"The story of Orion is significant, because this is the first time in modern history that a major expansion of human technology has been suppressed for political reasons."
-freeman dyson
Orion is still the only way forward for humans. Convince me otherwise
Look I'm all for nuclear and I'm sure the development of this and related technologies would have far reaching benefits its just we don't need that kind payload to orbit and beyond right now. It could put us on distant worlds but there is much more to do before such a feat has economically viable and becomes a real way forward for humanity.
>this and related technologies would have far reaching benefits
>we don't need that kind payload to orbit
Seems like an essential contradiction.
the short term goal of Orion is easy infrastructure. Construction yards around Terra, Sol, Luna and Mars would allow fully fledged habitats within 2-3 decades. once the infra is there, space becomes literally magnitudes of times more resource-wealthy than earth is.
earth is holding us back, it does not need to be 'fixed' before we move forward. just as well, since all efforts to reach a parsimonious existence on earth had turned out with global catastrophes.
here's the thing most people, yourself included, fail to connect about space habitation v. exploration.
Habitation has not happened yet and is *truly* a new paradigm:
humans on a space habitat aren't expected to pay for the services which keep them alive. therefore, you're creating a new situation for humans where you can actually escape the socioeconomic funnel and get to work moving the species forward without risking conflict over resources at every turn.
Agree with you, but Dyson is wrong. Nuclear is the cleanest and safest way to generate electricity, but for 40 years nuclear generation has also been suppressed and demonized for political reasons.
Everything environmentalists want to accomplish with wind and solar they can accomplish with much smaller footprint and a much more reliable power grid.
Couldn't you say the political stigma against nuclear power and the Orion stem from exactly the same fears?
I think Dyson understood exactly how powerful nuclear power can be. after all he led the design team of the TRIGA nuclear reactor.
it's also worth entertaining that easy access to space allows you to build geostationary solar foils to collect raw radiation from the sun, making even nuclear fission seem impractical in comparison (outside of specific applications like backup generators etc)
humanity needs to sort out its presence on the one planet we do have, before reaching out to try to take a potential second or third.
i know it's the standard primate response when you've ruined one place - you naturally want to move on to another. pause, and take a long, hard look at yourselves in the mirror.
just a thought.
> Seems like an essential contradiction.
Maybe, but Dyson cracks it up as some grand conspiracy "suppressed for political reasons" and I understand that nuclear gets abysmal press but still the economic motive for incremental investment that drives capitalist economies just dosn't exist for suddenly launching thousands of tons to orbit. Maybe its unambitious but states the only organisations wealthy and (theoretically) far sighted enough cant justify the investment.
Sure space infrastructure would be great but its serving no great current economic need outside a planned economy of post scarcity gay space communism hardly something repressed for political reasons being almost inconceivable for the public. Orion may make such resources available but further advances in production like self replicating extractors and full automation may be more useful in utilizing these materials.
I don't really have much to say about the second part as my first comment really didn't concern it. I'm thinking about the rest but I thought I'd pop this before the thread is pruned.
oh, it's the
>PRIMATES
guy.
Point: the goal is NOT to colonize other planets. full stop.
even then, you're mistaken about the human nature aspect.
the cosmos has been a goal for humanity since before we even knew what planets were and well before we'd done extensive damage to our own.
Based futurism-posting
he would be so disappointed if he was alive today
if you're commenting on Dyson's own opinions, I would read ch. 19 of the book his above quote is from,
>FROM EROS TO GAIA
the chapter discusses his personal opinions on the political climate surrounding the final days of the project. conveniently it is available in Google's book preview.
my opinion is: sure, the idea is lofty in terms of its end goals but the cancellation of the program in full before even a basic applied test flight with payload is a big red flag. they didn't have to send a million tons to orbit, but a small prototype woul dprove to the public it was feasible and practical. that would have been enough to keep the program strong as well as guarantee its future.
the backing-down after making so many realizations is a back-room decision, or at least feels like one. and not a decision made for the advancement of mankind, rather the suppression of its creative/exploitative ambitions.
Well yeah you opened with the Dyson quote and I agree with you that Orion would be a great asset to humanity but I sought to temper that with the other feasible technologies that are 'required' for the utilization of the resources that Orion puts within our reach. Technologies which will likely develop in an incrementally beneficial way without massive state investment.
I don't have time to read Dyson's view but I would put forward not proceeding with further investment and testing prior to the Partial Test Ban Treaty and its cancellation thereafter while potentially a misinformed and political decision hardly seems 'backroom', but I'm sure Dyson being in the midst of it would have something more to say.
bamp
you can't really discuss Orion without bringing up Dyson, but for the sake of debate you can leave him out of it altogether.
the quote is basically doing 2 things:
1.it compares Orion in importance with the findings of Galileo and subsequent censoring by the catholic institution, hence "the first time in modern history." I would agree with him that this is not really an opinion but an observation.
2.it implies the program was just as important as the microscope, the steam engine, the Manhattan project or the LHC, modern discoveries.
I would take the quote in that context, not the conspiratorial context. he's touching on foul play but the quote is really about the understated importance of the technology.
here's the thing about Orion; it's fucking cheap.
Travel time isn't what's stopping a Mars mission and we're not even doing that. And Orion is still useless for interstellar travel, you'd need like 75%c just to get to the nearest star in a human life span.
