cape51 - 15/1/2007 6:11 PMis this just a conceptial work by a nasa fan o does this have real possibility.....
SteveMick - 16/1/2007 2:16 PMI have been wondering if the recent North korean nuclear "fizzle" might have some relevance to nuclear EPP (Orion). In previous discussions the question of minimum size for a fission detonation is has been central in that it determines the minimum size for such a vehicle and hence its cost and likliehood of production. If memory serves, a backpack nuke had a min. of 8KT and this was accepted as the lower limit. This makes for a big vehicle. In reading Scientific American's description of what might have gone wrong, one suggestion was that while in storage some of the plutonium had decayed into the 240 isotope which produced too many neutrons during explosive compression of the fissile material and reduced the size of the blast by causing an assymetry. Given this I wonder whether deliberately adding plutonium 240 could reduce the size of the blast tof a hypothetical vehicle to a level that would allow a relatively small (and much cheaper presumably)version of Orion type EPP. Is this practical or is reducing the energy per unit mass of the bombs something that will negate too much of the benefit gained from using nuclear energy in this application?Steve
Carl G - 16/1/2007 10:39 PMIs that plate at the back of the vechile actually bouncing or is that an illusion?
SteveMick - 17/1/2007 12:10 PMI should have said that one typical warhead's worth of energy per month in the form of smaller remanufactured bombs would "run the country". We'd have enough for 100 years or so even if I'm off by a factor of ten.Steve