Jeff Bell weighs in on the practicality for nuclear-electric for a Mars-orbit sample-return mission.  His verdict: unless you're talking asteroid belt or beyond, not much point.  And troublesome for anything that should really get through the Van Allen belts quickly - though SMART-1 shows it can be done slowly, for some purposes.
 
 
He doesn't think it's perfect for JIMO either, but I expect JIMO will make substantial use of slingshot trajectories, and Bell's criticism may have assumed more direct trajectories.  The main advantage of nuclear-electric for JIMO, I always thought, was that it would enable propulsion *near* Jupiter, to various moon orbits.  JIMO is now expected to be chemically propelled from Earth orbit, mainly out of concern for reducing the chance of collisions.  I.e., it's planned to not use nuclear-electric in one phase precisely because it's nuclear-electric in another.
 
Putting JIMO into the same funding wedge as CEV might still be the safest thing for it.  If it turns out the public reaction to putting a reactor in orbit dooms JIMO for a while, it might continue with reduced funding until CEV-based scenarios prove out for putting the reactor unfueled into a safe place, far out there, and getting plutonium to it safely, and separately.  Or it could be that they are both in the same laundry disposal chute, ready to drop when the body politic lets go.  Wish I knew.
 
-michael turner
 
----- Original Message -----
To: europa
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 2:15 AM
Subject: Constellation and Prometheus - Uncomfortable Bedfellows

Constellation and Prometheus: Uncomfortable bedfellows

NASA has raised a few eyebrows by lumping its nuclear propulsion
program, Project Prometheus, into Code T alongside the Crew Exploration
Vehicle effort, Project Constellation.  Taylor Dinerman argues that the
technology-driven Prometheus could clash with the operations-driven
Constellation, to the ultimate detriment of NASA.

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/120/1



In space, no one can hear you explain
---
In the last two months NASA has been buffeted by criticism regarding
both the new space initiative as well as its decision to cancel the
last Hubble servicing mission.  Jeff Foust argues that NASA's problems
are partly its own doing because of its reticence to share information
and explain its actions.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/118/1

Reply via email to