Right, like a important technological avenue deliberately not taken. The 'Church' won out against clear progress. Well like all alternative history situations I'm skeptical but all I can say is I would like to see it tested which doesn't seem likely with today political climate. I'v seen the cost projections and always thought they were optimistic. I'm not sure I'd hold Dyson to them especially when much more R&D is required but I lack the expertise to disagree so it may be a case of seeming too good to be true. However I would trust NASA or its NIAC if they thought that they could utilize Orion craft so cheaply and to such an effect to at least posit to the government for the relaxation of the Test Ban but I may overestimate their ambition.
The thing with small Orion craft is they require approximately the same amount of fissionable material as even the largest variants and produce comparable fallout due to the nature of nuclear weapons making them inefficient in comparison. Furthermore the state of US manufacturing of fissile material is not even close to what it was in 1960 so these industries would have to be revived correlating with a hopeful revival of the nuclear industry in general. To create this material the current nuclear stockpile could be dissembled. However the current price of a thermo-nuke warhead is about 1 million so the cost of manufacture of nuclear shaped charges would have to come down with mass production. Yes I'm keen but I don't think posting on Yea Forums will help even to change public opinion.
Orion is about payload capacity so for our purposes its true application is a 'first stage' lifting vehicle for reaching GEO with millions of tons of payload. sure you can take it anywhere easily as well, but many other propulsion systems can handle that OK (although none have been developed which will do so as quickly or cheaply as Orion.)
>Travel time isn't what's stopping a Mars mission
this is wrong.
travel time to Mars is prohibitive for current launch vehicles since it correlates with shielding requirements and thus fuel requirements and thus all design parameters.
>you'd need like 75%c
these speeds are not really possible. look into Hawking radiation and the Abraham–Lorentz–Dirac force. no one expects to reach another star in a normal lifetime without suspended animation of a sort.
notice the table I just posted, showing a manned Orion with 3.3%c cruise velocity and eta of 133 years
Not just travel time 'Non but you can't say all that payload capacity wouldn't make any transport between far more economical, promoting orbital infrastructure and development. Its like comparing horses with motor vehicles they both do the same thing but one is just better. Anyway a human lifetime travel is probably far to ambitions for many more human life times but not necessarily a great limitation. Exploration could be conducted by robotic means and I personally believe life extension/ cryogenics is well on the table. Anyway Orion could be useful in building the orbital infrastructure like the laser beam relays that will propel later craft at reasonable speeds, bypassing the tyranny of the rocket equation.
We are currently faced with a generation that doesn't have the balls to move out of their parent's house.
We certainly don't have the balls to move out to other planets.
Overpopulation will make this planet uninhabitable within the next century. By then, we're fucked.
Mankind will NEVER move out into the cosmos.
as you say there are many things about putting Orion into practice we won't know until it's done.
The clear advantage is that the propulsion system is very simple and has no valves, pressure chambers, cryogenic fuel, etc. just some basic mechanical engineering will be needed to flesh out the design and make it practical today.
repurposing of the nuclear stockpiles is, imo, a crucial and symbolic part of reviving Orion.
as for nuclear fallout, the lower altitude charges can be engineered to mostly project useful radiation and avoid fallout (predominantly fusion reactions.) direct radiation is actually a greater concern, but even this has simple solutions such as angling the deflector plate to spread radiation across a wider area safely or simply lofting the Orion the first few km using conventional rockets.
seems like the only way to make Orion feasible is to bring the entire nuclear industry up to speed alongside it. Not a bad idea and long overdue if I'm being honest.
I agree that Earth should be our focus, but we need a backup plan in case something goes wrong. Even if humanity builds a permanent settlement off the homeworld, it'll be decades at least until it becomes self sufficient. We need to start sooner rather than later.
We agree, now lets have sex Orion poster.
We've already moved into the cosmos. there are people in space at this moment.
also, speak for yourself.
I'll never understand how people like yourself can play into nihilism so directly as to ignore the world around you to suit your outlook
'Back up plans' is just plain unambitious. Imagine if 16th century Europe waited to 'fix things at home' before colonizing the Americas. The resources and technology we get from the cosmos will help us improve the lot of all humanity. ;)
only if it's in zero-g, loverboy
...
i think discussing people in space is unnecessary focus on a less important detail of progress in that area.
we are slower in progressing our tech than necessary even when completely disregarding the part about number of actual humans in space.
the economic reward for hauling astroids might be fairly impressive. and remote control should suffice there.
>"you just acquired more of metal X than accessible on the earths surface" levels of impressive
i do not understand how this hasnt already motivated some nation or super-corporation to do that investment.
b b but user it hasn't been tested what if 0 g bb retarded???
Orion is interesting, but in the amount of time it'll take to start seeing results we'll probably have reached the AI intelligence explosion. At that point things like Orion may be seen as primitive.
We need to prepare for society moving beyond human limitations. The longer we take the harder it'll be to survive the fallout.
Orion or the magic microwave engine or light sails. It doesn’t matter. People are not built for long term weightlessness and exposure to the radiation found in deep space. 2 years outside of Earths magnetic shield will leave astronauts drooling cancer bombs waiting to break bones in planetary gravity wells.
I assumed no one would get preggers. did i luck out??
I'm sorry Non but we can only prepare for the times we live in. Waiting for the singularity is entrusting too much to the future.
