Nuclear ground-orbit vehicle - Page 3

raniE · 04-20-2010, 06:01 PM

I'm thinking about TL9 space travel and wondering about nuclear thermal reaction engines. Looking at GURPS Spaceships, an NTR using water as reaction mass is one of the cheapest ways of getting stuff into orbit. How dangerous, for the environment, crew, passengers and humans in general, would such a vehicle be to operate, assuming that there are no accidents in which reactor material is ejected from the spacecraft? Is using water as reaction mass going to be significantly more environmentally harmful than using hydrogen (water is so much cheaper and easier to use it's usually worth the loss of delta-V)? Is it possible to build a nuclear ramjet that does not release radioactive material into the atmosphere (Project Pluto from the 1960s sounds like something you really do not want to release into the atmosphere)?

04-20-2010, 06:01 PM	#1
raniE Join Date: Jun 2007	Nuclear ground-orbit vehicle I'm thinking about TL9 space travel and wondering about nuclear thermal reaction engines. Looking at GURPS Spaceships, an NTR using water as reaction mass is one of the cheapest ways of getting stuff into orbit. How dangerous, for the environment, crew, passengers and humans in general, would such a vehicle be to operate, assuming that there are no accidents in which reactor material is ejected from the spacecraft? Is using water as reaction mass going to be significantly more environmentally harmful than using hydrogen (water is so much cheaper and easier to use it's usually worth the loss of delta-V)? Is it possible to build a nuclear ramjet that does not release radioactive material into the atmosphere (Project Pluto from the 1960s sounds like something you really do not want to release into the atmosphere)? Last edited by raniE; 04-20-2010 at 06:55 PM.