• Russians make breakthrough in interplanetary space travel, prototypes by 2014
    90 replies, posted
[QUOTE][B]A ground-breaking Russian nuclear space-travel propulsion system will be ready by 2017 and will power a ship capable of long-haul interplanetary missions by 2025, giving Russia a head start in the outer-space race. The megawatt-class nuclear drive will function for up to three years and produce 100-150 kilowatts of energy at normal capacity. [/B] [B]The new project proposes the use of an electric ion propulsion system. The engines exhaust thrust will be generated by an ion flow, which is further accelerated by an electric field. The nuclear reactor will therefore “supply” the necessary amount of electric power without unwanted radioactive contamination of the environment. Xenon will serve as the working body for the engines.[/B] It is under development at Skolkovo, Russia’s technology innovation hub, whose nuclear cluster head Denis Kovalevich confirmed the breakthrough to Interfax. "At present we are testing several types of fuel and later we will start drafting the design," he said. While the engine is expected to be fully assembled by 2017 the accompanying craft will not be ready before 2025 former head of Roscosmos, Anatoly Perminov, told Interfax. Scientists expect to start putting the new engine through its paces in operational tests as early as 2014. The Russian government began the ambitious project in 2010 with an investment of approximately $17 million dollars and is expected to shell out $247 million over the next five years to complete the engine. Contractors: NIKIET (Research and Design Institute of Power Engineering, open joint-stock company, subsidiary of Russia’s state-run nuclear corporation Rosatom) – main design office for the reactor Energia (Korolyov Rocket and Space Corporation) Kurchatov Institute (National Research Centre) Keldysh Research Center (Federal State Unitary Enterprise) Funds: Total cost of nuclear propulsion system: over US $247 million Total project budget: over US $580 million through 2019 The idea of using a nuclear propulsion system to power space missions is not altogether new. It came about in the 1960s and was the brainchild of three Russian academics, Mstislav Keldysh, Igor Kurchatov and Sergey Korolev in the Soviet Union. Research into the field was subsequently carried out not only in the Soviet Union, but also in the US, although with a view to creating a new weapon rather than the advancement of space travel. The stumbling block that has faced scientists over the last couple of years is that as a craft travels further away from the sun’s rays, solar energy weakens and cannot produce the necessary energy to power electric engines through its solar panels. Nuclear power has generally been considered a valid alternative to fossil fuels to power space craft, as it is the only energy source capable of producing the enormous thrust needed for interplanetary travel. NASA embarked on a project to develop a nuclear engine capable of powering a space craft, but funding was cut in 2003. The revolutionary propulsion system falls in line with recently announced plans for Russia to conquer space. Last month, the Russian Federal Space Agency released its ambitious scheme to explore our solar system in the coming years. Entitled Space Development Strategies up to 2030, Russia aims to send probes to Mars, Jupiter, and Venus, as well as establish a series of bases on the moon. [/QUOTE] For a second I thought I was reading sci fi. Makes me think, Russians get more done then SpaceX on a smaller budget. [URL="http://rt.com/news/space-nuclear-engine-propulsion-120/"]Spauce[/URL]
Nuclear? I was expecting Vodka-powered.
Brilliant. Now get NASA on these things and make some that do double the speed. Go go new Space Race 2!
We need a new Space Race. All the diddling around since America landed on the moon has achieved relatively little.
Its great to know there will be a space race during my time.
Looks like I wasn't born to early to see the universe. One macro image down, infinite number remaining.
[QUOTE]outer-space race[/QUOTE] I like the sound of that.
Explodes at liftoff
Looks like Russia is back in the game!
[QUOTE=Sand;35419247]Explodes at liftoff[/QUOTE] These engines will be safer then conventionally fueled rocket engines.