*yawn*
you think I'm talking about aliens, not the overworked dudes on the ISS don't you?
Depends what you mean by 'luck out'
Orion *is* primitive, and elegantly so.
With the money, any 1st world economy could build one in a year. I'm not exaggerating. See larry niven's Footfall for the premise of a realistic rushed construction of one such vehicle.
the alternative is cryogenic rockets, and that road is turning out to be long and expensive.
>People are not built for long term weightlessness
Spin it. Problem solved.
>and exposure to the radiation found in deep space.
Shield it. Problem solved.
the fucking orion project?
are you retarded, its terribly energy inefficient.
just use a nuclear powered engine.
The only reason radiation is an issue in space is because our launch vehicles have deltaV budgets and shielding is heavy. Bigger rockets solve the problem immediately and Orion makes it a non-issue since you're already shielding it from itself.
As for magnetic fields, that's why you start in LEO with large habitats and artificial gravity and hollow asteroids for further habitats.
No one will be weightless for long-term missions. A simple bolus design solves that issue with current long-haul vehicle designs.
You're not the only one to contemplate these issues, and far from the smartest to do so.
it's a debate, not a meme gallery. care to give a constructive opinion or are you going to be a non-participant?
Shield it with what?
The whole fucking point of space travel is having enough fuel to get the mass from point a to point c. Radiation shielding adequate snuff for deep space is going to be heavy. Very heavy.
But you go ahead and live in your fantasy world where engineering and cold equations can be easily solved.
Moron.
>we can only prepare for the times we live in
Wrong. We can have treaties on AI developed weapons, programs and laws for people made redundant by an AI workforce, restrictions on the development of AGIs, etc. Lets make sure that humanity isn't thrown into complete chaos or subjugation, or just killed outright.
...of course it's inefficient. That's the entire premise.
Point: The R&D is done.
No nuclear engine design has *any* R&D conducted on it.
I'm talking about things we know we can build, not fantasy engines that will take decades to get running and put on appropriate platforms.
You're an idiot.
user, you are the moron.
The Orion does away with mass budgets. That's the entire point of this thread.
Heres the thing.
the weight of those nuclear bombs is not worth their propulsion. as well as the constant EMP blasts from the bombs
someone feels intimidated.
yes it's super clean if you ignore all of the radio active waste, and meltdowns.
So clean!
you tell me, user. we're gonna have unprotected sex in zero-g?
on top of that. if you slowly convert the energy into power, e.g. ion engine using nuclear power. then boom. much more efficient. it would take longer to construct a vehicle capable of taking nuclear blasts than one using an ion thruster.
Look Non' when we make those lows the singularity wont be a distant concept we will be preparing not for the future but the imminent present.Tthe singularity is still some time of if ever.
good news is. fusion may be viable in the next 30 years! definetly on time to save us from global warming.
look into "fly ash"
a lot of that is made. all of it has to be disposed of. usually in landfills.
you tell me if you are ready to become patient 0 of space aids?
it's a laughably bad design by todays standard.
The problem with people like you is you're always waiting for some new scientific discovery when the solutions are actually just simple engineering.
You would have told the Wright Brothers to wait until carbon fiber composites were created because their wood and fabric designs were too fragile.
The Orion depends on a super massive shield between the nukes and the astronauts. Better plan on continuing the shield around the environmental capsule too.
Otherwise deal with this... Galactic cosmic radiation doesn't affect humans on Earth, because the planet's magnetosphere protects us. However, heavy ions such as iron and silicon that are found in deep space can damage the human body, because these atoms have a "greater mass compared to no-mass photons such as X-rays and gamma (γ)-rays, [which are] prevalent on Earth, as well as low-mass protons in outer space,"
You will need adequate shielding for everyday radiation. Then there is the odd barrage of solar storms and bursts of cosmic rays.
difference is. ionic engine from nuclear power isnt much of a leap. just connect A to B as you said, good old fashioned engineering.
Begone Nuke Tard. Do you think solar is clean, do you know how and of what the panels are made? Nuclear stands as the most versatile, safest and lowest carbon emission power source. Renewables are useful but nuclear is the most effective direct replacement to fossil. Also nuclear waste is a joke, its a regulatory problem created by anti-nuke activists.
I'm not sure how you believe this.
The reaction mass of an Orion is massively disproportionate to its payload.
The entire bomblet counts as 'reaction mass.'
I suggest you look at some designs of the Orion and make another appraisal on the significance of both its fuel mass and its ability to shield EMP. It has both considerations well in hand.
Is it inefficient? absolutely.
But it's proven. We built them.
Nuclear powered ion engines rated for launch vehicles are a pipe dream with decades of R&D needed to make them a reality.
Meanwhile, we have a proven, working tech that can get entirely self-sufficient manned moonbases established in 1 launch.
>1 launch
>good news is. fusion may be viable in the next 30 years! definetly on time to save us from global warming.
They were saying that in the 1980's too.
Yeah, I believe in magic too.
What of today's standards provide anything near a substitute for the cost and efficiency of Orion?
You know Orion works on all levels even with 60s technology. It was tested with conventional explosives. The only miracles needed here are political.
You're brainwashed.
Modern reactors are so clean and efficient they produce about .7kg-1.1kg of solid waste for an *entire human lifetime of power consumption*
Meltdowns are the fault of government agencies and NGOs who are barred from effectively handling the nuclear supply.
