Fly S.A.F.E.: Surfing Atop Fisson Explosions

@bend1483

3 жыл бұрын

Love it!

@machineball

3 жыл бұрын

yes

@mrpicky1868

3 жыл бұрын

revield)

@dankodnevic3222

3 жыл бұрын

Suicidal Atomic Fart Engine

@BobbyCoggins

3 жыл бұрын

This needs to be on a T-Shirt @Scott Manley

"non-stop Chernobyl", "weapons grade uranium", "fly safe". Welcome to the CIA watchlist, bois.

@marty2129

3 жыл бұрын

So CIA Watchlist has the same keywords as Metalcore Band Name Generator? Interesting... :D

@r0cketplumber

3 жыл бұрын

I had to actively register with with the feds to buy nitromethane for rocket engines a decade ago. I'm sure they have a dossier on me, c'est la vie.

@EngineEnginer

3 жыл бұрын

Czarnobyl not chernobyl

@eiteiei4063

3 жыл бұрын

@@marty2129 lol good one

@dylanrimmer

3 жыл бұрын

@@EngineEnginer no its chernobyl

Engines, % C, and "No known reasons it wouldn't work" - What a time to be alive.

@thefirstsin

3 жыл бұрын

Hell yeah!

@unexpected2475

3 жыл бұрын

Feels a little bit like a modern Bussard Ramjet. Hopefully this proves to be more feasible than that though.

@augustovasconcellos7173

3 жыл бұрын

We've had realistic designs that could reach 10-12% of the speed of light for YEARS, though. Project Orion was not fucking around.

@geryz7549

2 жыл бұрын

@@augustovasconcellos7173 Project Orion, Medusa, Breakthrough Starshot, Fission Fragment Reactor engines, the list goes on...

@lmamakos

2 жыл бұрын

with all that going on, alive for how long?

Honestly, at this point in history, THIS is the best engine we've got for REAL interplanetary travel.

@barreiros5077

2 жыл бұрын

Far away of my A

@kamenwaticlients

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah this one seems completely doable in the short term. Not sure of anyone has the will to try it out.

@spencer1980

2 жыл бұрын

If we want to actually explore the solar system and end this robot foreplay nonsense, this seems to be our best bet. The thing I like about this engine is how scalable it is.

@kenshi_cv2407

Жыл бұрын

I still think we should pursue inertial confinement fusion engines for Solar System exploration, propellants for those engines are vastly easier to mine and refine elsewhere in the solar system.

@spencer1980

Жыл бұрын

@@kenshi_cv2407 have you read much about that muon catalyzed fusion? Doesn't work for making power, but heard it could work great for propulsion (I'm still a fan of these salt water rockets since your need for an external power source is limited to powering pumps and not much else). A space ship is gonna need lots of power, and inertial confinement also needs a lot of power. At that point, you're gonna need a massive fission reactor regardless. In fact, I'm willing to bet that your consumption of fissile material would be greater powering a fusion drive than you would consume with a salt water design, for a vessel of comparable mass and velocity.

Kerbal Space Program 2 developers: "Write that down, write that down!"

@bbgun061

3 жыл бұрын

The trailer seems to feature an inertial confinement fusion engine. I doubt they forgot about this one...

@joelnord4699

3 жыл бұрын

We can hope

@GrandProtectorDark

3 жыл бұрын

KSP2 already has a NSWR.

@id_NaN

3 жыл бұрын

@@GrandProtectorDark didnt they only have the standard nuclear engine?

@waylandsmith

3 жыл бұрын

There's a pretty popular mod, Interstellar, that has detailed models of many different types of nuclear engines, all of them based on proposed, real designs. These include thermal, salt water, fusion and fission and require you to be able to regulate heat, fuels, nuclear waste and propellant.

"How is the engine running?" "Not great -not terrible."

@bokiNYC

3 жыл бұрын

😂😂

@sohamatkar9285

3 жыл бұрын

"He's delusional, take him to the infirmary"

@rhinobird

3 жыл бұрын

"How is the engine running?" "yes"

@thespaceman9146

3 жыл бұрын

Instead of 3.6 roentgen, 3.6 kilonewtons

@NovaRanger007

3 жыл бұрын

@@thespaceman9146 Huh.. I'm dumb.. please tell how a radiation unit is equivalent to a force unit here?

"So you know what we've thought about?" "Please don't tell me you want to use nukes as a propulsion method again" "Oh no not nukes, we want to make a non-stop Chernobyl"

@CptJistuce

2 жыл бұрын

"We only need ONE nuke! ... it just explodes for minutes instead of microseconds."

"900 times the energy of TNT" Excellent

@karstenschuhmann8334

3 жыл бұрын

If fact, that is very low for a nuclear device, gasoline has more than twice the energy of TNT.

@misterguts

3 жыл бұрын

"Excellent" I can just hear Mr Burns saying that...

@MusikCassette

3 жыл бұрын

@@misterguts The energy density of TNT isn't actually that good. especially compared with rocket fuels.

@dsdy1205

2 жыл бұрын

@@karstenschuhmann8334 Yeah, it's bad cos of the weight of all that water, and your per kg solubility isn't going to be above the ballpark of a percent

@1224chrisng

2 жыл бұрын

@@karstenschuhmann8334 I think famously, Twinkies have a much higher energy density than TNT, TNT has an energy density of about 1 kilocalories per gram, whereas Twinkies has 3.4 kcal/g, but this is mainly because Twinkies or gasoline don't have built-in oxidisers

"Non-stop Chernobyl" sounds like a perfect angle for the pitch to the investors.

@Aermydach

3 жыл бұрын

Or the name of a Metal band?

@OnionChoppingNinja

3 жыл бұрын

I'd fund that...

@DanielTsosie

3 жыл бұрын

HBO would love a show of that description :D

@stopthephilosophicalzombie9017

3 жыл бұрын

Sounds like a good punk band name.

@sirius4k

3 жыл бұрын

Sold! You had me at Cher Nobyl.

- So, is this a great idea or a terrible idea? - Yes

@KermitFrazierdotcom

3 жыл бұрын

Umm... like Henry Ford said, If You Think You Can, or You Think You Cant, You're Right.

@jgedutis

3 жыл бұрын

This is a great idea 💡

@zefzec4462

3 жыл бұрын

This engine would need a disclaimer saying POINT AWAY FROM EARTH!

@stefanhauptmann6564

3 жыл бұрын

Not great not terrible...

@AnimeSunglasses

3 жыл бұрын

"It's amazing how often those two things coincide."

"Ruin your day" Early interplanetary humanity is going to be *LIT*

@thefirstsin

3 жыл бұрын

Hell yeah!

@MadScientist267

2 жыл бұрын

Course if that actually meant anything...

