NASA just signed an agreement with DARPA to create the first nuclear rocket by 2027! Also, a new enhancement will improve Earth to Mars travel time fourfold to 45 days!! Could this technology be used to facilitate Elon Musk’s ambitions with Starship?
#space #spacex #nasa
Please support my channel! EARLY VIDEO RELEASES, DISCORD MEMBERSHIP AND EXCLUSIVE CONTENT PLUS 15% OFF MERCH!
https://www.patreon.com/AngryAstronaut
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/AngryAstro
source
How long did it take them to get SLS off the pad?
We never stopped drawing nuclear plans; we only stopped being public about it.
I'm sure Elon has some nuclear engineers on the payroll.
If someone had a lunar manufacturing plant, could they build nuclear engines there?
vote for those who support the Space Force president.
What's wrong with Canadian weather? It's pretty fine!
The angry astronaut or the angry driver?
NASA has always kept humanity from any real answers from the Moon or Mars or anything space. What makes you think that they will at all come clean in the next 50 years about ANYTHING?!?!?!?
We will only know the truth when we can get there ourselves and see…we are decades away…it's sad and wrong
Better get those " spun pair" habitat modules under test to provide artificial gravity for a interplanetary trip.
If the US is serious about interplanetary travel based on nuclear propulsion technology, the US really needs to get back to appropriate educational standards, respect of competence and understanding of science and a whole lot less emphasis on World Wide Wrestling histrionics as a substitute for planning and policy. Just sayin'!
Could VASIMR PLASMA ENGINES incorporate the Thermal Nuclear Reactor to POWER IT'S ENGINE'S??? Dr. Franklin Chang-Diaz has proposed this concept over 20 YEARS ago.
Also AA yes nuclear propulsion is more efficient than chemical rocket's…. But there is another long term human presence in outer space 🌌🚀 issue that HAS TO BE ADDRESSED JUST AS MUCH!!! And that's the issue of ARTIFICIAL GRAVITY. There should be RESEARCH ON THE MOON SURFACE to SOLVE that EQUATION as well .. I SEE CIRCULAR SAUCER TYPE SPACECRAFT IN THE FUTURE TO ADDRESS ALL OF THESE ISSUES FOR INTER AND OUTER PLANETARY SPACE TRAVEL FOR HUMANS .. NO ARTIFICIAL GRAVITY… NO LONG TERM MISSIONS TO DISTANCE WORLD'S….
This is so exciting that we can get to Mars in 45 days. Now if nasa could come up with artificial gravity for the space craft and also for Mars habitat people would not have to return home to Earth for medical reasons. Also if we could design space tugs that could go to the asteroid belt to prospect for materials that are necessary for space craft or habitat building. The material's needed for the space stations at earth and at the moon and Mars would be readily available for little to no cost . Wow off on a rant. Take care of yourself.
Thermal nuclear engines are the least efficient of all the nuclear designs. NASA is lagging behind if they want to put this 55 year old design into a rocket.
We are allways thinking nuclear propulsion for Mars and beyond. But what could it change regarding Moon projects ? If we can go to the moon in a few hours (even faster then driving from Chicago to New Orleans). How fast it would help extracting ressources and sending them to a new huge space station in LEO ?
Use FH to lift materials into orbit to build modular ships. SLS and Starship already look outdated and redundant.
There are several problems with using nuclear propulsion. The most important and obvious is politics and international agreements.
Second close is safety, one single launch failure can be a humongous contamination hazard.
The best solution for those problems is to mine and purify suitable radioactive materials from the Moon itself.
The Moon has been bombarded by asteroids and meteors for eons, without erosion all those metals are still there, untouched.
Less hassle on safety and politics but it will be a race that China will throw all it gets and do the same it already does with Rare Earth minerals.
One thing us Brits know and it's about the wet!
Move to England then. I’d rather die young in a free country.
NASA already did all that back in the 1970s. Congress threw it all away and signed treaties that forbid nuclear power in space.
NASA can't violate the treaties.
Hi Happy.
I check in from time to time to see your progress, catching up on your news and congratulate you on your numbers and subs etc.
Like WOW – nearly 100k subs! But more impressive being over the last 2 weeks l estimate approx 130k to 150k plus views per week!
Congratulations and so very well deserved. 🎁
So first you have to get Congress to dismiss the treaties that forbid it.
There's no word on how anyone came up with the number of 45 days.
Usually what they do is take the exhaust velocity to calculate a typical delta v at a typical mission loading, and get a maximum possible velocity change.
As per tabloid media, they then take that maximum possible velocity and apply it to the shortest possible distance between the two planets and "voila" pull a number out of where the sun doesn't shine.
He mentions briefly but I feel we really need to make a point in that none of this is new news. We could have had this at any time since the late '60s.
It has not been lacking any kind of technology, or even available budget or any worthwhile efforts to do in space that has kept us from doing this.
It has been solely contrary political will. We
or some elected officialsdecided not to go, and to spend far FAR more on fighting for oil than even the most grandiose ambitious space effort could hope to spend.Why angry?
Ah….. if Starship is nuclear propulsion only (using a tug to get to higher orbit) then it will spew nuclear waste all over Mars when it takes off. I'd rather not have my future home massively irradiated at the ground level….
I love watching your shows where you talk about things that are NEVER going to happen. Keep dreaming Angry Astronaut!
Always whining…
2 thing
1) France, not the UK, automatically drops the speed in the rain.
2) but can the human body cope with the slow down, from want ever the speed is to put it in to orbit around Mars to get there in 45 days (even 90 days)
Nuclear is key only because it has the advantage of making the right people a ton of money. Solar thermal/electric is faster has far higher electric power per unit mass and is orders of magnitude cheaper and easier to develop. It also opens the door to beam powered propulsion which can even complete with antimatter.
you're right to be angry, Angry Astronaut, that we're 50 years behind on nuclear rockets compared to where we should be by now.
There was something that clamped down on further interplanetary manned exploration back then than the usual reasons/excuses we hear about.
we should build a fleet of nuclear powered interplanetary rockets that are kept parked in Earth orbit, then astronauts sent up for missions. They would be reparked on return, astronauts would come back down in the capsule they came up in.
This would allow for building larger interplanetary space craft that would not be feasible to be launched from Earth's surface.
These interplanetary spacecraft could be designed with a 30 to 50 year life time expectation, so their initial cost could be spread out over decades.
No Aliens Seen Anywhere (NASA) hired DARPA to design and develop the nuclear thermal rocket by 2027 because NASA couldn't make instant coffee in 4 years for less than 2 billion/ year. (and that was being kind)
What happens to the nuclear core in the engine once the spacecraft runs out of fuel?
Does it continue to heat it self until it melts down?
Are there some kind of control rods that can turn the core off?
Are the engines reusable?
Do the engines stay in orbit or land with the crew?
It won't happen in that time frame.
More like 15-20 years if we are lucky.
This is NASA after all.
Question: where are you on day #46 unless you start braking early enough. 😅
Almost to 100 K !!!!