Read history.
We don't need those laws for the singularity, we aren't going to suddenly figure out AGIs by accident. We need it for the lead up when people are being made redundant by tech. we're going to see low education jobs go first, but early studies have shown that things like radiology could be next. It could take years to get the proper laws in place to take care of people who can't have a function in society anymore. That's not even touching what happens when robot sex replaces human reproduction.
Did I tell you to wait?
I just said be prepared to shit your guts out from radiation damage to your gastric system caused by long term exposure to magic ballots you can’t see not feel. Inability to absorb adequate nutrition means weakened space pioneers who won’t be in any condition to terraform a new planet.
Dude, why do you think the scientists talk about digging under the Moon’s surface when settling the planetoid? Because 10 feet of dirt protects against radiation. You gonna put ten feet of dirt around a deep space capsule?
My dude. We all know this. Shielding is easily achieved with wastewater or heavy metal. The pusher plate doubles as a mechanical device and the propulsion's shield.
Orion is so powerful mass is literally not a concern. You can put an entire WW2 battleship on the end of it if you really want to.
>someone feels intimidated.
Well.....Aren't you special.
This is pure fantasy. There are a million systems to integrate into a spacecraft's propulsion which influence the launch vehicle's entire conceptualization.
you're taking a piss on the reality that we'd need decades of dedicated, highly expensive research to build something Orion can do on a shoestring budget next year.
But you cant launch with ion 'Non so you will never get the massive payloads.
Orion starts from orbit.
Launching it from the bottom of Earth’s gravity well is impractical, not to mention the fuck all damage it would cause to the environment.
So how long is it gonna take to put your battleship in orbit?
You get more stupid with each post.
>compares Lunar regolith with spaceship radiation shielding
user, there are people much, much more intelligent than you who have already worked out these problems.
EMP is very easy to shield, you could use chicken wire. Non' I bet you NPP has better ISP/Delta-V/TWR than any ion you can point to.
>user, there are people much, much more intelligent than you who have already worked out these problems.
Also known as "every fuckin' engineering student who has graduated within the last 5 decades".
I agree to that part 'Non but either Orion is more expedient than you think or AI social changes closer than I think. AI laws and Orion can go hand in hand what I mean is that we should foucus on what we have and not be distracted by future concepts to the exclusion of all else.
Being patronizing never solved a known problem. You keep claiming the work has been done. Where are the footnotes? Where are the references?
Orion does not start from orbit (repeat x10), it is most useful launched from Earth. That was the entire premise of its development, to boost huge payloads to orbit.
>please, do basic research if you're this unfamiliar with the topic.
There are numerous solutions to radiation, and no it would not damage the environment after about 2-4km height. like I said, below this altitude there are several solutions.
The battleship comment was a reference to a classic piece of hard science fiction you've never read in which the Battleship Iowa's main guns are attached to an Orion vehicle.
You're an idiot.
'Non the spacecraft is going to have enough fuel, water and systems to wrap around the habitation capsule to protect it from radiation. Especially with Orion which can take thousands of tons to orbit.
launches Orion over a city
everyone dies
launches Orion over the pacific ocean
nobody dies
aint it funny how that works
user, just for Mars, here is a list of manned programs in which astronaut safety was considered paramount. Each of these programs had shielding against radiation as a main aspect of mission and vehicle design:
1 NASA Design reference missions (2000+)
2 MARPOST (2000–2005)
3 ESA Aurora programme (2001+)
4 ESA/Russia plan (2002)
5 USA Vision for Space Exploration (2004)
6 Mars Society Germany – European Mars Mission (EMM) (2005)
7 China National Space Administration (CNSA) (2006)
8 The One-Way Trip Option (2006); Mars to Stay (2006)
9 NASA Design Reference Mission 5.0 (2007)
10 NASA Design Reference Mission Architecture 5.0 (2009)
11 NASA Austere Human Missions to Mars (2009)
12 USA's Mars orbit by the mid-2030s (2010)
13 Martian Frontier (2007–2011)
14 Russian mission proposals (2011)
15 2-4-2 concept (2011–2012)
16 Boeing Conceptual Space Vehicle Architecture (2012)
17 Mars One (2012)
18 Inspiration Mars Foundation (2013)
19 Boeing Affordable Mission (2014)
20 NASA's Journey to Mars: Pioneering Next Steps in Space Exploration (2015-)
21 SpaceX Mars transportation infrastructure (2016-)
22 ITS launch vehicle
23 BFR (Big Falcon Rocket)
24 Mars Base Camp (2016)
25 Deep Space Transport (2017)
research the topic and I'll never be patronizing.
Space travel involves medical science along with engineering.
space.com
NASA is working on the issue but hasn’t solved it yet.
>It’s important to consider how radiation will impact astronauts on longer space missions
The article relates to a study on mice. It's a new data point, it doesn't mean radiation shielding is no longer viable by some magical reasoning.
Are you trying to discount all space travel in general?
This thread is specifically about the Orion or alternatives to it.
dude, this is a teacher's guide for educating on how radiation works with classroom experiments. Just stop.
basically SpaceX's ambitions, to be fair.
Tell the average person that if they were hit by the amount of radiation that a 60W light bulb puts out in a year in just one millisecond that they would die immediately.
Enjoy the lulz as they freak out and eye that light bulb with suspicion.