And thus was born humanity's improbable stone age stellar empire, built upon nothing but hubris and a love of things that go boom. When it comes time to join the interstellar community, we may find that we're the Klingons. Ad Luna! Ad Ares! As Astra!

@newhorizon3229

2 жыл бұрын

I really don't wanna be that guy but Ares is the Greek name of the god of war, the Romans called him Mars so in Latin it would be 'Ad Mars!'.

@KingMinish

2 жыл бұрын

The Imperium calls us, brother

@JustwinJBees

2 жыл бұрын

Ad Astra Per Aspera

@nickl5658

2 жыл бұрын

Klingons developed the photon torpedo and had a better understanding of warp factor than the Federation. No... if we go into space we may find ourselves being the Pakleds

This thing somehow manages to be even more insane than the one where you ride a constant chain of nuclear explosions on top of a giant steel plate

@webbugt

3 жыл бұрын

Power output: 14 Chernobyl/s

@Trifler500

3 жыл бұрын

@Maylevka May Yup. The only real reason the research stopped on projects like Orion was the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. I imagine the people working on it were very disappointed.

@charlescsmith1213

3 жыл бұрын

@@webbugt I feel like Chernobyls could be a new unit of measurement. Like horsepower, but for nuclear rockets

@dsdy1205

3 жыл бұрын

Considering it was created when Zubrin looked at Orion and thought to himself "That's not good enough", I'm not surprised.

@Trifler500

3 жыл бұрын

@Maylevka May I remember reading a lengthy article about it. They weren't planning on using it for the booster. It would have only been ignited after reaching/leaving orbit.

"There's a more powerful version, where instead of using reactor grade Uranium it uses WEAPONS grade uranium" Because of course there is.

@seldoon_nemar

3 жыл бұрын

When you need to "hotrod" your reactor drive 😂 "hey, is that engine dual fuel rated?" DON'T USE THE WRONG FUEL HOSE

@ilikenicethings

3 жыл бұрын

What could possibly go wrong??? Sounds like a safe, secure plan to me! But, but what if the first stage rocket breaks down on ascent and this final stage spreads weapons grade nuclear material everywhere ...

@paulmahoney7619

3 жыл бұрын

@@ilikenicethings You'd source the uranium and water from asteroids.

@1320crusier

3 жыл бұрын

@@ilikenicethings Theres a point at which we need to be ok with being less risk averse.

@mllhild

3 жыл бұрын

@@ilikenicethings You could put the uranium refinement plant in orbit and feed it with material from asteroids and comets. Practicly building your rocket in space as well helps with a lot of problems.

"Non stop Chernobyl". Sounds like a name for a heavy metal band.

@maxmustermann76

3 жыл бұрын

i had the same thoughts

@SpaceDave-on8uv

3 жыл бұрын

Uranium is a heavy metal, I see what you did there...

@davidanalyst671

3 жыл бұрын

I hear they drop new albums faster than the water level in an RBMK

@JinKee

3 жыл бұрын

they went home after a 20 minute set

@alexv3357

2 жыл бұрын

"Relentless Chernobyl," maybe? "Ceaseless Chernobyl?"

"what if Project Orion but the explosion is continuous"

@cooperjmills

3 жыл бұрын

This

@OttomanDrifter91

2 жыл бұрын

'What if Project Orion but better'

@dsdy1205

2 жыл бұрын

That actually was Zubrin's rationale for creating this

"I went to Jupiter and back in 6 months, riding a continuous chernobyl-like atomic bomb". There won't be a more badass quote, ever. Period.

@outofcontext728

3 жыл бұрын

Well why not frase it like this: I rode a atomic space chernobyl for 6 months to saturn and back

@MrCrackbear

3 жыл бұрын

yeah but only girls go to Jupiter, and they do so to get more stupider, so idk if it's really that badass

@666Tomato666

3 жыл бұрын

A believe they call 'em Torchships

@outofcontext728

3 жыл бұрын

@@MrCrackbear what about pluto then?

@Karibanu

3 жыл бұрын

@@outofcontext728 Would need a plutonium powered engine, obviously.

Project Orion: "Let's throw megaton-class nuclear bombs out the back and literally blow this thing to Mars." NSWR: "Hold my beer."

@stefanr8232

3 жыл бұрын

"hold my brine"

@timd6468

3 жыл бұрын

"Hold my Gose". (For the beer nerds)

@weatheranddarkness

3 жыл бұрын

@@timd6468 I'm still not clear on what constitutes a gose. Are you implying it involves salt?

@timd6468

3 жыл бұрын

@@weatheranddarkness Gose is style of beer that is brewed with water that has unusually high salinity or has salt added.

@charlesbouldin3087

3 жыл бұрын

The proposed Orion used much smaller explosions than that! More like kiloton, or a few kilotons.

5:30 "this isn't your usual slow reaction" i mean it's kinda to the nuke what a conventional rocket is to a bomb, right? like a nuclear runaway explosion that just keeps going with one end open

@mikeg4972

2 жыл бұрын

There would be no nuclear explosion. To make a nuclear bomb, a special setup is required.

@CptJistuce

2 жыл бұрын

Yep. It is a very apt analogy.

@kamenwaticlients

2 жыл бұрын

That makes it even clearer

Meanwhile at the Universal Atomic Energy Agency, the alien in charge of space decontamination just had all 4 of his hearts go into cardiac arrest.

@TealJosh

3 жыл бұрын

Haha, if they want us to not do it, they better come down and give us warp drive quickly.

@DeHerg

3 жыл бұрын

If that is giving it a hearts attack imaging it looking at what our sun puts out every second.

@michaelfoye1135

3 жыл бұрын

If he's going to worry about this, he'll feint when he gets wind of just how much radiation is the normal background in space.

@tophatsurgeon7469

2 жыл бұрын

@@TealJosh Give us a warp drive; or every ten minutes; we cause a galactic environmental catastrophe...

@williamblack4006

2 жыл бұрын

@K31TH3R "space decontamination?" I have to break it to you: space is literally filled with high energy cosmic rays and neutrons streaming off the sun.

“It’s like Chernobyl but in space”

@alexandermccomb6444

3 жыл бұрын

Space Chernobyl: in space soviet comrade gets you.

@hernan4667

3 жыл бұрын

Chernobyl is space haha

@showcase-me

3 жыл бұрын

and we know *everything* is better in space!

@HNedel

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah, that should be the title of a proposal to congress :D

@spencerjones4203

3 жыл бұрын

Yea but the radiation from it would kill satellites so we could not watch the HBO mini series

"Open cycle nuclear reactor" Well. This is it. Nothing will ever excite me as much as this. My ChE and NE nerding combine to this one horrendous, wonderful beast.

@polygondwanaland8390

3 жыл бұрын

I've also seen proposals for an "autophagic nuclear solid rocket booster". Basically this, but as an SRB.

