3 ms·
Project orion has the name recognition, but nuclear salt water rockets would just be a much better use of the same amount of fissiles. Maybe we should start rep
by Tuna-Fish 10y ago
Project orion has the name recognition, but nuclear salt water rockets would just be a much better use of the same amount of fissiles. Maybe we should start reposting the wikipedia link every month until people remember mr. Zubrin's creations more than project Orion?
- Pinckney 10y agoThe big advantage of Orion is that we're reasonably confident it would work, and could probably build one within the decade with a serious effort. Zubrin's NSW rocket, on the other hand, falls into the "hasn't yet been conclusively proved impossible" category. We're not sure if we can control the reaction, and we're not sure how much heat would be transferred to the rocket if we can.
- maverick_iceman 10y agoOrion would have exhaust velocity ~1000-10000km/s. Compare that to NSWR's 66km/s. NSWR seems fast compared to today's chemical rockets but it's nothing compared to Orion.
- Symmetry 10y agoIt's hard to say which is a more efficient use of fissiles. It's easier to burn up all your fuels in the context of an explosion as in Orion than in a saltwater rocket. On the other hand by bulking out the fuel with water to form a larger mass of propellant the saltwater uses it's energy more efficiently at the cost of lower ISP. But really, if we're willing to leak radioactive byproducts I think an open cycle gas core might be the best bet in terms of not-yet-developed rockets. http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/enginelist.php#id--Nuclear_Thermal--Gas_Core--Open_Cycle http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/enginelist.php#...