[QUOTE=TestECull;35419179]Go go new Space Race 2![/QUOTE] A little competition is neat but I don't want it to be the driving force behind space travel and innovation. I want the public to understand the importance, and embrace the greatness of spacetravel and science as a whole. I want space exploration driven by lust for knowledge and a future, not one driven by competition and fear. This lust would be the fundamental foundations for continued exploration for years to come. Hopefully, a small space race would get that ball rolling, but I hope it's not the sole sustained reason for going out there, like it was when we originally conquered the moon.
I'm actually really surprised nobody has even begun taking steps towards creating a moon base or small colony on the moon yet, it would be an incredibly hard task but a necessary step both construction wise and in the sense of how people get on together and survive in an environment like that. [QUOTE=mac338;35419272]A little competition is neat but I don't want it to be the driving force behind space travel and innovation. I want the public to understand the importance, and embrace the greatness of spacetravel and science as a whole.[/quote] I was actually going to say something very similar to that, countries need to pool resources and work together when it comes to heading out to space, maybe not so much now but more so when we are going to start colonising other planets.
[QUOTE=mac338;35419272]A little competition is neat but I don't want it to be the driving force behind space travel and innovation. I want the public to understand the importance, and embrace the greatness of spacetravel and science as a whole. I want space exploration driven by lust for knowledge and a future, not one driven by competition and fear. This lust would be the fundamental foundations for continued exploration for years to come. Hopefully, a small space race would get that ball rolling, but I hope it's not the sole sustained reason for going out there, like it was when we originally conquered the moon.[/QUOTE] IF you want any progress whatsoever you need to not worry about the reason behind the space race. Personally, I don't care [i]why[/i]. I just know that when we have a space race we make HUGE discoveries and milestones. We never would have landed on the moon without the threat of Russia beating us to it, after all. Too hard, too expensive, not enough interest, would never have happened without the politics behind it. The political dickwaving is a necessary evil if you want to live to see inter-planetary space flight become a reality. The public is far too worried about terrorists, piracy and what videogames do to kid's minds to give half a fuck about space and the exploration thereof.
[QUOTE=Cushie;35419309]I'm actually really surprised nobody has even begun taking steps towards creating a moon base or small colony on the moon yet, it would be an incredibly hard task but a necessary step both construction wise and in the sense of how people get on together and survive in an environment like that.[/QUOTE] Deemed "impractical" every time. It's not in a politicians brain, long as it is not in the public's heart to think forward, and beyond.
Interplanetary space travel by 2025? I think 'Squee!' is a good word to describe my feelings about that.
Eh, its RT. I'm skeptical. Cool if it happens, but I'm not sitting at the edge of my seat.
[QUOTE=TestECull;35419331]IF you want any progress whatsoever you need to not worry about the reason behind the space race. Personally, I don't care [i]why[/i]. I just know that when we have a space race we make HUGE discoveries and milestones. We never would have landed on the moon without the threat of Russia beating us to it, after all. Too hard, too expensive, not enough interest, would never have happened without the politics behind it. The political dickwaving is a necessary evil if you want to live to see inter-planetary space flight become a reality. The public is far too worried about terrorists, piracy and what videogames do to kid's minds to give half a fuck about space and the exploration thereof.[/QUOTE] The problem being, the space race ended the moment the threat was over, and it would again lest people appreciate what it brings us. Hence I believe a "space agenda" must be created to underline all it's perks, to inspire the public.
Russia needs to hurry up with its Eurasian union thing and start Cold war 2, Blue, white and red v. Red white and blue.
Hippies will be angry because it uses evil nuclear power.
[QUOTE=MIPS;35419396]Hippies will be angry because it uses evil nuclear power.[/QUOTE] Say no to space pollution is chanted at some giant hippy rally, then suddenly the room turns quiet, one person stands up and realizes space is naturally radiated.