@KevinBalch-dt8ot

3 жыл бұрын

I know. I was a nuclear engineer but now retired so about 30 years too late for me.

@tariqahmad1371

3 жыл бұрын

Watch “the nuclear option” by Isaac Arthur, there are some serious designs that would be best used far from earth. Great stuff

@infernosgaming8942

3 жыл бұрын

Just be careful, or else it could become an Open-Open Cycle Nuclear Reactor

@morgansinclair6318

3 жыл бұрын

I prefer closed cycle, i.e. the nuclear lightbulb. Half as efficient, but you can use them to lift off from the surface of living worlds, and that's when you really need the high thrust anyway.

"My father is a firefighter" "Wow that's badass" "Uh, my father it's a soldier then" "Doesn't he fear death?" "Pfft, my father rides atomic bombs to Jupiter and back every six or so months, and that's only the way he travels to his job"

@OttomanDrifter91

2 жыл бұрын

I mean cars we run today mostly utilise literal dinosaur juice that's expired waaaayy long ago to spin some aerosol machineguns. As long as we build things we'll always be cool.

@kreynolds1123

2 жыл бұрын

Rides a nonstop nucular explosion all the way to Jupiter.

@Helena-me6mp

2 жыл бұрын

thats how our parents got to school

@smoochfa973

2 жыл бұрын

😂😂

@Yuki_Ika7

Жыл бұрын

Metal AF

I'm not sure I like the idea of being inside a rocket that has nuclear explosions continuously going off behind me, but I do like the idea of going to other star systems in decades instead of millennia.

@KonradTheWizzard

2 жыл бұрын

We should stop using cars and busses: the fossil fuel motors work by utilizing hundreds of thermobaric explosions per minute only a couple feet away from the passengers - generating enough energy to kill everyone inside the vehicle (and a few outside of it) every minute several times over. Certainly a scary idea. Electric vehicles are out as well: the immense magnetic fields inside those motor coils would be enough to wipe someone's brain if applied directly. The amound of electric energy stored in those batteries (or retrieved from those overhead power lines in the case of trains and trams) would also be quite deadly. If we can develop this technology to a point at which it becomes as safe as a diesel car - then I wouldn't care how much energy it is and how it is derived. So, go with your second thought... ;-)

@dsdy1205

2 жыл бұрын

If you wanna go anywhere in a reasonable amount of time, you can't go wrong exploding a bunch of shit behind you

@dsdy1205

2 жыл бұрын

@Lassi Kinnunen 81 Well, that system has the advantage of being passively stable. The worst form of drive failure that could happen is the drive plate dampers failing and the whole plate tearing off and falling away. Meanwhile on Dr Zubrin's wild ride if your water isn't flowing fast enough the continuous nuclear explosion progresses backwards up the pipes into your fuel tank...

@dougaltolan3017

2 жыл бұрын

@@KonradTheWizzard horses, don't forget how a horse can kill with a single kick.

@fluffly3606

2 жыл бұрын

when you're inside a running conventional automobile there are chemical explosions continuously going off in front of you. it's not that different :D

He says “Fly Safe” while describing his magic nuclear bomb Chernobyl flying carpet...

@iasimov5960

3 жыл бұрын

No less safe than any naturally occurring radiation found in the cosmos. Life on earth has basked in the glow of a gigantic fusion bomb its whole history.

@SynthOSphere

3 жыл бұрын

@@iasimov5960 Indeed... Radiation OUTSIDE the magnetosphere, Life INSIDE... Launching rocket with a full load of 20%+ uranium in our sky is not an option. Failure probabilities are still too high. Even planes still crash a couple times a year. Asteroid mining and refining in space is the only solution to this.

@ArgonianSkaleel

3 жыл бұрын

S.A.F.E.: Suicidal Atomic Fart Engine

@shurmurray

3 жыл бұрын

+1. The feasibility of this thing is hugely outweighed by the long and painful development. How many of those nuke engines and rockets going to explode in Earth's atmosphere before they will safely fly in space?.

@-danR

3 жыл бұрын

He put the stress on _SAFE_ , I noticed.

I'd rather see the worlds supply of weapons grade nuclear material used in a space ship than a bomb.

@luckyhendrix

3 жыл бұрын

Untill he rocket carrying all that fissible material in orbit has an accident and falls back to earth during ascent ,😅

@r3dp9

3 жыл бұрын

@@luckyhendrix Bah. There's no 100% way to protect earth (or any given city on earth, for that matter). The best protection is always to diversify, get some of your assets out of the one basket.

@leandrox1

3 жыл бұрын

Put hundred of kilos of uranium in a crew dragon capsule...the more secure capsule available...in a very secure container... And build the prototypes of the motors on the future Moon bases... BTW...in the future you can get the uranium o plutonium from mines on the Moon or from near asteroids... You wont need to launch uranium from Earth...

@Flobbled

3 жыл бұрын

@@luckyhendrix The Cassini probe already carried almost 30 kg (64 lbs) of Plutonium 238 so it was done before and there wasn't too much protest.

@ich439

3 жыл бұрын

@@luckyhendrix No that wouldn't be a problem. U235 is much less dangerous than the plutonium used for other space missions.(if it just falls down without reakting) But what will the russians do if there is an official announcment that the us launches a missile with enough fissile material to blow up a nation? And how do you test such a engine? It can never run on earth due to the massive contamintion.......

The fact that this genuinely feels like the beginning of stuff like this being taken so seriously and potentially being worked on in my lifetime alone is enough to make me happy during this rubbish pandemic times. Love that a fellow jock is the go to space guy also btw 🤘🏼🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

OK, the science says yes, the engineering says yes, and the mere fact that we're genuinely using units like "1% of the speed of light" makes me say Yes Yes Yes! Another fascinating vid, Scott, many thanks. (NB, can I nominate that the SI unit for 1% SoL be called the 'Manley'?)

Phrases to leave out of the promotional materials, #431: "So it's a non-stop Chernobyl in space."

@ThePhiphler

3 жыл бұрын

SpaceX has this problem already. They have to careful strip out all mentions of "belly-flop maneuver" and "suicide burns" when filing applications with the FAA.

@DepressivesBrot

3 жыл бұрын

@@ThePhiphler See also: Why the project is no longer called the Big F***** Rocket.

@James-vc2xs

3 жыл бұрын

"...Chernobyl almost worked..." hehe

@mkocel

3 жыл бұрын

THANK YOU LOL FUCKING CHRIST WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE?

@phuzz00

3 жыл бұрын

It's a non-stop *double* Chernobyl in space ;)

"Dr Von Braun, let me introduce Dr Strangelove. Oh, you've worked together before?"