>2019
>still using the term "space aids"
spaids has been around since the 90's user
You fuckheads talk like HS students. I thought I’d give you HS materials
user we have reasonable confidence that anyone undertaking any of theses missions will survive and go on to live a healthy life. What more can you ask for? Yes medical science is a concern of any mission but engineering can ensure crew safety. Orion is just a useful tool. The technology exists to preserve the crew for the duration of the mission. I don't see the problem. If any technology has the capacity to protect the crew (which it does) Orion is the most feasible platform involving some of the the shortest travel times and most delta-V and thus limiting exposure. Orion need not be manned or take people to other planets, sure the speed is nice but the real game changer is the payload to orbit.
>mfw explaining anything nuclear, from a CANDU reactor to the Orion to the average person...
we might talk like Hot Sexy students, but those materials were neither
>complains about feeling patronized
>is straight up condescending
bipolar type 2 confirmed?
Do you understand we have never sent any living creature into deep space for a prolonged amount of time? Testing proposed radiation exposures on mice is SOP. Would you rather it be 100% computer modeling?
savage
>never sent any living creature into deep space for a prolonged amount of time
are you certain of that? Because I launched a hamster a few years ago and it didn't come back
Me stating the format of a research paper is not discounting a method. I'm saying it's only vaguely comparable to the reality of building and flying a craft with people inside of it.
Heck man, eveyone on the ISS knows they're most likely going to get cancer in proportion to their mission duration. Again, that's because the ISS was built with a very strict weight limit.
There are specific reasons we haven't sent even basic bacteria into space, you should read up on those reasons. It is a huge consideration for Mars rovers, especially.
Pointing out someone depends upon a patronizing tone to score a point is not the same as feeling patronized.
You’re just trying. I get it.
Personally, I LOVE computer modeling. I have some vintage centerfolds of the Apple IIe, still sexy as fuck...
Ad hominem
Shoving a hamster up your ass isn’t a mission to deep space no matter what you told Mr Lemmiwinks.
bump
>space station
>very strict weight limit
guffaw
Again, do you care to be on-topic or are you going to continue debating radiation exposure with an obvious lack of knowledge?
If you have nothing to say about Orion it's probably best you stop putting your foot in your mouth.
So, you’re not trying?
Do you want encouragement or not?
I’ve got a trophy here for you for participating!
not OP, user. Your debilitating lunacy is showing.
>I’ve got a trophy here for you for participating!
>I've got your participation trophy right here!
learn 2 succinct
The ISS was built with over 40 seperate launches.
It's rocket science dude, it's fine that you aen't a resident expert. Just don't pretend you are...
bruh, things are weightless in space. WHY WOULD THEY BE CONCERNED ABOUT WEIGHT??? theres this thing called ZERO-G, and its everywhere you aren't.
>itreallydobelikethatsometimes
It's called microgravity user, Zero-G is a misnomer reeeeeee
>the cosmos has been a goal for humanity since before we even knew what planets were
Has it, though?
Well, wait a fucking minute. The fish die if the people die.
just like Zero-D is a misnomer for your microdick?
Nuclear fallout
I used "goal" loosely. Ambition, more like. It's been a symbol of attainment and all cultures have referenced visiting it in or out of our corporeal bodies as a means to transcend mortal/earthly struggles. A place where the human condition doesn't apply.
As for the fish, they are protected by one of the best radiation shields available, water. Fallout particles are not an issue if engineered correctly, so you only have to worry about xrays and gammas. Damage to wildlife is negligible, especially compared with modern industrial practices...
You keep talking about Orion as if it’s the holy grail of space travel. Reality is that you have been traveling through space all your life. You just can’t get past your enthusiasm for an engineering idea to realize that the whole point is getting your cargo to its destination alive.
Yeah yeah. Orion has been detailed in half a dozen science fiction books. Larry Niven, Jerry Pournelle (who I met years ago), and a variety of pulp magazine writers have detailed the idea multiple times. The idea still depends upon setting off a nuke while you are sitting on it. The only difference betweeen Orion and a Nazi pulse jet is the choice of fuel. It is not an elegant design. It is a brute force design. The ancient Chinese philosopher Wan Hu did the exact same thing as Orion during the Ming dynasty when he put insane amounts of explosives under a wooden chair. He must have made it to space because nothing was left on the ground to find after he lit the fuse. As for claims that on planetary surface nuclear explosions and close proximity to surface air bursts don’t present environmental issues? You are an idiot. There are valid reasons why above ground nuclear testing was ceased. Setting off dozens of smiles to get a mass out of the gravity well is going to wreak havoc with fallout and weather patterns.
The bottom line is that Orion champions are short sighted and fail to recognize that most sci-fi books detailing the use of the technology are story’s about escape with no thought of going back to the point of origin.
>you have been traveling through space all your life
They experimented with fission, fusion, hydrogen, thermonuclear and fusion-coupled fission bombs just during the Orion's development phase.
So no fallout is not a concern. there are several ways to negate it by using weak, optimized bomblets and using the nasty ones only above the shock layer, where solar wind can grab it and blow it off.
its crazy the shit people do in their spare time. The most experimenting I've done was a MMF threesome...
We have however sent probes that have accurately recorded radiation levels, we know how these levels effect humans and we know how to shield against them. Radiation is less mysterious and insidious than you seem to think.
