NASA, Roscosmos to discuss nuclear powered rocketry
April 6, 2011 by Bob Yirka 
(PhysOrg.com) -- Anatoly Perminov, director of the Russian Space agency Roscosmos, has announced plans for an upcoming meeting between the Russian space agency, and it’s counterparts in the United States, France, Germany and Japan (countries with a high level of nuclear engineering capability) on April 15. The meeting is being held to discuss the possibility of cooperation between the nations in building a nuclear powered rocket.
Cooperation between the Russians and the United States in space exploration, is nothing new of course, dating back to the 1970’s and the Apollo-Soyuz missions, and more recently with astronauts from the U.S. and many other nations riding up to the space station on Russian rockets. What is new is the possibility of not just a rocket powered by nuclear energy, but a joint international project based on a technology that causes people from most any country to feel a little fear. The idea of a nuclear powered rocket exploding in the air shortly after takeoff (Challenger) or burning up upon reentry (Columbia) and spreading radioactive material over thousands of miles below is an issue that won’t go away any time soon.
This would not be the first time that a spacecraft has employed the use of nuclear power (Soviet Topaz spy satellites, etc.) but it would be the first time an actual nuclear reactor would be installed onto a rocket and sent into space.
Perminov, in his announcement, reiterated that Roscosmos has been working on nuclear powered rocket designs for quite some time and is now ready to move forward on developing an actual rocket, though there seems to be some discrepancies regarding the type of engine the agency has in mind. In earlier reports, it seemed the Russians were considering a reactor heat engine, but of late seem to be more of a mind to use the reactor to produce electricity to drive an ion or plasma type engine.
The idea of using nuclear power to drive a rocket is not unique to the Russians, NASA and likely other space agencies have been working on their own designs for a nuclear powered rocket, as most in the field agree that chemical based engines just won’t work for long range space exploration. The sheer weight of the fuel along with the huge amount of cargo space required to hold it, prevent any serious thought of very long missions. Nuclear power on the other hand would require far less of both, plus it would require fewer moving parts.
At this point, though not stated specifically, it appears the only thing holding back the Russians is the money to pay for their project, with current estimates at or near $600 million; and it’s the likely reason that the Russians are looking to form a consortium. Whether the United States or any of the other invited guests is willing to sign on to such a partnership though, is anyone’s guess.
© 2010 PhysOrg.com
-
From lemons to lemonade: Reaction uses carbon dioxide to make carbon-based semiconductor,
32 comments
-
Thioridazine kills cancer stem cells in human while avoiding toxic side-effects of conventional cancer treatments,
3 comments
-
SpaceX private rocket blasts off for space station (Update),
42 comments
-
Climate scientists say they have solved riddle of rising sea,
30 comments
-
Research team claims to have found evidence Lake Cheko is impact crater for Tunguska Event,
18 comments
-
revamping general concept and cosmological principle
May 25, 2012
-
Transiting Exoplanet Light Curve
May 25, 2012
-
Math behind Theoretical Physics
May 24, 2012
-
Do we know whats at the center of galaxies yet?
May 23, 2012
-
Structure of the Milky Way?
May 20, 2012
-
What would it take to terraform Pluto and Charon?
May 19, 2012
- More from Physics Forums - General Astronomy
More news stories
SpaceX capsule has 'new car' smell, astronauts say (Update)
SpaceX's Dragon cargo vessel smells like a new car, said astronauts at the International Space Station after opening the hatches Saturday following the spacecraft's landmark mission to the orbiting lab.
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
18 hours ago |
4.5 / 5 (20) |
0
Astronomers seize last chance in lifetime for Venus Transit
Astronomers are gearing for one the rarest events in the Solar System: an alignment of Earth, Venus and the Sun that will not be seen for another 105 years.
18 hours ago |
5 / 5 (3) |
2
Australia hails surprise super-telescope decision
Australia has hailed a surprise decision giving it a role in a radio telescope project aimed at revolutionising astronomy, vowing to draw on its decades of experience in space science.
18 hours ago |
5 / 5 (4) |
1
Astronauts enter world's 1st private supply ship
(AP) -- Space station astronauts floated into the Dragon on Saturday, a day after its heralded arrival as the world's first commercial supply ship.
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
18 hours ago |
5 / 5 (5) |
0
Sophisticated simulations predict future warming
The chances of our planet being hit by a global warming of 3 degrees Celsius by 2050 is as likely as it being hit by an increase of 1.4 degrees, new research shows. Presented in the journal Nature Geoscience, the British study ...
Space & Earth / Earth Sciences
May 22, 2012 |
4.4 / 5 (9) |
51
Scientist: Evolution debate will soon be history
(AP) -- Richard Leakey predicts skepticism over evolution will soon be history. Not that the avowed atheist has any doubts himself.
Dell tablet leak: 10.1-inch display, two-battery choice
(Phys.org) -- Headline after headline talks about vendors’ tablets in the wings as likely number-one contenders for the iPad. Such claims have justifiably been taken with a grain of salt, considering ...
SpotterRF debuts Radar Backpack Kit (w/ Video)
(Phys.org) -- SpotterRF has announced a special radar backpack kit designed to enhance situational awareness for soldiers on the ground. The company says its special radar is designed for warfighters as part ...
Thousands of shellfish found dead in Peru
Thousands of crustaceans were found dead off the coast of Lima following the mystery mass death of dolphins and pelicans, the Peruvian Navy said Friday.
Keep food safety in mind this memorial day weekend
(HealthDay) -- Picnics, parades and cookouts are as much a part of Memorial Day weekend as tributes to the United States' war veterans.
Family history of Alzheimer's affects functional connectivity
(HealthDay) -- Cognitively normal individuals with a family history of late-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) may display lower resting state functional connectivity in the default mode network (DMN) of the brain, ...