@mortisCZ

3 жыл бұрын

Jawohl! Hiz ideaz might zeem far flung but wir want to fling thingz far, ja? Further than ze London thiz time.

@kenanacampora

3 жыл бұрын

Hahahah. Both were in the SS

@achtsekundenfurz7876

3 жыл бұрын

"Oh hi Wernher, I'm the new head of your engine design department. This idea is gonna blow you away!" _looks at blueprints_ "Someone get me my Braun pants"

@danwaldron2053

3 жыл бұрын

@@achtsekundenfurz7876 4⁴⁴

@davidanalyst671

3 жыл бұрын

hahaha!! damn now I'm going to have to go rewatch this

As I understood it from having read up a bit about this idea, the fuel tanks don't need to have boron (or other control rod material) inside them, though the tanks were made of a high-boron metal alloy, or at least a layer of boron in the tank walls. But the main way of preventing criticality occurring in the fuel tanks was simply geometry - the tanks would be made long and thin, with relatively large gaps between all the tanks, a bit like how nuclear reactor cores are made of lots of separate long thin fuel rods rather than one massive block of uranium. There would also be lightweight non-absorbent filler material in the gaps between the tanks to prevent the water pooling anywhere inside the whole structure in event of any tank springing a leak. As to the chemistry, uranium tetrabromide seems like a bit of an odd choice to me - especially as a solution in water would be at least partially hydrolyzed into uranyl ions and hydrogen bromide, the latter making the solution strongly acidic. The only way to inhibit this hydrolysis would be to keep the pH low with another even stronger acid, so either way, uranium tetabromide solutions would be corrosive at the very least, as well as probably unstable. The sources I read mentioned using uranyl nitrate or plutonium nitrate: These make a lot more sense, since all nitrate salts are water soluble, the solutions are stable and not appreciably acidic, and can be made much more concentrated than bromide salts if necessary.

@leerman22

2 жыл бұрын

I think having the uranium salts mix with the water as needed is a better option than keeping tanks of "boom juice" around. May make ISRU more practical, sourcing water at least. Could save a lot of weight, too, as only the salt storage needs neutron poisons. Corrosion would affect less parts as well.

@Teboski78

2 жыл бұрын

Would plutonium need to be isotopically enriched or depleted for the design to work? Or could it just be tailored to work best with the natural isotopic makeup of the plutonium in nuclear waste?

@Teboski78

2 жыл бұрын

@@leerman22 would the salts now need to be separated by larger spaces or does the lack of moderating water make storage a lot easier?

@leerman22

2 жыл бұрын

@@Teboski78 Moderator reduces the fuel needed to go critical, so it would be safer keeping them separate.

@lloydevans2900

2 жыл бұрын

@@Teboski78 As I understand it, isotopic enrichment only applies to uranium from the perspective of building a critical mass, since while U-238 is fissionable under fast neutron conditions, U-235 (naturally occurring at 0.7%) and U-233 (decay product from thorium) are the only fissile isotopes of uranium. Plutonium is a different story entirely, since it doesn't occur naturally in any significant quantities, so all the known plutonium stocks in existence have been manufactured in reactor cores. More to the point, every known isotope of plutonium is fissile. Some of the heavier isotopes are even prone to spontaneous fission, without needing an external neutron source. These slow buildup of these heavier isotopes sets a practical limit on how long you can leave U-238 breeding plutonium in a reactor: If you have too much of the spontaneous fission isotopes in your final plutonium, the risk of premature detonation becomes unacceptably high - especially for a production warhead!

From what I can tell, it's probably the motor that Tintin's rocket used :D

@geryz7549

3 жыл бұрын

Inside the atmosphere? I suppose Tintin's rocket commits mass genocide then

@anuvisraa5786

3 жыл бұрын

@@geryz7549 he is belgian noting new for the guy

@HerrGausF

2 жыл бұрын

@@geryz7549 IIRC the moon rocket also had conventional propulsion for launch into orbit.

@pewpewman._.3415

2 жыл бұрын

@@anuvisraa5786 *XD*

@dsdy1205

Ай бұрын

Nah, Tintin's rocket was basically an NTR with holy frick levels of chamber temp owing to the handwavium calculite that Prof Calculus invented to line the fuel elements

When you look at it there goes another steam engine.

@emceeboogieboots1608

3 жыл бұрын

Nuclear steam engine... This is TRUE steam punk!

@NoName-zn1sb

3 жыл бұрын

!!

@PandorasFolly

3 жыл бұрын

Water is just such a useful element. When our descendants push a hole through reality to finally achieve FTL or explore other dimensions I am sure it will basically be a fancy steam engine.

@Rose_Harmonic

3 жыл бұрын

@@emceeboogieboots1608 The steamiest

@argschrecklich9704

3 жыл бұрын

It's humbling that our advances in energy technology amount to finding more efficient ways to boil water. I was so amazed as a kid that we humans can harness the power of the atom and so dissapointed when learned how it's actually done. "It's just a kettle? Bleh!"

"non-stop Chernobyl" ... "depending on how you do your math" ... "Fly safe!"

@britishneko3906

3 жыл бұрын

seems like another nuke plane than a rocket

The 90% enriched version is a warship drive. Not only does it have the sheer power to make the sorts of burns you might need while packing the mass of your offensive and defensive systems, it's also a weapon in its own right. Exhaust velocities in the thousands of KPS, AND it's radioactive as hell? The Kzinti Lesson says hi :P Plus, it's fuel efficient enough that if you're willing to settle for a "mere" 1,000 KPS of delta V, your tankage would be relatively small and easier to protect.

The "fly safe" in the end sounded like a threat. 😬

Having read Zubrin's paper, there seems to be a pretty obvious show stopper in this design. Zubrin goes to great lengths to explain how a critical mass could be maintained in the cylindrical part of the engine(plenum) due to the fact that water is basically incompressible and would maintain a steady flow rate. But then he wants almost all the actual fission to happen in the nozzle where the propellant is more spread out and is no longer a critical mass. Because uranium atoms only release a limited amount of neutrons when they split there is simply no way to generate enough neutrons in the plenum to split the required number of uranium atoms in the nozzle, and if you had enough uranium in the nozzle where the propellant is spreading out to maintain a critical mass the plenum would go up like a bomb. Also you cannot heat the water in the plenum enough to turn it into steam, because then you have to take gas laws into effect where increased temperature requires either higher pressure(which would result in the flow going the wrong way), or increased flow speed as you go down the plenum, resulting in the critical mass being lost and the chain reaction ending even before you get into the nozzle. Because heavier molecules such as water and uranium require a much higher temperature than straight hydrogen molecules to reach the same ISP, I am extremely skeptical that any attempt to build this design could actually reach the ISP levels of a nuclear thermal rocket, never mind the tens to thousands of km/s exhaust velocities Zubrin speculates about. I would love to be proved wrong, but this design seems to be a classic case of using math to get answers to a different question than you are actually asking.

