Nukes may launch NASA on long-range missions

Yahoo News ^ | 1/2/4 | AFP

[NormsRevenge]

PASADENA, California, (AFP) -

Nuclear power may give NASA (news - web sites)'s long-range missions the speed and range that combustion engines cannot, but research is sputtering for lack of funds.

NASA's head of the Prometheus program said the agency has three billion dollars for the next five years.

"Beyond that, we know we need more money," Al Newhouse told AFP. "We are at a very early stage of this program. It has been in existence for slighty under a year."

Nuclear propulsion first became a NASA budget line item in 2003, with 125 million dollars. NASA requested 279 million dollars for 2004 but Congress allocated 250 million.

Prometheus is part of a program called "New Frontiers," which includes a mission to the moons of Jupiter -- Ganymede, Callisto and Europa -- using nuclear electrical generation and propulsion.

Nine people are working on the project at NASA headquarters in Washington as well as at least 100 others in 10 NASA centers around the country, but some basic questions remain unanswered.

"I don't know what kind of power conversion I can use" to generate electricity, Newhouse said. "We are developing, with recent successes, ion propulsion techniques."

Tests at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, showed that a jet of ionized atomic particles can furnish propulsion.

NASA says the nuclear electric xenon ion system, or NEXIS, could be used in the rocket destined for the Jupiter mission, adding that such a system could propel a spacecraft for 10 years or more.

But the announcement in early 2003 that NASA was explore the use of nuclear power in space raised heated opposition.

The Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, based in Gainesville, Florida, claimed such engines pose a risk both during launch and in space.

"It increases the chance of an accident from Florida or elsewhere," coordinator Bruce Gagnon said. The Prometheus rocket would likely be launched from NASA's Kennedy Space Center (news - web sites) on Florida's Atlantic coast.

Southern US residents remember well the Space Shuttle Columbia break-up, which rained debris on Texas and Louisiana last February 1.

"One of our major concerns," said NASA's Newhouse, "is making sure that we do not in any way create a hazard for the public -- and that's the public in the world.

"We want to make sure that we don't operate this thing (the nuclear reactor) until we are in a position where it's going away from the Earth, so that it can't come back.

"We have to make sure that we can launch it safely.

"Our intention is to design it so that the reactor part of the package will be intact as a result of a launch vehicle explosion."

[Bilbo Baggins]

The Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, based in Gainesville, Florida, claimed such engines pose a risk both during launch and in space.

Maybe someone should tell him that the sun is a *HUGE* nuclear power generator in space, and we don't seem to be dead yet.

Launch is another issue.

[Support Free Republic]

Are we there yet?

[Dallas59]

Heh....A few hundred environmentalists just had major coronaries after reading that story.

[Brett66]

I guess it's standard journalism practice to provide a counterpoint? Why do they think they need the opinions of an extremist like Gagnon? Pathetic.

[MetalMan]

I'm interested in how this could possibly work. Nuclear powered engines still need some sort of propellant. Nuclear reactors on our boats use steam to turn the props, which gives it thrust... but in the void of space there isn't any water or enough gas for this method to work.

I think it would be interesting to see what they come up with.

[MetalMan]

Tests at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, showed that a jet of ionized atomic particles can furnish propulsion.

I guess it tells me right here. hehe

[MetalMan]

I think they are concerned about it falling out of orbit, and the heavy materials being spread out far in the atmosphere. But as long as the craft left Earth's gravity to explore deep space, this really isn't an issue.

Unless they're concerned about us pissing off some aliens or something. Who knows how those environment freak's brains work anyhow?

[NormsRevenge]

Here's some info from NASA on Prometheus (formerly the Nuclear Systems Initiative) . Pretty neat stuff.

[demlosers]

The Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, based in Gainesville, Florida, claimed such engines pose a risk both during launch and in space.

"It increases the chance of an accident from Florida or elsewhere," coordinator Bruce Gagnon said.

The press loves to quote these minuscule bozos who oppose nukes. How come I always get this mental image of two leftist morons who live out of a garage with 1 sporting a Darth Vader suit.

[vpintheak]

You just know all the nut-bags are going to protest this in full force. Therefore any rat in congress, will be dead set against it, the hell with progress.

[Paleo Conservative]

Heh....A few hundred environmentalists just had major coronaries after reading that story.

I wish that were so.

[DarthMaulrulesok]

Well, if we are going to make the environmentalists, no nukes crowd, peaceniks, etc upset ANYWAY, we might as well go the whole hog and make them REALLY UPSET.

So, let's take advantage of our new ion propulsion and start mass production of TIE fighters.

BWA HA HA HA

[Fledermaus]

The stupidity of idiots like The Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space are bigger risks.