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
So lets not investigate new technology? we NEED nuclear rockets if we ever want to go to mars
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (4)
US/USSR should have discussed Atomic Rockets when they agreed to ban above ground nuclear testing. Perhaps we'd be mining asteroids today.
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (4)
There has been a nuclear reactor in space. The SNAP-10A was launched April 3, 1965 into a polar low Earth orbit altitude approx 1,300 km, having been developed at the now infamous Santa Susanna Field Laboratory in southern California (site of an uncontained nuclear meltdown worse than Three Mile Island, and kept secret for years).
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 1.8 / 5 (5)
NASA has the money, but lacks the will and technology due to ecoterrorism and general stupidity.
Partnership is an obvious way to get it done. :)
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 2.5 / 5 (2)
http://en.wikiped...ki/NERVA
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 3.3 / 5 (3)
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Your comparassion is like saying a peeble bed nuclear reactor sounds like an H-Bomb.
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 4.5 / 5 (2)
I had never heard of Santa Susanna Field Laboratory, so I looked it up. What an environmental and health disaster that place was! Burning radioactive material and metallic sodium in an open pit... Strange I had never heard of it.
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 2.8 / 5 (4)
ESA's Electronic Solar Sail is actually theoretically one of the most efficient propulsion systems I've ever seen, at least for simply exploring our own solar system with "one way probes" and orbiters and stuff like that.
But for moving real cargo and people between planets in a timely manner, I agree Nuclear is the most prudent.
This would allow much, much faster travel times, and therefore you need much less food, water, air, and recycling on board, thus further lowering the payload mass. It just makes the whole thing much easier, because if you cut your fuel mass exponentially, and you multiply your flight speed linearly, then you cut your food, water, and air mass linearly, so then you need linearly less fuel. It would probably cut the cost of a Mars trip by as much as 90%.
In the long term, it would allow much larger payloads, such as colony ships or factories in space...
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Exponent * (Linear to the 1.5 power)
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
I actually pass this facility on my way to work everyday. It has a handful of reactors including the first to ever power a city.
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (8)
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 3.9 / 5 (7)
Well, think about it...
The Fukushima plant has melted down, but only after a 9.0 earthquake and subsequent tsunami. Even still, so far NOT ONE PERSON has been killed due to the nuclear material or anything associated with it. There were two people at the site killed by the tsunami.
From that perspective, the Fukushima plant may actually have been the safest place to be during the quake and tsunami.
Think of that, zero people died as a result of the nuclear or anything associated with it.
Lots of people die in automobile accidents or doing mundane things all the time.
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 4.5 / 5 (2)
I was thinking about this recently as well and comparing it to the dangers faced by the oil field workers. A quick search shows 404 deaths from 2003-2006 per the CDC which is roughly 2 per week. Granted more people are employed in oil and gas but its something to think about.
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 3.4 / 5 (5)
get out
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (1)
I guess one good thing will come of it: just like the Chernobyl exclusion zone has become Europe's largest natural reserve, so it seems will the Fukushima exclusion zone become Japan's.
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 4 / 5 (1)
IIRC, NERVA was developed to a viable, interplanetary design and ground run successfully, with scant 'fallout'. Of course, shielding the crew from it would take some careful work.
http://www.davidd...RVA.html
Apr 06, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Even with Chernobyl, three mile island and Fukushima, nuclear is still the safest power source we have.
http://nextbigfut...rce.html]http://nextbigfut...rce.html[/url]
http://nextbigfut...rce.html]http://nextbigfut...rce.html[/url]
Apr 07, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
During the course of my research I studied everything. Opposing arguments, favorable arguments, scientific papers, facts and figures, etc. What I found basically convinced me that the general public is ignorant and stupid for harboring irrational fears of nuclear power. It is literally our salvation. It is not only a bridge to nuclear fusion, but a viable power source in it's own right.
Apr 07, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
This technology is already tried and tested and will be deployed on the space station the next year or so. And its scalable...
The idea is to use a pebble bed reactor (container sized) like the ones you can buy commercially.
J
Apr 07, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
The safety record for the nuclear industry is impeccable. It's a laughable assertion that nuclear is not safe, because for more than half a century it has proven to be a shining example of safety. "But what about the potential for a catastrophic explosion." So what? It's never happened before and the reactors don't even work that way.
Apr 07, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
It's a case of human negligence, and improper reactor design. Both of these are non-issues in American (or any modern) designs. As safe as the reactors currently in use are (which are already decades old) the most cutting-edge designs are essentially idiot and accident proof.
The question is not "is nuclear safe? Is it viable" the question is enviro-terrorists sabotaging every effort to move forward and achieve real energy independence. This has never been about safety, and always about control. We need to build new reactors, and pursue the technology. It is the way forward.
Apr 07, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Does that sound like any serious threat to the surrounding area? No. They have things under control, even after getting hit by a catastrophic force of nature. That's more than can be said for other types of power plants under such circumstances.
Also, consider that countries like France (which are otherwise very leftist) have been slowly but surely amassing nuclear power plants so that, in the last half a century, they have come to the point where more than 70 percent of their energy is provided by nuclear power. How often do you hear of the French having problems with their reactors?
The rest of the world is pursuing nuclear and moving forward. Only America is actively sabotaging itself.
Apr 07, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Apr 07, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Apr 07, 2011
Rank: 4 / 5 (1)
Apr 07, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
The single most important thing we can do for humanity's future is manned space exploration, and I wish we would finally get started.
Apr 10, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
propulsion is long overdue.
When mankind can solve the anti-gravity problem then we will
really see a space exploration and colonization push.
Until, then we will continue to use Chinese/German fireworks
technology for expensive limited space exploration.
Today's technology from Space-X and rest of field is too
mundane to even waste time following.