Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [Gizmodo]How NASA’s Nuclear Rockets Will Take Us Way Beyond Mars
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Gizmodo]How NASA’s Nuclear Rockets Will Take Us Way Beyond Mars - Page 10

post #91 of 124
I really can't comprehend why we don't spend more money on Nasa, the amount of power you gain by being able to transport people across our galaxy is far more exciting than anything in our grasp currently...Plus you can make a **** load of cash, especially if you're the only place doing it. (monopoly on interstellar transporting? Not to mention the ability to sell rare space material, and maybe even find new particles or elements that create better fuel/weapons.
post #92 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy9000 View Post

Future reusable rockets will probably be like this, not like the space shuttle:

Amazing how it stays vertical and still maintaining g acceleration!
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4790k MSI Z97 Gaming 5 Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X 2x8gb ADATA 2133MHz CL10 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Mushkin 1 TB SSD & Samsung F3 spinpoint 1 TB MCP655A + 2 x MCP320 + EK supreme copper Win10 Corsair K70 Lux 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair 750W Bitphenix Monstrous water cooling case Logitech G9X 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4790k MSI Z97 Gaming 5 Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X 2x8gb ADATA 2133MHz CL10 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Mushkin 1 TB SSD & Samsung F3 spinpoint 1 TB MCP655A + 2 x MCP320 + EK supreme copper Win10 Corsair K70 Lux 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair 750W Bitphenix Monstrous water cooling case Logitech G9X 
  hide details  
Reply
post #93 of 124
People who have no facts about this please stop posting "Chernobyl in space" scare tactics. Space exploration is already dangerous. There have been more solid fuel/ chemical fuel rocket accidents than you can count on ten hands. If you want to push the limits you have to take risks. Deal with it people.
New i7 950 build
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-950 @ 4.2ghz MSI Big Bang x58  Crossfire Sapphire 7970 OC  6gb HyperX 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
C300 64gb , Agility2 90gb, 2x WD greens Raid 0 Samsung 830 series 64gb H100 Windows 7 64bit 
MonitorPowerCase
Crossover 1440p OCZ ZX850W Lian li Pc-x2000f 
  hide details  
Reply
New i7 950 build
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-950 @ 4.2ghz MSI Big Bang x58  Crossfire Sapphire 7970 OC  6gb HyperX 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
C300 64gb , Agility2 90gb, 2x WD greens Raid 0 Samsung 830 series 64gb H100 Windows 7 64bit 
MonitorPowerCase
Crossover 1440p OCZ ZX850W Lian li Pc-x2000f 
  hide details  
Reply
post #94 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by strap624 View Post

People who have no facts about this please stop posting "Chernobyl in space" scare tactics. Space exploration is already dangerous. There have been more solid fuel/ chemical fuel rocket accidents than you can count on ten hands. If you want to push the limits you have to take risks. Deal with it people.

So that'd be like, more than 100 accidents then right?
First Time Build
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i7 920 MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522) EVGA GeForce GTX 460 EVGA GeForce GTX 460 
GraphicsRAMRAMRAM
Galaxy GeForce GTX 460 Corsair  Corsair  Corsair  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 Sony DVD+-RW Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 64bit 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Acer P215H Acer P221W Dynex Silverstone OP1000-E 1kW PSU 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Cooler Master HAF 932 Dynex Dynex ASUS Xonar DG 
  hide details  
Reply
First Time Build
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i7 920 MSI X58 Pro-E (MS-7522) EVGA GeForce GTX 460 EVGA GeForce GTX 460 
GraphicsRAMRAMRAM
Galaxy GeForce GTX 460 Corsair  Corsair  Corsair  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 Sony DVD+-RW Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 64bit 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Acer P215H Acer P221W Dynex Silverstone OP1000-E 1kW PSU 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Cooler Master HAF 932 Dynex Dynex ASUS Xonar DG 
  hide details  
Reply
post #95 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by lacrossewacker View Post

I'd say we're one of the most hated counties. I think it's a bit safer to have a can of whoop-as* always on hand. Lot of other spending though can be cut from the inside. NASA should be back to the funding it once was. I think it used to be 1,000th of a dollar went to NASA, and the gov't cut that. Some of the smartest people in the world, and the gov't cut them. Felt pretty bad for those lads that probably graduated from MIT, only to be traded for some political agenda crap.

