Search the Community

Personally, I believe that application of nuclear power in space would be very much in our interest. Not only do nuclear thermal rockets offer a major improvement over existing propulsion technologies, but the use of nuclear reactors as power sources for satellites, space probes, and the like could allow for much greater scientific return or utility. However, I realize that nuclear power does have associated risks, and there are others who may feel different. Whether you are for or against the usage of nuclear power in space, I am curious to hear your opinions. For reference, here's an interesting paper discussing the topic.

I`ve recently found an interesting article about 3D printer which is used in aerospace area. Have you heard anything about that? This machine allows printing multi-composite parts simultaneously from several materials, which is infeasible in other types of aerospace 3d printing.

Similar to the aviation subforum, a thread to post documents in. Reply with your own contributions. Launch Vehicles Advanced Cryogenic Expendible SSTO Advanced Rocket Engines Air Augmented Rocket Propulsion Concepts Improved Saturn V Variants History of Soviet Liquid Fueled Engines Silbervogel The Space Shuttle as an Element in the National Space Program (published 1970) Space Shuttle Range Safety Command Destruct System Why Does the Space Shuttle Have Wings?: A Look at the Social Construction of Technology in Air and Space Human Rated Delta IV Ignition! An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants Soviet Space Program Handbook (1988) Launch Loop Atlas V Users Guide Current Evaluation of Tripropellant Concept Star Raker Assessments of Proposed Upgraded (STS, 1999) Liquid Flyback Booster Configurations Liquid Flyback Booster Study Assessment Dual Liquid Flyback Booster for Space Shuttle Apollo Lunar Module Propulsion Systems Overview Lifting Manned Hypervelocity Reentry Vehicles Saturn V Improvement Study Nuclear Propulsion Missions to Mars and the Moons of Jupiter and Saturn Utilizing Nuclear Thermal Rockets with Indigenous Propellants Nuclear Thermal Rockets Using Indigenous Martian Propellants Nuclear Thermal Rocket/VehicIe Design Options for Future NASA Missions to the Moon and Mars Nuclear Pulse Propulsion Solid Core Nuclear Propulsion Concept Development of Nuclear Rocket Engines in the USSR NSWR Space Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Program Rover Nuclear Engine Program Tests Design of Antimatter Annihilation Rocket Antiproton Powered Propulsion with Magnetically Confined Plasma Engines Nuclear Pulse Space Vehicle Study SOAR: Space Orbiting Advanced Fusion Power Reactor Metal DUMBO Rocket Reactor Fission Fragment Rocket Engine The Political Feasibility of Nuclear Power in Space Liquid Annular Reactor System (LARS) On the Use of a Pulsed Nuclear Thermal Rocket for Interstellar Travel Fission Fragment Rockets (1988) Exploration Lunex Soviet Manned Lunar Program Solar Rocket System Concept Analysis Manned Mars Missions Using Electric Propulsion Galactic and Solar Cosmic Ray Shielding Issues in Radiation Protection: Galactic Cosmic Rays Titan Submersible Proposal Discovery of 1992 QB1 (first KBO) Color Diversity Among Centaurs and KBOs Manned Venus Flyby Proposal (1967) Manned Eros Flyby (would have used Apollo derivative possibly) Bussard Ramjet (simple) Bussard Ramjet (more stuff) Comparison of Phobos and Deimos as Exploration Targets Scenarios for the Orbits of 2000 CR105 and 2003 VB12 A couple of spaceflight books JIMO Materials Challenges Aerocapture Analysis for a Neptune Mission Aerogravity Assist at Triton Neptune Orbiters Using Solar and Radioisotope Electric Propulsion Magnetic Field of Mercury Human Exploration of Mercury and Saturn Project Mercury Report (1959) Abort Options for Mars Missions Manned Phobos Mission (Project APEX) Manned Venus Orbiting Mission High Altitude Venus Operations Concept Crewed Mission to Callisto Titan and Europa Mission Summary Design of a Common Lunar Lander (1991) Manned Lunar Habitats Meteroid/Debris Shielding Interstellar radio links enhanced by exploiting the Sun as a Gravitational Lens. Origin and Orbital Distribution of Trans-Neptunian Scattered Disc X-Ray Fluorescence from Inner Disc in Cygnus X-1 Evidence for a Distant Planet in the Outer Solar System Evidence for Nemesis (from 1985) THE USES OF ASTRONOMY AN ORATION Rapid Mars Transits with Exhaust-Modulated Plasma Propulsion VASIMIR Columbia Crew Survival Investigation Report CO2/Metal Propellants for Mars Sample Return Missions ISS EVA Radiation Protection Studies The Mars Project (Von Braun, 1953) That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi’s paradox Nanotechnology and Space System Architecture Apollo Guidance Computer Code List Missiles (ICBMs and such, shorter range missiles live in the aviation forum) Defense Against Ballistic Missiles ICBM Basing Options Soviet Theater Nuclear Forces: Implications for NATO Defense (1981) Seize the High Ground: The Army in Space and Missile Defense Soviet Concepts of Ballistic Missile Defense ABM R&D at Bell Labs Ballistic Missile Defense Report A4 User Manual (in German) The SS-8 Controversy Other Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design A Linear Accelerator in Space Astronomical Engineering: A Strategy for Modifying Planetary Orbits Boris Chertok Memoir Link to English Translation The Problem of Space Travel 1928 by Slovenian Engineer Herman Potočnik Rockets and People, by Boris Chertok