>You are an idiot
Imagine trying to be this lofty, but resorting to childish insults halfway through the idea.
1. objectively look at the way modern nuclear devices work
2. realize 'fallout' is a mechanism of weapons
3. realize this is a propulsion system, you can have bomblets without fallout
4. profit
I know this is posing some sort of existential crisis for you, but it's not that difficult to understand.
>probes that have accurately recorded radiation levels
well then I've been using them all wrong...
>There are specific reasons we haven't sent even basic bacteria into space
wat, you know they sent themselves. They recovered viable bacteria from the equipment sent on the Apollo missions exposed to vacuum that suffered prolonged exposure to radiation and vacuum as well as numerous deliberate exposure experiments. I don't know what your talking about
I figured the water would protect them, since it's an entire ocean. But you give that extremely conditional statement, where the fish are safe if the Orion rocket isn't shitting out things it's not supposed to be shitting out. If engineered correctly...
I'm guessing you don't want engineers and flight coordinators to be so hyped, that they miss something critical? What's the acceptable margin of error here? What would a misaligned or temperature-warped plate do?
Do I really have to explicitly say "intentionally sent" just for you to not rebuff with nonsense?
There is well-established protocol for disinfecting all spacecraft and we know it is not perfect. We know every single vehicle sent to space has bacteria on it, since you can't kill them all.
What I'm talking about is intentionally sending bacterial cultures to other bodies, which is frowned upon for fear of seeding.
very trite...
bumPerr
>They recovered viable bacteria from the equipment sent on the Apollo missions exposed to vacuum that suffered prolonged exposure to radiation
I jerked off on a meteorite once
You’re using “existential” wrong. I know I’m being lofty when I say that but I get a hard on being lofty.
>They experimented with fission, fusion, hydrogen, thermonuclear and fusion-coupled fission bombs just during the Orion's development phase.
>So no fallout is not a concern. there are several ways to negate it by using weak, optimized bomblets and using the nasty ones only above the shock layer, where solar wind can grab it and blow it off.
as stated above... these are nuclear reactions, they are just about the most repeatable things imaginable. You get the charge right and the shape about right and it annihilates.
>most repeatable things imaginable
this is the song that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends, some people started singing it, not knowing what it was, and then they just kept singing it forever just because this is the song that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends, some people started singing it, not knowing what it was, and then they just kept singing it forever just because this is the song that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends, some people started singing it, not knowing what it was, and then they just kept singing it forever just because this is the song that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends, some people started singing it, not knowing what it was, and then they just kept singing it forever just because this is the song that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends, some people started singing it, not knowing what it was, and then they just kept singing it forever just because this is the song that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends, some people started singing it, not knowing what it was, and then they just kept singing it forever just because this is the song that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends, some people started singing it, not knowing what it was, and then they just kept singing it forever just because this is the song that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends, some people started singing it, not knowing what it was, and then they just kept singing it forever just because this is the song that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends, some people started singing it, not knowing what it was, and then they just kept singing it forever just because this is the song that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends, some people started singing it, not knowing what it was, and then they just kept singing it forever just because...
I'm making fun of how you're tying disparate concepts into a thread to discount a propulsion system. how fucking obvious is it that this *isn't* an existential crisis?
Lol, no sense of irony at all.
brute force is the epitome of elegance...
>found the engineer
>ou're creating a new situation for humans where you can actually escape the socioeconomic funnel
Jesus. This is astoundingly naive. Who do you think is going to gund this supposed "2-3 decades" of infrastructure buildout? Taxpayers? Of course not. Corporations would be the only feasible source of funding and they're only going to do that if guaranteed future remuneration. The very same system that creates the "socioeconomic funnel" on this spinning rock.
Sorry I misunderstood. Well anyway the viability of Orion isn't really related to the potential for ecological contamination. That is more an ethical question and one that applies too all spacecraft and a chance I personally am ready to take.
I’m sorry. You want me to take you seriously?
Now that... is ironic.
Who the fuck do you think subsidizes private corporations?
Jesus f Christ.
I'm sorry but what the fuck is this?
There hasn't been a discussion of this nature with posts typed so eloquently for months. And I'm not exaggerating.
Yea Forums didn't suddenly get its old users back. This is bot spam just like the fucking yellow spam, just like the andy spam, just like the trump spam, just like the porn spam. Get the fuck out
as long as it's this one and not the god awful dream theater cover
If something goes wrong then we don't deserve a backup plan, seeing as how that thing going wrong has been 100% preventable since the seventies
Fuck I had a great comment typed out and hit one wrong key...anyway.
Orion is not sophisticated, but thats part of its elegance and what makes it such a powerful and acheivaable technology
> There are valid reasons why above ground nuclear testing was ceased
There was, mainly that they were mostly used to make better weapons for the destruction of humanity. Here we hope to make cleaner bomblets to propel humanity's future. Estimates of the contamination have ranged from 1-0 statistical cancer deaths much less than many industrial processes depending on launch site. The fallout is comparable between any weight Orion craft, making bigger craft 'cleaner'. I don't care much about Scifi only the utility of this technology.
You're assuming my statement implies space can magically convert people's ideology.
It cannot.
Large numbers of people living in space requires a tremendous amount of resources to keep them there and viable as workers, in investment and maintenance.
It is conducive to higher societal function and extreme individual independence from traditional political mechanisms.
