?
If you don't know what to do with it here what do you intend to do with it there?
Wouldn't it be better to use other experimental technology instead of WWII technology.



posted on Feb, 21 2004 @ 03:59 PM
link   
why must people assume everything america does is bad or for a evil purpose? *sigh* arent we allowed to do anything? its ridiculious, just shut up for once and leave it be..



posted on Feb, 21 2004 @ 04:09 PM
link   
America has the best for humanity so I'm not assuming anything.
When Russia with it's Barentz-sea was planning the same my questions would be the same.

Why do you dislike critical voices, I'm not French and I'm not German for that matter, I just don't take everything for granted.
Of course they are not dumping nuclear waste ,duh.
It's just questioning the need for nuclear technologies that are not fully workable.



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stefan
It's not so much hating nuclear power ...I love it and use it. It's just the wast thats gets to me. Personnally I don't so the need for nuclear propulsion for jovian or other space missions.
Why...you ask?
If you don't know what to do with it here what do you intend to do with it there?
Wouldn't it be better to use other experimental technology instead of WWII technology.


euh because nuclear reactors in space is still experimental.
if you want experimental you have to go for fusion reactors in space instead of the fision reactor currently planned.



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 03:08 PM
link   
So that means putting a experimental technology which doesn't even work yet on earth in space and try it there for 10 times the cost?
that's stupid.
First make fusion work on earth and then in space seems a nice approach to me and it saves money to.
Don't get me wrong space exploration is fundamental for human technological progress but everybody knows it's expensive to experiment above the athmosphere.



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 03:19 PM
link   
it already works on earth in a small version they are planning to build a larger fusion reactor for the ITER project. but why not in space if there is a mishap better in space than on earth.



posted on Feb, 27 2004 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Fusion is not working yet as is visioned, that's correct.
Fusion is something else than fission.

""However, those two years of exposure to the space environment rife with human-made orbital debris, meteoroids, and intense radiation belt hazards are among issues that have moved NASA to consider putting JIMO on an escape velocity shortly after launch.""

Wouldn't it be better to try the moon as launch base?

There's NO mention of fusion in the article.

""Discussions are underway between NASA and Naval Reactors -- located in the Department of Energys National Nuclear Security Administration -- to jointly build a space-rated nuclear reactor to be used for JIMO and other deep space missions.""

That means using technology that works and is understood and only has to be 'adapted' for space.



posted on Feb, 28 2004 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by MarkLuitzen
it already works on earth in a small version they are planning to build a larger fusion reactor for the ITER project. but why not in space if there is a mishap better in space than on earth.

um, ur sayin theres a fusion reactor here? fusion as in sun fusion? as in E=mc^2?
link please!



posted on Feb, 28 2004 @ 03:55 PM
link   
well actually if you kept up with current events, there are several reactors. which do function - however their useful power output is a fraction of the amount of energy you need to put into them, so they arent nearly useful by any means.



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 12:13 PM
link   
www.iter.org...

much info about fusion reactors current and proposed ...

[Edited on 1-3-2004 by MarkLuitzen]



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 12:20 PM
link   
how safe could it be to send a reactor to space? what if the rocket blew up on takeoff, wouldnt that spread an enormous amount of fallout over a large area?



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Possibly, but you could do quite a bit to harden the core and make allowances for the possibility of a catastrophic event on launch.



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 01:12 PM
link   
you don't need to launch the reactor only the parts and put it together in space. just like the iss.

one more note a nuclear bomb can be dropped in the middle of a populated region with out danger
it will only go of when armed. same here when not armed or active it will not pose any danger.





top topics
 
0

log in

join