The Nuclear Space

1. The Nuclear Space By: Matthew Buza

2. Development of Nuclear Systems • Importance of Space Exploration: moon, mars, outer planets • Limits of Robotic missions, need for manned missions • Limits of modern rockets • Use of nuclear as a new system, what it offers • Nuclear for unmanned and manned, and powering alternative modes of transportation (Ionic, RTG, NTR)

3. Why Go? • Bring back the hidden dream, no spark. • Doubt in NASA, Columbia, Cost?, Need? • Forget that NASA also Aero not just space, most efficient branch of government, education/research/materials/technologies/space/aero • Need for new cheaper, lighter, more powerful system of transportation.

4. Robots and Rockets • The human detachment, Robots can only do so much. No where near where we want to study. • Loss of dynamic science, “On the go science.” • Rockets limitations for travel (one pop shop). • Chemical rockets a thing of the past, new technologies needed. • Impulses of 400 to 500 sec. Compared to N. 1000- 6000 sec. • 1 kg of nuclear material has ten millions times as much energy as 1 kg of chemical material. • New period (politically) allow for new systems to be developed.

5. Nuclear Systems of the past!!! • United States and Russia competed with nuclear reactors in space, though two paths were taken. • America went with RTG’s(45/1), while russia(6/36) dabbled in more small nuclear reactors. • What is an RTG? And What type of Nuclear reactor? • RTGs are lightweight, compact spacecraft power systems, very reliable. Notnuclear reactors, no moving parts. No fission or fusion processes to produce energy. Power through natural radioactive decay of plutonium (mostly Pu-238, a non-weaponsgrade isotope). Heat generated is changed into electricity. • Nuclear Reactors, small scaled down versions of reactors. Use heating of water or gas to create energy for system. • Famous missions with nuclear systems on them. Apollo, Kosomos, Galileo, Cassini, Voyager 1/2 , Viking 1/2, pioneer

6. What does the Nuke give me? • More power than stored batteries, and large solar cells. Weight alone, and size of reactors or RTG’s (1m x .4m dia.) • Ex: Cassini, 600-700W, 1.6 billion miles, 11 years. RTG(3) mass: 168kg Solar panels: 1,337kg • Solar panels (4) are 42m X 3.5m, enormous. • Pro’s: size, no moving parts, easy maneuverability • Con’s: pulbic fear of nuclear, ex: 72 lbs of nuclear material. “It will allow us to go to Neptune, Uranus and Pluto and go in orbit and allows us to think about sending missions to other stars. The kinds of missions we’re talking about could not be done without nuclear power” – Ed Weiler NASA space science chief. “What we are talking about today is not whether we will develop nuclear space power systems, but whether we will explore our solar system, because without nuclear power, it’s not practical “ – James Crocker, VP Lockheed Martin.

7. Where too next? • New political desire for revived space program. Administration is willing to spend the money needed to get back to the moon and to mars. • Questions do arise as manned missions are discussed • What about the power systems? (solar, nuclear, battery) • If new and radical ship, where do we build, and how do we get there? • Protect crew from reactor radiation, or reactor meltdown. • What type of transportation, old rockets? Or something new?

8. Rattle and Hum -- the future is now • Two types of modern methods, and hopes. Nuclear electric Propulsion (NEC), and Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP). • Both have been developed extensively by JPL and NASA, respectively. • NEC, most commonly known as Ionic propulsion. • Systems runs off energy source, most likely a nuclear reactor • Located on the ship, battery and solar power just not enough. • Charged ions (inert gas bombarded), causing an electron from atom to be expelled and then charged particle creates an equal and opposite ‘push’ on the spacecraft as its ejected out • Low thrust, but ion engines have very large impulse times, which allows for higher speeds in the long run. • NTP have been developed at NASA since 1959 for space applications (NERVA). • Attempting to create a rocket with an imbedded nuclear reactor which superheats low molecular mass materials (H2). • Fear is that a rocket failure will cause a nuclear disaster.

9. Future Travels • Price of one mars mission with chemical rockets is 3 billion, while the thermal-rocket engine was just 1.3 billion, less than half of the normal chemical rocket. • If outer planets are to be explored nuclear reactors and nuclear devices for power and transportation will be needed. • If stellar traveling is meant to happen large impulse ion drives, with larger nuclear reactors will be used. • Also new systems cut down on time spent out, time spent outside of the protective covering Earth’s magnetic field. • Safer for the astronaut.

10. Nuke  • Stress importance of RTG’s, and nuclear reactors for space exploration. • Understand the world around you, expand the human presence in space. And the limitations of modern chemical rockets. • The new propulsion techniques will allow for many more people to travel the solar systems (for now). • Allow for a more hand’s on, and the dynamic science. The removal of robots, and chemical rockets will usher in a new era of planetary exploration.