Using Concrete to build space ships...

> Lots of good points, but personally I still think the most
efficient way to
> implement this is to use a nuclear reactor to superheat whatever
material is
> conveniently available to use as propellant. The amount of nuclear
fuel
> required in term of mass is still negligible, and the thrust
achieved would
> be immensely superior. More efficient engines also means safer
travel, as
> well as much faster...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Claudio

I agree that nuclear has much going for it. I have no argument with
its technical merits. However, I'll leave you to placate the
protesters :)

It's easier to look at the technical issues and tick off the pros
and cons. It's a completely different game to try to predict the
politics of launching nuclear material into orbit. I hope it can
work but how the hell can you predict the likelihoods?

The central theme of a cycler is that it shouldn't need much
propulsion because it just follows its resonance orbit forever.

A ship, be it chemical or nuclear, has more versatility, but it
always needs fuel, and thus is limited by the rocket equation. Even
nuclear ships have that limitation, but it's not as severe as for
chemical ships.

TangoMan