>

Did somebody die?

I feel I've just witnessed a funeral.

Nuclear is not dead.

It's an ace we're saving and will someday use.

But just in case the good fairies don't sprinkle magic dust all over
everything, we need to be able to implement a plan that has nothing
to do with nuclear.

Then action becomes more likely to occur.

The VASIMR, for example, can possibly get to Mars in 90 days. This
removes the need to have artificial gravity on the journey. This is
better than spanking the back end of a horse.

If we can do nuclear first, then great!

But I wouldn't put everything in it.

If we do, then we really have entered a faith based query mode. An
untasty prospect.

George

Help build a city in space.
http://cygo.com/

--- In spacesettlers@y..., "John Frazer" wrote:
> George Perkins wrote:
> > A private company is not going to legally get ahold
> >of nuclear material without governmental cooperation...
> >and to think that's going to happen is just a fantasy.
> >
> > Those that still insist on nuclear-first are just
> >zealots that we need to look beyond if we want to get
> >anything done.
>
> I'll counter first by saying that the (seeming?) impossibility of
> nuclear power in some form in a near-term private space effort is
> primarily caused by _Anti-Nuclear_ zealotry.
> Second; is governmental approval completely out of the question?
> Don't private concerns build nuclear power stations? Again, the
> hysteria factor must be dealt with, to avoid the (excessive?)
> permitting costs & timescales.
>
> In a perfect world, we could ensure safety & responsibility to
> allow, for instance, a 100kwe deployable fission plant on the back
of
> a flatbed telerobotic truck for a first generation Mars Direct
> mission, followed a decade or so later by a NTR upper stage of a
HLV.
> A "Kucker" nuclear fission power/heating unit for a 'Diemos water
> company' scenario should also be reasonable, in the not too distant
> future. (uses heat provided by decay to melt ices for collection)
> Neither of these ideas should be too hard to get past a fair &
> impartial (UN sponsored?) board of approvals. By the time a private
> concern could get HLV boosters and get a mission off the drawing
> boards, this should be possible to arrange.
> We'll be fighting the hysteria of the Anti zealots, of course.
>
> I still hold out hopes for Nuke _pulse_ rockets, and feel some
> certainty that it'll happen eventually, but you may be right in
> calling me a zealot... (yes, with appropriate changes in nuclear
> materials handling protocols to allow a ship with several hundred
or

VASIMR requires a lot of power to operate which would make solar out of the
question.

Your going to have to find another non-nuclear option, like chemicals (hehe).

--- George Perkins wrote:

Nuclear is taboo. It's not the answer for a private start up in this
day and age.

It's not even cool.

I'm interested in a small space-only craft that can run on blocks of
ice that you can easily shove into it.

George

Help build a space city.
http://cygo.com/

I thought killing astronaughts for fun was the only taboo topic here.

I would like to know how you plan to have it run on blocks of ice.

--- George Perkins wrote:

Hmm.

Check out http://www.neofuel.com/

He talks about using ice/steam as a propellent. He uses two possible
energy sources, solar and .... another.

It's got lots of really cool designs. The only problem with steam
is that it has a fairly poor ISP (about 190-200); but a moon mining
scenario may make it practical.

"But you're really not going to like it." - Douglas Adams

-Ian.

George Perkins wrote:
> I'm interested in a small space-only craft that can run on blocks of
> ice that you can easily shove into it.
>
> George

--
- Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@...)

"Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding technological
civilization?"
- Gerard O'Neill

WOW!!

Thank you, Ian.

George

--- In spacesettlers@y..., Ian Woollard wrote:
> Hmm.
>
> Check out http://www.neofuel.com/
>
> He talks about using ice/steam as a propellent. He uses two possible
> energy sources, solar and .... another.
>
> It's got lots of really cool designs. The only problem with steam
> is that it has a fairly poor ISP (about 190-200); but a moon mining
> scenario may make it practical.
>
> "But you're really not going to like it." - Douglas Adams
>
> -Ian.
>
> George Perkins wrote:
> > I'm interested in a small space-only craft that can run on blocks
of
> > ice that you can easily shove into it.
> >
> > George
>
> --
> - Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@t...)
>
> "Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
technological