|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
David Spain wrote:
Project Orion was a concept study. And a test program. that lead into the Casaba Howitzer test program, that was the secret core of Reagan's SDI. http://spacebombardment.blogspot.com...r-concept.html It proposed building a space-based only "rocket" ...It was really only seriously proposed for use strictly in space. The bombs were to be released in a series of continuous distinct pulses. Here's evidence it was seriously proposed for Earth launch, by a serious player, who later was part of the team behind the World Trade Center. http://spacebombardment.blogspot.com...-re-lunar.html |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
bombardmentforce wrote: David Spain wrote: Project Orion was a concept study. And a test program. that lead into the Casaba Howitzer test program, that was the secret core of Reagan's SDI. http://spacebombardment.blogspot.com...r-concept.html It proposed building a space-based only "rocket" ...It was really only seriously proposed for use strictly in space. The bombs were to be released in a series of continuous distinct pulses. Here's evidence it was seriously proposed for Earth launch, by a serious player, who later was part of the team behind the World Trade Center. http://spacebombardment.blogspot.com...-re-lunar.html An Orion rocket would work but you would not want to launch it from Earths surface. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
bernardz wrote:
An Orion rocket would work but you would not want to launch it from Earths surface. Somewhere over N. Korea would be nice. Bob Kolker |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
Robert Kolker wrote: bernardz wrote: An Orion rocket would work but you would not want to launch it from Earths surface. Somewhere over N. Korea would be nice. Bob Kolker In all seriousness the original idea was to launch it, or at least test fire it, near the General Atomics HQ in La Jolla. Yes, using a "small" nuclear device. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
Jack Linthicum wrote:
Robert Kolker wrote: bernardz wrote: An Orion rocket would work but you would not want to launch it from Earths surface. Somewhere over N. Korea would be nice. Bob Kolker In all seriousness the original idea was to launch it, or at least test fire it, near the General Atomics HQ in La Jolla. Yes, using a "small" nuclear device. Here's map of the Nerva test site, visted by Dyson as they evaluated test options. http://spacebombardment.blogspot.com...mage-zone.html |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
bombardmentforce wrote: Jack Linthicum wrote: Robert Kolker wrote: bernardz wrote: An Orion rocket would work but you would not want to launch it from Earths surface. Somewhere over N. Korea would be nice. Bob Kolker In all seriousness the original idea was to launch it, or at least test fire it, near the General Atomics HQ in La Jolla. Yes, using a "small" nuclear device. Here's map of the Nerva test site, visted by Dyson as they evaluated test options. http://spacebombardment.blogspot.com...mage-zone.html Chapter 20 Jackass Flats "We assumed it would be somewhere near La Jolla in the Pacific", Freeman answers, when asked about the location of the launch. A barge is mentioned. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
bernardz wrote:
bombardmentforce wrote: David Spain wrote: Project Orion was a concept study. And a test program. that lead into the Casaba Howitzer test program, that was the secret core of Reagan's SDI. http://spacebombardment.blogspot.com...r-concept.html ..It was really only seriously proposed for use strictly in space. T Here's evidence it was seriously proposed for Earth launch, by a serious player, who later was part of the team behind the World Trade Center. http://spacebombardment.blogspot.com...-re-lunar.html An Orion rocket would work but you would not want to launch it from Earths surface. I would, the motive, 4 hr ISP. http://spacebombardment.blogspot.com...1-880-ton.html Lofted designs can't aspire to the 5 cent / lb efficiency of Dyson's 8,000,000 ton Super-Orion. I am in favor of large scale space conquest and development, SRBs won't do. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
bombardmentforce wrote:
I would, the motive, 4 hr ISP. http://spacebombardment.blogspot.com...1-880-ton.html Lofted designs can't aspire to the 5 cent / lb efficiency of Dyson's 8,000,000 ton Super-Orion. I am in favor of large scale space conquest and development, SRBs won't do. They surely will not. But I think your optimism is beyond your reason. If the earth were going to be hit by a large asteroid or comet in ten years it might be worthwhile to try to save a few souls from the extinction. Other than that, it is a waste of time and money. Bob Kolker |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
In message , Robert Kolker
writes bombardmentforce wrote: I would, the motive, 4 hr ISP. http://spacebombardment.blogspot.com...-in-detail-1-8 80-ton.html Lofted designs can't aspire to the 5 cent / lb efficiency of Dyson's 8,000,000 ton Super-Orion. I am in favor of large scale space conquest and development, SRBs won't do. They surely will not. But I think your optimism is beyond your reason. If the earth were going to be hit by a large asteroid or comet in ten years it might be worthwhile to try to save a few souls from the extinction. Other than that, it is a waste of time and money. Isn't that the most likely reason for building Orion? Others are what Arthur Clarke calls "a space equivalent of the Berlin Airlift", or the battleship in Niven/Pournelle's "Footfall". When you don't have time to play around with shuttle-size payloads, or you won't be allowed more than one launch. Or when it doesn't matter what happens to the launch site. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
In article ,
Jonathan Silverlight wrote: Isn't that the most likely reason for building Orion? ... When you don't have time to play around with shuttle-size payloads, or you won't be allowed more than one launch. Or when it doesn't matter what happens to the launch site. And when you don't care about some rather nasty air pollution. (Unless you assumed hypothetical fission-free bombs -- which figured heavily into most of the optimistic predictions about Orion -- Orion's fallout output was up at the level that made people reading the reports say "urk!" even in the days of routine atmospheric H-bomb testing.) -- spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
National Space Policy: NSDD-42 (issued on July 4th, 1982) | Stuf4 | History | 158 | December 13th 14 09:50 PM |
Moonbase Power | [email protected] | Policy | 34 | April 6th 06 06:47 PM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 1 | March 2nd 05 04:35 PM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | August 5th 04 01:36 AM |
National Space Policy: NSDD-42 (issued on July 4th, 1982) | Stuf4 | Policy | 145 | July 28th 04 07:30 AM |