3 ms·
It's not clear that methane would be as workable; that's a large change from hydrogen to that. We at least know that hydrogen is workable, because an engine wa
by CydeWeys 6y ago
It's not clear that methane would be as workable; that's a large change from hydrogen to that. We at least know that hydrogen is workable, because an engine was built and tested.
As for the shielding, you can't use solely propellant as shielding because you still need shielding once the propellant is exhausted (the engine remains highly radioactive after having been used). And it's not clear that hydrogen provides suitable shielding for all the kinds of radioactivity generated here anyway; you might actually just need lead. Plus you still need substantial shielding in the event of break-up/crash on launch.
- evv555 6y agoAt what distance is radioactivity no longer an issue? The engine could be attached to payload at a longer distance with relatively lightweight structures. It doesn't have to be designed to stand up to the stress of launch/land with a payload. Just to ferry between points in space.
- valuearb 6y agoSpars can’t be that lightweight when NTR engines have a lot of mass, and get very, very hot.
- baybal2 6y agoJust throw away a reactor after, and carry a second one for a back trip