There's a shitload of real estate in the solar system, and we don't know much about most of it. What unmanned probes would you like to see built to learn more about the planets and other objects? My first choice is an Enceladus orbiter/lander; it's one of the best candidates for extraterrestial life, has confirmed cryovolcanism, and organics have been found near it. Plus, any mission you send there can get some bonus science of Titan and other cool places in the Saturn system. I also like FOCAL, just for the sheer audacity of it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOCAL_(spacecraft)

The Soviets did a lot of good things with their space program. The R-7 was the first and still is one of the best satellite launchers, the Venera probes were cool and got us a lot of data, the RD-180 gets high performance through weird metallurgic sorcery, etc. Unfortunately, a lot of the stuff they did was also crap. Stuff like the N-1 comes immediately to mind, but there were others. Let's take a look at Vostok, the first manned spacecraft. It is commonly compared to the American Mercury spacecraft. Both had similar purposes; to get a man into space, keep him there for a short time, and return him safely. It did this well. However, Vostok was a bit primitive compared to Merucry; http://www.astronautix.com/craft/vostok.htm In my opinion, this made Vostok less useful than Mercury for getting astronauts experience with maneuvering a spacecraft in zero-g, and building knowledge needed for more complex missions. Also, the Vostok's spherical shape meant that all reentries were purely ballistic, which subjected the cosmonauts to higher g-loads than their American counterparts. Still, on the whole, Vostok did its job. It's probably not fair to call it bad. Voshkod, on the other hand. Holy shit, motherfucking Voshkod. People often compare Voshkod to Gemini. Those people are wrong. Gemini was a completely new design, incorporating many advanced features. Voshkod was simply a Vostok with three people crammed inside of it. The cosmonauts were unable to wear spacesuits, leaving them no options in the event of atmosphere loss. There were no ejection seats or launch abort system (Gemini and Vostok had ejection seats) meaning that a failure of the launch vehicle would have been fatal. The capsule was poorly designed also, with the instruments being difficult to read. The American Gemini program of about the same time made many pioneering advances in spaceflight. Docking tests were conducted, at first with unmanned targets (Agena), and later with other capsules. Flights at high altitudes beyond low earth orbit were also done. In contrast, Voshkod flights did little to advance human knowledge of spaceflight (aside from Leonov's spacewalk). The best thing that can be said about Voshkod is that it didn't kill anyone, which is more due to luck than good design. The Soviet space program would not accomplish the goals that the Gemini program did until later in the 1960s with Soyuz. By this time the Americans were almost at the moon. In 2015, the Soyuz capsule has evolved to be an excellent and reliable space transportation system. However, it was not always this way. Let us look at Soyuz 1. Multiple unmanned tests flights of the Soyuz capsule experienced failures and showed unreliability in the system. http://www.astronautix.com/flights/soyuz1.htmDespite this, Vladimir Komarov launched in Soyuz 1 on April 23 1967. Immediately, he experienced numerous issues. Stuck solar panels, failed maneuvering systems, and other problems meant that the flight had to be terminated after only a day in space. Reentry was mostly successful; however, the main parachute sadly failed, and Komarov was killed on landing. Not only did the failure of Soyuz 1 cause the senseless death of a cosmonaut, but it also set the Soyuz program back by over a year. Had the Soviets waited a few more months to debug the capsule before launching it, it is possible that this could have been avoided.

George Dyson talks about project Orion; http://www.ted.com/talks/george_dyson_on_project_orion

For those of you who are not familiar with him, Robert Zubrin is an American aerospace engineer and author of some note. He is probably best known for his advocacy of the 'Mars Direct' proposal, although he's also done quite a bit of work in the nuclear spacecraft propulsion field (he's the guy that came up with the NSWR). His wiki page says he's also written on other vaguely political topics, but I'm not familiar with them. Personally, I find his work on spacecraft propulsion highly interesting, and it's good that we've got somebody putting forth cogent ideas for space exploration. However, I feel that some of his ideas are a bit too optimistic, especially in regards to his Mars Direct approach. I feel that it would be more optimal to gain more experience with long term off-planet living in a location such as the moon before proceeding to Mars, while also using that time to mature techniques such as nuclear rockets to actually get to Mars. On a related note, I showed his NSWR paper to a guy I know who has some not insignificant knowledge of nuclear physics, and he was a bit skeptical. Still, in my opinion, it's infinitely better to have somebody be a bit overoptimistic about how well their ideas will work, and keeps push them forward, then a bunch of limp wristed pessimists who are afraid to send anyone beyond LEO because it might cost a few million dollars.

First, there was the Antares rocket explosion, and now SpaceShipTwo has crashed, killing 1 pilot. It seems the craft exploded after lighting the engine. Test flights are always a risk. Growing up as the brat of a test pilot, this has always been on my mind during these sorts of things. Post more details here as they become available.