Why not instead focus on why we are one of the most hated countries? No, no. That would make sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by strap624 View Post

People who have no facts about this please stop posting "Chernobyl in space" scare tactics. Space exploration is already dangerous. There have been more solid fuel/ chemical fuel rocket accidents than you can count on ten hands. If you want to push the limits you have to take risks. Deal with it people.

True. But none of those accidents have involved nuclear powered engines. Big difference.
Cool'n'Quiet
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3770T Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD4H GeForce GT 640 (fanless) Mushkin 2x 8GB DDR3 1600 CL8 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung 256GB 840 Pro SSD Noctua NH-U9B SE2 Linux Mint Debian Edition 201303 64-bit SeaSonic 400W 80+Platinum (fanless) 
Case
Corsair Obsidian 550D 
  hide details  
Reply
Cool'n'Quiet
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3770T Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD4H GeForce GT 640 (fanless) Mushkin 2x 8GB DDR3 1600 CL8 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung 256GB 840 Pro SSD Noctua NH-U9B SE2 Linux Mint Debian Edition 201303 64-bit SeaSonic 400W 80+Platinum (fanless) 
Case
Corsair Obsidian 550D 
  hide details  
Reply
post #96 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by b3machi7ke View Post

So that'd be like, more than 100 accidents then right?

Heh, that would be 50

Though if I was in space I'd be far more worried about a lot of other ways I might die before I'd worry about a few initial nuclear explosions propelling my rocket going wrong. I am sure that will receive a lot of focus and will be well tested before hand. If it does go wrong...it would probably be a quick painless death (if the hull can keep out the sun's radiation than it should be able to keep out anything from the propulsion system. I think I'd be more worried about my air supply leaking out a month into the trip or something.

Al long as it isn't weapons...the more times anything fission based is used is a great thing. It should be providing every watt of power used on earth.
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
2600K @ 4.7GHz Asus P8P67 B3 GTX 580 EVGA Hydro Copper 2 GTX 580 EVGA  
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
4x4GB G.Skill Ripjaws bunch of 'em Blu-Ray For movies Windows 8.1 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
24.4" Hans G HH251 X2 Yamakasi DS270  Blah 1000watt Super Flower 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Built into Desk Microsoft SideWinder X8 Comfy one... Creative Extreme Gamer 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
2600K @ 4.7GHz Asus P8P67 B3 GTX 580 EVGA Hydro Copper 2 GTX 580 EVGA  
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
4x4GB G.Skill Ripjaws bunch of 'em Blu-Ray For movies Windows 8.1 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
24.4" Hans G HH251 X2 Yamakasi DS270  Blah 1000watt Super Flower 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Built into Desk Microsoft SideWinder X8 Comfy one... Creative Extreme Gamer 
  hide details  
Reply
post #97 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pr0xy View Post

So.. nuclear pulse propulsion? Always found that concept to be a bit/extremely risky, especially compared to the ion thrusters already in use. Only problem with ion propulsion is there isn't a power source available that can power them enough to make them useful for anything other than spacecraft re-positioning.

Nuclear power, duh! (convert to electricity instead of explosions)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pr0xy View Post

^The only other propulsion systems we have for space flight besides chemical and nuclear rockets is ion rockets. I posted in the first page why ion propulsion isn't feasible right now. As for everything else you wrote, I'm laughing too hard at it to form a response.

In space flight? Solar sails and gravity slingshoting. There was something recently about using gravity as the means of propulsion but it pretty much takes forever to build up the real speed necessary or something. Theoretically possible, just not really feasible to implement.

And for whomever said we don't have the material to build a space elevator, that's only half true. We have the material, we just suck at making it.
My giant
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E6600 lapped Asus P5n32-E 680i GeForce 9800GT 512MB 2x1GB (unused ATM) & 2x2Gb Corsair XMS2 PC6400 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
WDJS SATA-II 160GB + WD80GB + WDAAKS Raid0 320GB Aperature FSII 19" LCD Apevia DarkSide 600W 
Case
NZXT Zero 
  hide details  
Reply
My giant
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E6600 lapped Asus P5n32-E 680i GeForce 9800GT 512MB 2x1GB (unused ATM) & 2x2Gb Corsair XMS2 PC6400 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
WDJS SATA-II 160GB + WD80GB + WDAAKS Raid0 320GB Aperature FSII 19" LCD Apevia DarkSide 600W 
Case
NZXT Zero 
  hide details  
Reply
post #98 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirmie View Post

Nuclear power, duh! (convert to electricity instead of explosions)
In space flight? Solar sails and gravity slingshoting. There was something recently about using gravity as the means of propulsion but it pretty much takes forever to build up the real speed necessary or something. Theoretically possible, just not really feasible to implement.

