This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Nuclear salt-water rocket article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article at the start seems to indicate that the nuclear salt is contained and separate from a solution pumped into the reaction chamber, but further down seems to indicate that the nuclear salt itself is being pumped out of the system as propellant. The overall language is unclear and the reader is left somewhat confused as to whether the nuclear-salt is simply a stationary mass in the rocket frame heating a solution propellant, or if the salt itself is a propellant and exits the vehible. Suggest clearer language and also a supporting diagram would make a tremendous explanatory difference. 76.182.84.243 ( talk) 16:06, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Why talk about "Orthodox chemical rockets"? Should it not simply be "Chemical Rockets"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrDeconstructo ( talk • contribs) 08:29, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
How would a engine using such a fuel work? -- angel'o'sphere
Within the propellant tanks, neutron density of the fuel would be low due to the geometry/neutron absorptive materials of the tank walls, so temperature would be low too and thus the fuel would remain liquid.. However when injected into the reaction chamber, the neutron density (and therefore temperature) of the fuel would rise sharply and therefore the water would more or less instantly change to high pressure steam which would exit through a nozzle at high velocity and thus propel the craft. Of course you then have radioactive steam floating about so you don't want to try this at home ! -- Derek Ross | Talk 16:36, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
Except that the radioactive steam should be travelling quickly enough that it's not bound by the Sun's gravity well, and should leave the Solar system in time. Just make sure you're not pointing towards Earth (or another inhabited body) when you fire that rocket... Wtrmute 14:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Thats fine if you only launch one such vehicle, but if you started to extensively use them in Earth Orbit, even above LEO, you might get a cumalative effect, even with minor contamination from each individual ignition
Spiz101 (
talk) 01:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Citation for this article is "Entering Space", Robert Zubrin ISBN 1585420360 68.3.12.199 ( talk) 21:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
"such engines could not be used on the surface of a planet without terrible environmental damage occurring." Would it be worse than all the open air nuclear bomb tests? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.194.250.115 ( talk) 16:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
((WIKIRANK)) Content: 2 Spelling: 3 Appearance: 2 RDN1F (don't) (talk) (to) (me) (before) (my) (coffee) ( talk) 15:50, 11 June 2011 (UTC) Find out more about WikiRank here: user:RDN1F/WikiRank
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Nuclear salt-water rocket article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article at the start seems to indicate that the nuclear salt is contained and separate from a solution pumped into the reaction chamber, but further down seems to indicate that the nuclear salt itself is being pumped out of the system as propellant. The overall language is unclear and the reader is left somewhat confused as to whether the nuclear-salt is simply a stationary mass in the rocket frame heating a solution propellant, or if the salt itself is a propellant and exits the vehible. Suggest clearer language and also a supporting diagram would make a tremendous explanatory difference. 76.182.84.243 ( talk) 16:06, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Why talk about "Orthodox chemical rockets"? Should it not simply be "Chemical Rockets"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrDeconstructo ( talk • contribs) 08:29, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
How would a engine using such a fuel work? -- angel'o'sphere
Within the propellant tanks, neutron density of the fuel would be low due to the geometry/neutron absorptive materials of the tank walls, so temperature would be low too and thus the fuel would remain liquid.. However when injected into the reaction chamber, the neutron density (and therefore temperature) of the fuel would rise sharply and therefore the water would more or less instantly change to high pressure steam which would exit through a nozzle at high velocity and thus propel the craft. Of course you then have radioactive steam floating about so you don't want to try this at home ! -- Derek Ross | Talk 16:36, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
Except that the radioactive steam should be travelling quickly enough that it's not bound by the Sun's gravity well, and should leave the Solar system in time. Just make sure you're not pointing towards Earth (or another inhabited body) when you fire that rocket... Wtrmute 14:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Thats fine if you only launch one such vehicle, but if you started to extensively use them in Earth Orbit, even above LEO, you might get a cumalative effect, even with minor contamination from each individual ignition
Spiz101 (
talk) 01:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Citation for this article is "Entering Space", Robert Zubrin ISBN 1585420360 68.3.12.199 ( talk) 21:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
"such engines could not be used on the surface of a planet without terrible environmental damage occurring." Would it be worse than all the open air nuclear bomb tests? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.194.250.115 ( talk) 16:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
((WIKIRANK)) Content: 2 Spelling: 3 Appearance: 2 RDN1F (don't) (talk) (to) (me) (before) (my) (coffee) ( talk) 15:50, 11 June 2011 (UTC) Find out more about WikiRank here: user:RDN1F/WikiRank