@KevinBalch-dt8ot

3 жыл бұрын

I think you would want the water to remain as a liquid in the plenum both for reasons of hydrodynamic stability and to ensure that the exiting fluid is as supercritical (from a reactor kinetics standpoint not thermodynamic standpoint) as possible. A nuclear bomb suffers the same problem in that the reaction shuts down once the fuel expands beyond a certain point yet they get the job done. I think having multiple tanks/injectors focused on the same point in the combustion chamber would address your concerns, be safer snd allow for some degree of throttleability at the cost of some increased weight and complexity. While H2O is more massive than H2, the higher powers this concept offers is more than worth it. The mass of the salt itself is negligible, particularly is it fissions.

@NavarroRefugee

3 жыл бұрын

Does water even stay water at the temperatures we're talking about here? I would think the water molecules would very quickly break down into hydrogen and oxygen.

@demacherius1

3 жыл бұрын

I think the biggest problem is that you would have to get all that nasty stuff into orbit in the first place. One failed start and we live in holes in the ground for the rest of the planets live.

@thewiirocks

3 жыл бұрын

@@demacherius1 That's ridiculous. You're massively overestimating the explosive power (assuming all the uranium concentrated during a launch explosion... which it would not) as well as the actual fallout. A launch failure would not be good by any stretch of the imagination. But practically it would be one of those, "caused 15 more cancers than expected over the next 20 years" type of things.

@demacherius1

3 жыл бұрын

@@thewiirocks I wasn't actualy concerned about the explosion. I just dont think that it is a good thing to have Uranium spead over a massive area. Isn't that a problem ?

"there's some things you can only really do in space" "oh yeah, name on" this.

@dragonatorul

3 жыл бұрын

To be fair you could do it on Earth too, but it's not really recommended.

@antaresmc4407

3 жыл бұрын

@@dragonatorul I have a launch vehicle using this thing in a KSP save. I know its not healthy, but what about the profit?

@thomasmackay4

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah, i was just thinking how the hell do you test this.

@craigprosser9554

3 жыл бұрын

@@thomasmackay4 from a long way away I imagine 😂

@Voron_Aggrav

3 жыл бұрын

@@thomasmackay4 somewhere you can seal it, or the moon

I don’t want to imagine what a “hard start” would look like for this

@TheVillainInGlasses

3 жыл бұрын

How would you even throttle something like this?

@Martinit0

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheVillainInGlasses Probably diluting the U salt concentration by mixing pure water in

@killman369547

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheVillainInGlasses probably by simply decreasing the amount of fuel flowing in. The engine would only be throttleable up to a certain point, below which the engine would flame out because there isn't enough fuel to maintain criticality. This could be overcome possibly by increasing the concentration of fissile material in the fuel as needed to keep the engines running at the lower throttle settings.

@Rickenbacker69

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheVillainInGlasses You can probably vary the amount of water being pumped in to a certain extent, while still keeping the reaction inside the nozzle. But if you set it up to create an average acceleration of 1G or so, there's really no need to throttle it.

@Mic_Glow

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheVillainInGlasses change the pure water/ salt ratio or, more likely, adjust neutron emitters/ absorbers near the nozzle. Changing fuel flow isn't an option I think since you need constant fuel flow to stop reaction from going into the fuel line. Can also use electromagnets to divert plasma flow a bit, everything that goes to the side doesn't provide thrust.

”A drive’s capability as a weapon is directly proportional to its capability as a drive” - The Expanse

Hearing “1% the speed of light” is just...nuts. I can’t wrap my brain around that

@mikldude9376

3 жыл бұрын

no doubt 1% speed would be better than our current snails pace, we should be aiming higher though, let's be downright ambitious and go for 5% 😁.

@subliminalvibes

3 жыл бұрын

Crazy huh!?! Even just 1% of the speed of light could get you from New York City in New York to Tampa in Florida, AND BACK... in one second. 1% light speed is 1,860 miles per second... So London to New York in just under 2 seconds! At the speed of light that same trip from London to New York would happen in just 19 milliseconds (nineteen one-thousandths of a second). Easy to miss your stop. 🤣

@johndododoe1411

3 жыл бұрын

@@subliminalvibes It's not the travel speed, it's the ship-relative exhaust speed. Should still be enough to accelerate beyond that speed.

@josephking6515

3 жыл бұрын

@@subliminalvibes Think you are missing a couple of zeros in the speed. 🤦‍♂️ 😀

@oldfrend

3 жыл бұрын

@@josephking6515 no he's not. speed of light is 186,000 miles per second. 1% of that - remove two zeroes. 1,860 miles per second. if you're going to be a pedant, at least be right.

I like this concept and with that exhaust nobody will ever tailgate for long.

@srenkoch6127

3 жыл бұрын

Well as stated by (I think Asimov), any propulsion system efficient enough to propel a starship can stand in as a weapon, just aim the exhaust at your enemy....

@benr.4238

3 жыл бұрын

Slamming on the brakes takes care of tailgaters.

@streetwind.

3 жыл бұрын

@@srenkoch6127 Larry Niven, actually. The Kzinti Lesson.

@srenkoch6127

3 жыл бұрын

@@streetwind. I stand corrected :-)

@alexandruianosi8469

3 жыл бұрын

@@srenkoch6127 If I remember correctly, it was about pointing the (interplanetary) communication system, a strategy used in the first encounter with the Kzin forces (as already stated by @Streetwind, in Larry's Niven universe).

5:05 this design is so insane, the entire fuel tank would have to contain some kind of Boron foam to absorb neutrons and as the graphic shows all the plumbing would also have to be filled with boron tubes

@PapaOscarNovember

Жыл бұрын

Or you’d have to dissolve uranium salt in some eutectic metal alloy so that uranium ion is always surrounded by dense liquid metal.

That design is crazy. Such a rocket engine would need to be designed to be much smaller so that the craft operates as a torch ship. Because even if you can only generate a small thrust, it changes life on board dramatically.

@leechjim8023

Жыл бұрын

What is a torch ship?

KSP 2: We're going to postpone the release one more time for the sake of continuous Kernobyl.

@a64738

3 жыл бұрын

:) Most Kerbal enigne of all time :)

@backyardretards5684

3 жыл бұрын

@@a64738 only second to the Orion drive :p

@marty2129

3 жыл бұрын

@@backyardretards5684 Actually, "riding a nuke stream" sounds mundane to "riding two non-stop chernobyls at once"

@meusana3681

3 жыл бұрын

worth the wait honestly

3:16 "This is obviously a technical challenge, but that's a whole nother video" Okay so when is that coming?