And for whomever said we don't have the material to build a space elevator, that's only half true. We have the material, we just suck at making it.

We can't convert massive amounts of nuclear power to electricity in space...we use the heat from the fission reaction to boil water and turn a turbine...it is just a steam plant. We can't really do this in space since we can't cool anything very well. Even if we could...that is a lot of water to haul around.

Though I really think the solar sails are the way to go. If we can use Ion thrusters to produce some resistance it might even work like sail boats in the water and the ship could travel towards the sun...I really hope some one out there with the know how is studying that. Especially with the graphene solar sails that have been in the new recently.
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
2600K @ 4.7GHz Asus P8P67 B3 GTX 580 EVGA Hydro Copper 2 GTX 580 EVGA  
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
4x4GB G.Skill Ripjaws bunch of 'em Blu-Ray For movies Windows 8.1 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
24.4" Hans G HH251 X2 Yamakasi DS270  Blah 1000watt Super Flower 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Built into Desk Microsoft SideWinder X8 Comfy one... Creative Extreme Gamer 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
2600K @ 4.7GHz Asus P8P67 B3 GTX 580 EVGA Hydro Copper 2 GTX 580 EVGA  
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
4x4GB G.Skill Ripjaws bunch of 'em Blu-Ray For movies Windows 8.1 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
24.4" Hans G HH251 X2 Yamakasi DS270  Blah 1000watt Super Flower 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Built into Desk Microsoft SideWinder X8 Comfy one... Creative Extreme Gamer 
  hide details  
Reply
post #99 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vagrant Storm View Post

We can't convert massive amounts of nuclear power to electricity in space...we use the heat from the fission reaction to boil water and turn a turbine...it is just a steam plant. We can't really do this in space since we can't cool anything very well. Even if we could...that is a lot of water to haul around.

Though I really think the solar sails are the way to go. If we can use Ion thrusters to produce some resistance it might even work like sail boats in the water and the ship could travel towards the sun...I really hope some one out there with the know how is studying that. Especially with the graphene solar sails that have been in the new recently.

Sure we can. We have to cool the massive heat that the sun puts on everything as well as create heat when the sun isn't heating things. We are cooling or heating things in space 24/7. A vacuum doesn't magically stop the transfer of heat. Heat is energy, not just temperature.

Staying Cool on the ISS

Edit: As for the amount of water, check out nuclear submarines. I've no data on that off the top of my head but I highly doubt they use the salt water to spin the turbines because of how corrosive it is.
Edited by Kirmie - 4/4/13 at 2:05pm
My giant
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E6600 lapped Asus P5n32-E 680i GeForce 9800GT 512MB 2x1GB (unused ATM) & 2x2Gb Corsair XMS2 PC6400 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
WDJS SATA-II 160GB + WD80GB + WDAAKS Raid0 320GB Aperature FSII 19" LCD Apevia DarkSide 600W 
Case
NZXT Zero 
  hide details  
Reply
My giant
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E6600 lapped Asus P5n32-E 680i GeForce 9800GT 512MB 2x1GB (unused ATM) & 2x2Gb Corsair XMS2 PC6400 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
WDJS SATA-II 160GB + WD80GB + WDAAKS Raid0 320GB Aperature FSII 19" LCD Apevia DarkSide 600W 
Case
NZXT Zero 
  hide details  
Reply
post #100 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shmerrick View Post

A solar power farm in space is much more effecient than anything we could hope to build on the Earth. Why? The Earth itself. Also, space is not cold. A vacume does not have temperature as you need to have exsistence to be a value of temperature. I'm not trying to troll, as space is foreign concept for most of us to understand seeing as we having nothing close to it here on Earth.

The lack of molecules in space make heat convection difficult, but space itself is infact very cold, around -270c.
Edited by Bennny - 4/4/13 at 3:17pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Technology and Science News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [Gizmodo]How NASA’s Nuclear Rockets Will Take Us Way Beyond Mars