This is all about large habitats housing up to a million (at the absolute upper end,) not resorts for elites. Once you have that many people, they become self-determinant in a which is very hard to undermine.
And that's what Orion makes possible, huge habitats.
Correct me if I'm wrong... but when I think of the kind of detonation intended for engineering purposes, and not an uncontrolled detonation or a full-on weaponized nuclear reaction, I think about things bigger than particles, even still. It can't be that flawless, if you need to ensure that the size and charge are exactly what they need to be. Repeatable? Nuclear reactions are pretty much more repeatable than most everything else, there's no denying that. But a whole detonation? On that scale, it must matter. That's magnitudes greater than the size of particles.
If something can go wrong because of some wonky shaping... that's the part where I hesitate. It's still a nuclear process. The wrong kind of shaped charge? Bad?
Who's going to do QA on those charges? If a couple get dinged, what then? Efficiency loss? An acceptable emission of gamma? I'm hearing a lot about what happens when things go right. What is the worst case scenario? Besides an Orion rocket just tipping over and detonating its yield all at once, as if it were an act of God?
Cleaner bomblets.
Kek
Let me guess, you believe in clean coal and water cooled nuclear power plants, too.
Oh, my sides. On a serious note. I’m typing from my phone and it’s killing me how many fracking times auto correct and a shitty keyboard kills my flow of thoughts, so I feel ya.
OP here, i am an oldfag but I post futurism regularly. idk why this thread got more attn. than usual but we're just doing our thing.
while you're here why don't you enjoy yourself and get up to speed with us...
No such thing as a “controlled detonation” with Orion. You have a massive shield on one side and open air on the other. It’s basically having your teacher hit you in the ass with a big paddle... not that teachers do that sort of thing anymore.
Look all bombs will make some fallout, minus theoretical pure fusion or antimatter weapons but cleaner bombs are certainly possible simply by the removal of the fissile/fissionable uranium tamper making the reaction far more fusion powered if less efficient. Now if I could get a coal plant to only kill one statistical person and made no greenhouse gas emission or long lasting contamination I'd call that clean.
Now I haven't done the math but I'm going to posit that its cleaner and safer than an equal amount of payload launched by conventional means.
these are designed to only project exhaust upwards to the pusher plate.
y'all should read the actual documentation they produced testing Orion, the details about the explosive to radioactive material is fascinating.
Nah man.
There's a notable resurgence of "normal" Yea Forums threads - along with the yellow spam it's just too much of a coincidence.
Posts look like they're following marketing analytics too. Poorly I might add.
Somethins up
Humans need to “explore” what their purpose is. If the purpose is selfishness and basically an extension of what we have on earth now, fuck it. Why explore and potentially migrate beyond?
incorrect. the charge is shaped and direct radiation bounces against it before going anywhere else.
Good post. Finally. Kek.
I am aware of it too. You'd have to be a little dense not to be.
stay safe user
I know what this means.
Agreed. The human purpose needs to grow beyond “what’s in it for me”.
Well, if Orion isn't turning into a giant fireball of shrapnel and fallout, I consider that "controlled". Plus, my whole understanding is that the detonation is being focused... I don't know about you, but to me, that demonstrates a lot more control than "oops, it went off", or, "kiss your ass goodbye".
I was told fallout particles weren't an issue assuming standard engineering practices, first and foremost. Don't go telling me Orion actually destroys everything around it in a several thousand mile radius during standard operation.
Who's telling the truth?
>charge is shaped and direct radiation bounces against it before going anywhere else.
Da fuck? I’m gonna assume that “it” is the shield.
With that being the case, the only way to direct the explosive blast (not radiation) in the direction of the shield is to have a bell shaped enclosure (basically a rocket nozzle) surrounding the bomblet.
That’s not how Orion works.
The shield itself is going to create fallout as ablation occurs.
Or what? Did Orion engineering create a substance impervious to a nuke?
... did they?
Consider it is a spacecraft. You check every millimeter of it before launch, hundreds or thousands of times.
Worst case scenario, one bomblet goes off in the magazine. This would only happen in the feed chute, since the bombs would be electronically primed or even mated to their main explosive element just before firing.
depending on your stage of flight, that might be .2kilotons at sea level or 5-7kt in space.
at sea level, it would be a failure for the vehicle with an emergency crew abort but there would be no chain reaction, that's not how nuclear devices work.
any higher and the crew would probably be killed but it's hard to say.
there's very little to go wrong in terms of bursting and vibrating, unlike other rocket engines.
>its ze jews
>danger danger look behind you
>pic related
Only saying it's too much of a coincidence. Settle down fellas..
you guys don't understand how nuclear fission and fusion differ. fusion produces no fallout.
Orion bomblets are primed by fission but are fusion devices.
>With special designs of the nuclear explosive Ted Taylor estimated that fission product fallout could be reduced tenfold, or even to zero, if a pure fusion explosive could be constructed instead. A 100% pure fusion explosive has yet to be successfully developed, according to declassified US government documents, although relatively clean PNEs (Peaceful nuclear explosions) were tested for canal excavation by the Soviet Union in the 1970s with 98% fusion yield in the Taiga test's 15 kiloton devices, 0.3 kilotons fission, which excavated part of the proposed Pechora–Kama Canal.
That's comforting.
Oh, I know my fission and fusion. I just don't know my Orion. For example, I wasn't aware that the bomblets were primed by fission, while ultimately being fusion devices.