@foty8679

3 жыл бұрын

30 years like fusion

@neniAAinen

3 жыл бұрын

No one seriously opened research on this. No need - no progress - no estimates

@TheShowdown16

3 жыл бұрын

@@foty8679 So more like 300?

@julesverne4339

3 жыл бұрын

@@foty8679 not to mention, that we have had fusion for many years, just not the ones that produces more energies than input.

You can also get the water flow rate to increase by simply restricting the flow cross section after the boron lined section of pipe, sort of like a venturi in a carburetor but with positive pressure at the inlet rather than positive pressure. You could even feed in a more concentrated nuclear fuel-water mix to better control the rate of reaction.

I hold not an ounce of irony when I say: Ok this is epic

5:40 So they run it at melt down levels while pumping water through it so it all goes ZOOM instead of BOOM

@Lemurion287

3 жыл бұрын

No, they run it at nuclear explosion levels meltdown levels are too tame.

@MrWooaa

3 жыл бұрын

Basically, yes.

@TauCu

3 жыл бұрын

and hope they don't forget the Z

I love it! 😍

@johnladuke6475

3 жыл бұрын

Proof of concept model in an upcoming episode? They left you with some uranium, right?

@chwriter7138

3 жыл бұрын

Are you still signed up to go to mars?

@Systox25

3 жыл бұрын

100% he DM Mark Rober for a project and started mining sum uranium

@ccserfas4629

3 жыл бұрын

Cody is your video from a couple years ago still available that you dilute a poison with water and consume it?

@bgbthabun627

3 жыл бұрын

@Cody'sLab I agree!!! this is an awesome idea, in that there is no hpyergolic ignition of the fuel required. And if they replace the water coolant of the nozzle with a well defined magnetic field passing through a ceramic nozzle then the water flow requirements would be much lower as well.

Scott Manley boosts my passion for hard sci-fi. Thanks

Oxford English Dictionary lists that the slang word salty means: angry, irritated or hostile. This propulsion system is driven by the power of irritation, anger and hostility.

@johndododoe1411

2 жыл бұрын

A key linguistic reference for that meaning of "salty" is a US news article describing a German politician named Adolf.

"Fly safe" seems less appropriate when discussing nuclear rockets

@cake6476

3 жыл бұрын

It's perfectly safe, just don't come within 100 kilometers of anything living, use a secondary shuttle to dock with stations, AND FOR KRAKEN'S SAKE STAY BEHIND THE SHADOW-SHIELD!

@rustyhorse8468

3 жыл бұрын

No. It is much more appropriate wish when riding a nuclear rocket.

9:50 "it's like a non stop Chernobyl going on" well sign me up then

@nuclearmedicineman6270

3 жыл бұрын

I'm in too; what could possibly go wrong?

@kazedcat

3 жыл бұрын

@@nuclearmedicineman6270 You refuel with premium weapons grade propellant.

@beansdad70

3 жыл бұрын

@@kazedcat Generates 1.21 gigawatts.

@yellekc

3 жыл бұрын

@@kazedcat Miss mars colony, end up in alpha centauri

@P3x310

3 жыл бұрын

"The Chernobyl Drive" is the way to the future. A future in space!

it truly saddens me that we have these possibilities to make engines like this enabling access to the entire solar system and there isnt a single group actively exploring making such a thing.

@kadian3904

2 жыл бұрын

all it is going to take is for us to actually get out there in space to build research and development facilities out there where the risk to human settlements is a non issue and things like this will rapidly develop and be put into use. Nations get itchy when you start fooling around with fissile materials...but in space no one can hear your man made sun go boom.

@ricomotions5416

2 жыл бұрын

the biggest problem is your rocket exploding during launch

@lukasvandewiel860

Жыл бұрын

Sadly, we rather beat each over the head over arguments about imaginary friends.

@dylanroemmele906

9 ай бұрын

@@lukasvandewiel860 yeah because we still totally live during the medieval crusades. You fucking reddit athiests are so weird man, no government that has access to rocket technology is crying about religious issues. You callout others for living in a delusion when you are actually living in it, the pot is calling the kettle black so hard right now holy shit.

ah yes I too measure my engine power in chernobyls per second

"Non-Stop Chernobyl" is a great band name.

@Theodorus5

3 жыл бұрын

haha :)

@Sarruji

3 жыл бұрын

I always thought a good one was ICBF. Intercontinental Ballistic Fist

Funny enough, the first time I heard of the Orion project I did ask myself: why not use a constant explosion instead of individual ones? Looks like somebody did think of that, 30 years ago.

@JFrazer4303

3 жыл бұрын

Because its extremely difficult, because fission explosions are easy and very well known.

@GermanTopGameTV

3 жыл бұрын

Peter, the thing you are missing is the idea of a continuous reaction. Instead of a handgrenade, which explodes as a single unit, think of a jar of gunpowder. Regardless of size of the gunpowder jar, it will burn and explode when ignited, but with a variation in intensity. The thing about nuclear chain reactions is, however, on stark contrast to chemical reactions that they follow an extremely nonlinear yield. While you could argue that pounds of TNT release about double of what one pound releases, a nuclear bomb of twice the Uranium might yield more then 10 times the explosive energy since it reacted much more material. Criticality is the most important measure. The idea here is to create an area in the engine bell in which there is enough fissable material present to create a runaway fission reaction, but also pump out the fuel fast enough to make sure this runaway reaction doesn't proper gate back into your tanks. Like a flamethrower that shoots out a stream of petrol, it would be very uncomfortable if the flame made it up the stream and into the tanks. Mediating the main propergation method of nuclear reactions, slow neutron density, is crucial here but can be achieved as Scott stated.

Your recommendation to “fly safe” sounded funnier this time

@Scott Manley. You probably should just do a video about Project Rho at this point. For those people who don't read the video description and realize there is a website devoted to this and more.

OMG! Someone finally referred to the Nevada Test Site as "Jackass Flats," it's correct name. Thank you, Scott.

@Walter-Montalvo

3 жыл бұрын

Huh, didn't know that!

@reaganturley2836

3 жыл бұрын

@@Walter-Montalvo Not for the whole site, just that part. Most of the nuclear testing was in Yucca Flats

@brettwarren5976

3 жыл бұрын

*its

@ronaldgarrison8478

3 жыл бұрын

Great name for an apartment complex with a college student population and a constant supply of free ice beer.

@johndemeritt3460

3 жыл бұрын

@@ronaldgarrison8478, talk about a critical mass -- of stupid!

"Stage separation successful, Chernobyl thrusters ignition in t minus 10, 9, ..."

@fallinginthed33p

3 жыл бұрын

There's no need to hit the AZ-5 button this time, comrade.

