--- David Weinshenker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Adrian Tymes wrote: > > --- Henry Spencer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The big trick > > > is maintaining a > > > reasonably stable blob of very hot uranium-rich > gas > > > without having it mix > > > with the hydrogen too much (because you don't > want > > > to lose fission fuel > > > out the exhaust) or melt through the walls. > > > > Actually, the big trick has been getting political > > approval for developing and launching > "new-kuu-lar" > > engines, especially when there is a danger that > their > > exhaust would be rather more radioactive than most > > rocket exhaust. > > Well obviously you wouldn't want to test it in an > atmosphere, > for the exact opposite reason that you can't test a > lot of > electric propulsion methods in an atmosphere!
You misunderstand: the nuclear material has to get into space somehow (the most coherent form of this objection I've heard is, "what if the rocket blows up and all the nuclear material rains down on us since the radioactive atoms themselves don't burn up?"), and even once it's out there, some people still object to "nukes in space". _______________________________________________ ERPS-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