So it's just a more powerful ion drive? NASA have been experimenting with these for years. Hooking it up to a nuclear reactor is nicer (although riskier), NASA used RTGs for a long time but people kept freaking out about them (So now I think they're only used for specific missions)
[QUOTE=mac338;35419370]The problem being, the space race ended the moment the threat was over, and it would again lest people appreciate what it brings us. Hence I believe a "space agenda" must be created to underline all it's perks, to inspire the public.[/QUOTE] Like I said the public doesn't give two fucks about space and the exploration thereof. We've got to take what we can get, and ten or fifteen years of political dickwaving spurring some damn good progress is what we can get. I'll take a space race regardless of the reason behind it. Now if you think you can change the public's mind and get them to stop focusing on terrorism, video games causing kids to go violent and gas prices long enough to look up at the stars and wonder if they'll ever be able to go there, then more power to ya. But so far nobody can even slow that train of thought down, let alone derail it.
[QUOTE=TheDecryptor;35419485]So it's just a more powerful ion drive? NASA have been experimenting with these for years. Hooking it up to a nuclear reactor is nicer (although riskier), NASA used RTGs for a long time but people kept freaking out about them (So now I think they're only used for specific missions)[/QUOTE] No its conceptually different, different fueling and powered by a nuclear reactor much more powerful then a RTG. Russia is thinking long and heavy haul, as in Space freighters.
[quote]megawatt-class nuclear drive[/quote] That's a really awesome sounding piece of technology
[QUOTE=MIPS;35419396]Hippies will be angry because it uses evil nuclear power.[/QUOTE]We should burn the hippies as fuel. Get to space and the entire planet high all at the same time.
[QUOTE=Heli;35419535]No its conceptually different, different fueling and powered by a nuclear reactor much more powerful then a RTG. Russia is thinking long and heavy haul, as in Space freighters.[/QUOTE] They're using Xenon, same NASA use with their ion drives. While it's more powerful (10-15x what NASA are doing), it'd also burn through the fuel at a much faster rate. And I wonder how well an ion drive would function vs. a normal rocket engine at those rates.
Can't wait until we discover the Prothean ruins on Mars
[QUOTE=TestECull;35419521]Like I said the public doesn't give two fucks about space and the exploration thereof. We've got to take what we can get, and ten or fifteen years of political dickwaving spurring some damn good progress is what we can get. I'll take a space race regardless of the reason behind it. Now if you think you can change the public's mind and get them to stop focusing on terrorism, video games causing kids to go violent, and gas prices, then more power to ya. But so far nobody can even slow that train of thought down, let alone derail it.[/QUOTE] A space race is a temporary measure. Inspring public doesn't have to be related to gas prices and violent video games. They can keep that train of thought. Doesn't mean they are unable to appreciate or want us to enter the void. I say what space needs is more focus. Particularly by the media.
it will only be a matter of years before i can live eve in real life
[QUOTE=mac338;35419614]A space race is a temporary measure. Inspring public doesn't have to be related to gas prices and violent video games. They can keep that train of thought. Doesn't mean they are unable to appreciate or want us to enter the void.[/quote] But they are. The public as a whole is too damn narrow minded. If they're bleating about gas prices and terrorism they won't give space flight a second thought. If you can convince them that interplanetary exploration will lower gas prices and reduce the terrorist threat they'll be right on board, but good luck with that, and I don't think there's anything else you can possibly do. Maybe convince them there'll be an economic boon? Itt'l make jobs? Still a longshot. There's no guarantee they'll go along with it, no guarantee they'll even listen to a word you say, preferring instead to bleat on about the same issues they've been bleating on about. A space race may be a temporary measure, but that's all we've got to work with. If we don't have a space race space exploration will just continue to stagnate. The public is CLEARLY not interested whatsoever in it...and who knows, maybe the fruits of that space race will derail the current train of thought the public has, make them more interested in space and more receptive to funding it better. Maybe the end result of the space race is a public genuinely interested in space exploration. [quote]I say what space needs is more focus. Particularly by the media.[/QUOTE] I say what space needs is craft floating around in it exploring it. I don't care what means get them there so long as they're put there.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.