@britishneko3906

3 жыл бұрын

hmm... I think if thr bigger thruster is called "KV2" because KV2 shoots nuke moare powerful than tsar bomba in paper

"HAL! Throttle down the engine..." "I'm sorry, Dave, but I WANNA GO FAST!"

@DawnUSNvet

3 жыл бұрын

I think it can only have one speed... wide open. otherwise, the reaction might take place in the fuel delivery lines?

"Its like a nonstop chernobyl going on" :D probably not the best marketing

"It's like Chernobyl but in space" Chernobyl: Am I getting a sci fi sequel?

@hellacoorinna9995

3 жыл бұрын

Antimatter matters

@quentinking4351

3 жыл бұрын

Chernobyl 2: Outer Space Boogaloo

@britishneko3906

3 жыл бұрын

@@quentinking4351 Chernobyl 3: mars is gone

@britishneko3906

3 жыл бұрын

@sadi muntakim Chernobyl 5: we fucked it up more and we turned the sun into a red star with the mass of 100 million normal suns

Certain chillies have the same effect in my exhaust nozzle.

@michaelmoorrees3585

3 жыл бұрын

So when we do get to Mars, and meet you there, we've been warned. Take some grub, for the return trip.

@johnladuke6475

3 жыл бұрын

Well now you know the answer, you need to install some jets of water to act as a buffer around your overly-energetic exhaust to prevent erosion of your nozzle. Please post a picture of your doctor's face if you ask for those to be installed.

@ptrsrrll

3 жыл бұрын

Classic !!🤣

@theravedaddy

3 жыл бұрын

@@johnladuke6475 theres people on facebook that offer that service

@vijeshkumar692

3 жыл бұрын

Good, you don't need a jetpack

Thank you for excellent content, Scott! I recently discovered your channel and I'm so happy that I did!

Scott, I learn something from every video you produce. Thank you!

"I'm Scott Manley, explode safe 🚀🔥💥💥💥💥" xD

This is actually a viable Torchship.... quick tell ELON about it.

@David-hx4gw

3 жыл бұрын

If he even mentioned this, I can’t imagine the clickbait arrival titles that would quickly follow 😂

@1515Steve1515

3 жыл бұрын

Mabey wait until he’s safely on Mars to give him ideas about continuous Chernobyl rocket tech.

@Egilhelmson

3 жыл бұрын

> This is actually a viable Torchship A shame that Heinlein never had children to see that. Seriously, what is the purpose of all that swapping that he and Ginny did if not to guarantee offspring?

@Skylancer727

3 жыл бұрын

Elon has openly said they are not interesting in researching experimental propulsion systems. He basically said they wouldn't even invest in aerojet rocket engines till NASA does it first. They are in the business of bringing the cost down and getting government delays out of space programs, not redefining space travel. You can argue reusing rockets yes but NASA has always said that was viable and never did it.

@revenevan11

3 жыл бұрын

@@Skylancer727 yep, he's a businessman willing to try some risky things, and while he's a bit of a visionary at times when it comes to the amount of stuff in space in the near future (but more of a bulk and low cost approach than a new tech approach); he's still a businessman at the end of the day. The genius imo of things like starship and the methane/LOX full flow staged combustion engines is that it's taking existing materials knowledge and trying something new, and a new approach to launch with it, so it can be physically prototyped and tested for speedy development instead of potentially nearly a century of R&D for completely new propulsion tech, which NASA is in a better position to work on. Good to see someone else who finally understands the (hopeful) continuing relationship of commercial spaceflight and NASA and the role they both have to play in our wonderful future! 🚀🌌🤩😁

Well... You build a engine, and in the worst case you have a nuclear bomb : Win/Win.

Right, time to kickstart this project!

"comes from solar panels soaking up the sun" Phrased like that it sounds like solar panels are some kind of doomsday device.

@Kyle-gw6qp

3 жыл бұрын

I mean they are stealing some of the sun's energy...

@mrflippant

3 жыл бұрын

Or maybe the panels are spending a week at an all-inclusive beach-side resort?

@beeble2003

3 жыл бұрын

Well, if you were a paper towel maker, "soaking up" and "blotting out" are basically the same thing...

@zolikoff

3 жыл бұрын

Well if you put enough solar panels at L1, you can literally take away the Earth's sunlight and doom it to freeze to death, so... Yeah.

@Treblaine

3 жыл бұрын

The way some people talk about nuclear power you'd think that is what solar panels are doing.

"the majority of the reaction will happen where you want it to" ... and the small minority will be occurring where?

@nuclearmedicineman6270

3 жыл бұрын

It's best not to think about that, and just learn to live with extra limbs.. or possibly superpowers.

@eleSDSU

3 жыл бұрын

Everywhere else around you.

@notlogical4016

3 жыл бұрын

live and let live, dont question it.

@machineball

3 жыл бұрын

likely in the portion of the pipe just before the primary reaction zone

@ericg7044

3 жыл бұрын

@@nuclearmedicineman6270 Username checks out?

As always your videos reach an amazing mix of science fiction and the physically possible. Thanks for giving us a reason to dream.

This is the coolest rocket video ever - thank you Scott Manley! Finally all the sci-fi nuclear (implied or explicitly stated) rocket engines make sense!!!

Thermal taps from the external reaction could literally power the rest of the ship. Why let all that radio active energy go to waste?

@Rickenbacker69

3 жыл бұрын

You'd still need to power it somehow when the engine is off. But that sounds like a relatively minor problem.

@Tonatsi

3 жыл бұрын

@@Rickenbacker69 batteries

@killman369547

2 жыл бұрын

@@Rickenbacker69 When the main engines are shut down a standard fission reactor could take over powering the ship.

@busteraycan

2 жыл бұрын

@@killman369547 That would be too heavy. You probably don't need that much power to begin with.

@kamenwaticlients

2 жыл бұрын

Maybe take a small amount of the fuel and let react or near reaction under control and use it for power

So essentially, not only is your fuel hypergolic, it's a fission bomb.

@badbeardbill9956

2 жыл бұрын

Nah. A bomb uses fast neutrons. This is more like a nuclear deflagration than a detonation... though ofc sent through a rocket nozzle

@jamesdyhouse2490

Жыл бұрын

But why can't a fission reaction be used to make a fusion rocket?

@damagingthebrand7387

Жыл бұрын

@@jamesdyhouse2490 I am probably wrong, but I think there is a group working on a z-pinch drive where you spit out D-D pellets and z-pinch them to criticality as they eject. Is that kind of a pulse fusion version of this?

@nastykerb34

Жыл бұрын

@@jamesdyhouse2490 u are dumb fission and fusion is the exact opposite

@reznikvolodymyr8145

Жыл бұрын

@@jamesdyhouse2490 Yes, and to use heavy water instead of simple water =)

Always enjoy and learn from your videos. Would love to see a follow-up video to this that references how realistic the "Pathfinder" shuttle using a Nerva engine from the show "For All Mankind" is.

