Combined Cycle Combustion/Plasma Rocket?

"Keith Willshaw" :

"Carey Sublette" wrote in message
ink.net...



I suggest you do some reading on how metallic Uranium
behaves on impact, here's a hint - its pyrophoric

This is of course irrelvant with respect to hazards from space
nuclear reactors which use insoluble uranium ceramic fuel elements,
not metallic uranium.


The Romashka reactor used in the Kosmos series used a
Uranium Carbide fuels. While Uranium Carbide, while this
has some advantages it has negative aspects too. It suffers
from serious swelling problems and can react with water.
It is not quite so insoluble as you imply, indeed the
disposal of the UC fuel for the UK Dounreay breeder
reactor is proving problematic

Then don't use Uranium Carbide in the next design!

Earl Colby Pottinger


--
I make public email sent to me! Hydrogen Peroxide Rockets, OpenBeos,
SerialTransfer 3.0, RAMDISK, BoatBuilding, DIY TabletPC. What happened to
the time? http://webhome.idirect.com/~earlcp

"Earl Colby Pottinger" wrote in message
...
"Keith Willshaw" :

"Carey Sublette" wrote in message
ink.net...



I suggest you do some reading on how metallic Uranium
behaves on impact, here's a hint - its pyrophoric

This is of course irrelvant with respect to hazards from space
nuclear reactors which use insoluble uranium ceramic fuel elements,
not metallic uranium.


The Romashka reactor used in the Kosmos series used a
Uranium Carbide fuels. While Uranium Carbide, while this
has some advantages it has negative aspects too. It suffers
from serious swelling problems and can react with water.
It is not quite so insoluble as you imply, indeed the
disposal of the UC fuel for the UK Dounreay breeder
reactor is proving problematic

Then don't use Uranium Carbide in the next design!


There is no next design. The UK fast breeder program
is dead, burying it is proving difficult and expensive.

Keith

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
news:cn6akk$dje$1
....
No I'm being an engineer, vapourware doesnt count.
The only hardware alternative out there is Topaz 2
....

This is clearly Keith's bottom line.

He refuses to discuss any reactor designs except old Soviet systems, which
are as poor an advertisement for future space reactor technology as their
RBMKs would be for future commerical power technology.

You are not get a discussion of technical possibilities going with him
(unless it is about future, but currently non-existent, solar power
systems).

"Carey Sublette" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
news:cn6akk$dje$1
...
No I'm being an engineer, vapourware doesnt count.
The only hardware alternative out there is Topaz 2
...

This is clearly Keith's bottom line.

He refuses to discuss any reactor designs except old Soviet systems, which
are as poor an advertisement for future space reactor technology as their
RBMKs would be for future commerical power technology.


Nobody has presented an alternative design to critique.
Feel free to do so

You are not get a discussion of technical possibilities going with him

Actually if you look back at the start of the thread you will find I
was proposing the Pratt and Whitney Triton nuclear drive.
The baseline TRITON engine is powered by a fast-spectrum
beryllium-reflected CERMET-fueled nuclear reactor.
It uses a dual turbopump arrangement driven by an expander
cycle using LH2 and a gas generator add-on to drive the LANTR (
LOX Augmented Nuclear Thermal Rocket)

When the TRITON is operating in electrical power mode ,
the reactor operating at less than 1% maximum thermal capability.
In this sub-level thermal power mode, the reactor is used to
heat a mixture of helium and xenon to drive a closed-loop
power conversion cycle.

(unless it is about future, but currently non-existent, solar power
systems).

Those non-existent solar power system are working aboard
spacecraft right now.

http://nmp.jpl.nasa.gov/ds1/tech/ionpropfaq.html

Keith