I thought of a propulsion method that was basically vague version of this for sci-fi purposes a couple years ago. It's nice to see that there might have been some realism to it after all.

As a professional nuclear rocket scientist, I approve this message.

5:50 - "Liquid Chernobyl" has a nice ring to it.

@nagasako7

3 жыл бұрын

Is name of Taco Bell food next morning

Great video Scott! Perhaps you could do a follow-up covering the fission-fragment rocket?

Robert Zubrin is like the honey badger of aerospace engineers. If the physics & economics work, man doesn’t give a fuck. I love it.

Okay, that was a cool video. This is the first time I can remember in my life feeling like anything measured in light years distant maybe worth paying attention to.

@youtubevanced4900

3 жыл бұрын

Yep. Scientists often look at and talk about distant galaxies and stars and I've really started to think, who cares. It's all too far away to ever be reachable so all the theories will remain as theoretical with no way to prove the reality. Feels like they should just concentrate on our solar system as that's all we will ever be able to get too.

@thirteenthandy

3 жыл бұрын

@@youtubevanced4900 The technology described in this video aside, those distant galaxies aren't even observable on a planetary scale, let alone reachable! That's what's really making me uninterested. They could be teeming with life and we would never know or be able to communicate and make ourselves known outside of multigenerational efforts. If there is truly a technology to bring these distances into our capacity to bridge, then they'll have my attention.

@Ryan-rq6dx

3 жыл бұрын

I would suggest the channel isaac aurthor. He does science and futurism.

@thirteenthandy

3 жыл бұрын

I will still say, however, that anything 100+ light-years away is ridiculous to get excited about when media says "potentially Earth-like planet!"

@youtubevanced4900

3 жыл бұрын

@Maylevka May Theorise their composition. Without actually testing them directly they won't know for certain.

If it's crazy and it works, it's not crazy.

@commerce-usa

3 жыл бұрын

True. It seems the most amazing things humans do, most often, come from the craziest things we do.

@aspuzling

3 жыл бұрын

I'm pretty sure this is crazy either way.

@charksey

3 жыл бұрын

Computers are just rocks that we put lightning into. Still crazy. The internet is sending lightning between rocks so they all blink in a way that we like. Still crazy.

@richardpoynton4026

3 жыл бұрын

If it’s crazy and it works, it’s not KAABOOOOOMMMM !!!

@Script_Mak3r

3 жыл бұрын

If it's crazy and it works, it's still crazy, you just got lucky.

The reaction could also power its own safety. It generates enough electricity that you could harvest a small percent for a magnetic bottle, that can act as either throttle or shutoff. Or, it can power EM screens that stop the radiation hitting you- which is actually the bigger danger at the speeds we're talking

this is just the beginning of a huge tree of crazy rocket engines.

We used to sail across the Atlantic with just the wind and we look at these people with sails like future generations are looking at us being creative with gravity assists.

@fallinginthed33p

3 жыл бұрын

Sailing didn't leave a wake of radioactive waste behind it.

@marijnjc

3 жыл бұрын

@@fallinginthed33p the radiation in space will be almost nothing, will shoot out of the solar system very quickly besides.. space is full of radiation.

NSWR: the closest we could get to interplanetary torches in any near future vehicles. Also extremely scary.

@badbeardbill9956

3 жыл бұрын

Orion though. Mini-Mag Orion though...

@casacara

3 жыл бұрын

@@badbeardbill9956 possible, but mini mag faces challenges yet to be solved

@billsugden3734

3 жыл бұрын

Just don't stand behind it too close, like 50 miles?

@ThePrisoner881

3 жыл бұрын

Scary only to those who don't understand nuclear reactions. This is not a bomb. If used in space, the radiological hazards are insignificant, especially when things like solar flares and CME's can fry you far more easily. It is a mark of ignorance to fear something you don't understand. The US Navy has used nucelar power for decades without a serious accident. Nuclear power, applied properly and with respect for its power, is nothing to be afraid of. If we are ever to leave this planet, nuclear energy of some kind will be the way we do it. Chemical propulsion is too impractical for interplanetary travel to say nothing of interstellar travel.

@kazedcat

3 жыл бұрын

@@ThePrisoner881 The scary part is the tank that store all those salt water propellant. If something happens to you neutron absorbent lining. You have a spaceship size nuke.

That wagon train to the stars is coming together quite nicely.

What a fascinating video! Thanks for this Scott!!

The specific impulse figure is so insane, it’s got to be done! Space here we come!

@beanslinger4616

3 жыл бұрын

Nyoom

@grproteus

3 жыл бұрын

here we come (in tiny radioactive pieces)

@scottarmstrong5607

3 жыл бұрын

@@grproteus We are already tiny radioactive pieces, we are made of the products of thermonuclear reactions already. It is trivial to build shielding between the engine and passenger compartment on such a spaceship as this, and the fuel "tank" will do this for us anyway.

Scott Manley is the one youtube channel I'm still coming back to after years and years. You're always relevant. Because space travel will always be relevant.

There is something about this that reminds me very much of the 'Infinite Improbability Drive'. Maybe your survival is so improbable that rather than calculate it the universe just puts you wherever you want to go because the universe does not want to calculate it.....

That was such a cool video Scott! Wow that was freaking amazing. You know some smart kid is actually going to perfect this and send us on our way with the 90% uranium mixture. Star Trek here we come!

"What's more crazy than getting into space by sitting on an explosion?" "Hear me out, how about... sitting on a NUCLEAR explosion?"

@ArgonianSkaleel

3 жыл бұрын

actually it's not quite an explosion but rather a continuous meltdown

I bet in my lifetime we'll have a nuclear version of the Titanic or Hindenburg on a trip through the Astroid belt to Mars

@PotentiallyAndy

3 жыл бұрын

Marketing department: Erm .... May I suggest we pick different names for the space craft... just you know ... for the brochures.

@Artemis0713

3 жыл бұрын

To be fair if they're in the asteroid belt, on a trip to Mars, I'm pretty sure they need a new astrogator

@mortisCZ

3 жыл бұрын

@@Artemis0713 The plot thickens by the minute! It's like a nuclear pudding. :-D

@alexsiemers7898

3 жыл бұрын

@@PotentiallyAndy no, they’re picking those names for a reason. It seems like a risk worth taking until it isn’t

@JosePineda-cy6om

3 жыл бұрын

Not necessarily - they could've gotten therebfirst to gather water, iron and radioactive ores to build the steff they'll use in the actual descent to Mars. It'd be way cheaper to source materials from the asteroids than to ship it from Earth

That was really well explained. Thanks!

"They did a lot of testing in a place called jackass flats" -Scott Manley 2021