Yes, my keyboard ate the word "shield"
Look at the picture. That's exactly how it works.
They aren't literal bombs, it's a propulsion system...
gotcha. Yes, fusion at sea level but you could carry dirtier fission bombs for huge yields in deep space as well.
>contained nuclear explosion powered Helios appears
and you thought Orion is too hot to travel
Shaped charges exist for conventional and nuclear explosives user, the explosion can be focused into a 'beam' with correct engineering.
based user
was thinking same thing...
Well its not really a concern, sure some radioactivity might result but its really an insignificant dose, compared to say natural gas extraction or whatever, it is also dispersed by altitude so not concentrated. You could also design a pusher plate from a material that does not undergo neutron activation or that any products arnt that long lived or even one that does not ablate but these are far larger. As long as neutron activation is minimized and no significant amount of the bombs original nuclear material remains its really quite safe.
i'm just jazzed he said we were 'eloquent'
Yeah all existing bombs are fission primed and the most powerful 'dirty' thermonuclear' bombs still get most of their energy from the rapid boosted fission of the tamper with the neutrons provided by the fusion component from which they are named. However, the fissile tamper is not necessary and fusion stages once ignited are theoretically infinitely scale-able with more fusion stages. Its relay quite fascinating. I would recommend Scott Manley's 'Going Nuclear' Youtube playlist.
If the shaped Charge is held at the correct angle. Is it a magic force that holds the bomblet at the correct orientation?
they discovered a thin coating of oil protects against the blast by scattering heat. a graphite oil on the pusher plate protected 100% against ablation.
the plate only needs to be thick enough to distribute force without failing, which is awesome.
the stability question. yes, that was one of the chief concerns tested. the bomblet remains perpendicular since there is no turbulence acting on it youtube.com
Well they should be propelled from the craft in the correct orientation (this way towards pusher plate) and inertia should want to keep them that way until they detonate. The charge should be roughly symmetrical with most of the energy projected from the 'poles' of the weapon the shaped tamper only has to hold for a tiny fraction of a second like conventional nukes. Really 'Non i'm not shitting you nuclear shaped charges exist. I don't really know what you mean 'Non the bomblett is obliterated before they can move of axis much.
good thred
Noo bump damn you. I wasted too much of my life here!
Its a shame there isn't much good Orion art
>1st time in history
What the fuck was the Space Shuttle then?
Compared to Saturn 5, it had less payload, was inherently less safe (and to this day has the worst safety record of any orbital transport), cost more to launch and the program never even tried to address it's fatal flaws before a fuckup, only after.
There's a few 3d renderings on DA but most are departures from the designs worked through development and shown to Kennedy
Different user made comment about ‘non’
I could try to interpret it for you.
While I might debate the finer points if it weren't, this was well before the shuttle was being developed so still an earlier pivoting point.
It would be wacky if we spent all this time fucking about with advanced propulsion just to come full circle back to Orion in another 50 years. I wonder what the future holds.
I was just confused by what user meant by
> "Is it a magic force that holds the bomblet at the correct orientation?"
As far as I know it doesn't really need to be 'held' as long as its still facing the right way as the detonation is so brief.
>As far as I know it doesn't really need to be 'held' as long as its still facing the right way as the detonation is so brief.
Envision a space capsule being propelled by someone throwing sticks of dynamite out the back of the ship. It’s not “bam”..... “bam”..... “bam”
It’s bam bam bam bam bam!
Now, the case has been made that a shaped nuclear charge can be used for best efficiency. That means each charge must be oriented in the same direction. Now to do this the drive not only has to shove a charge out the back end and have it point at a specific direction every single time, but the previous explosion must not interfere with that orientation despite the fact that the new bomblet is between the ship and the previous explosion. This my reference to “magic”.
Can the user who keeps saying this is super simple explain how this is to be done?
It's not an issue because there are no forces acting on the bomblet once out of atmosphere. In atmosphere, you can do napkin calculations and see a bomblet would have enough momentum to overcome any turbulence effects in atmo. No, I haven't done them but like I said that was a preliminary concern. Momentum is enough for drag concerns.
You're also mentioning the possibility of eddy currents or debris or something in the wake of the ship in space but this is unrealistic. The bomblets are firing every second or 2 in space and the exhaust gas dissipates very quickly as the ship continues forward, leaving potential debris (which would be dust) far behind since it is flying in all directions except for the pusher plate.
user, I don't think this is a serious problem. The pushing effect from the nuclear blast is very brief, hence the pusher plate to spread out the impact. I dont think that with the correct spacing of the blasts and the bomblets there will be any significant off axis detonations. If you fire the bomblets with enough velocity like bullets behind you they should fly strait and true. If the detonations did cause too much interference in the atmosphere you could always just use non shaped charges for accent and cop the efficiency loss just like you do for the cleaner bombs.
i did post the same reply i had saved from a couple years back, but no, i am a reel hooman beeing.
>Everything environmentalists want to accomplish with wind and solar they can accomplish with much smaller footprint and a much more reliable power grid.
What is the footprint of Chernobyl and Fukushima?
Do you know that nuclear waste dumping grounds are so deadly for such a long period of time that humans have commissioned anthropologists, fiction writers, sociologist, scientists among many other experts to get together and design a way to prevent future civilisations 10'000 years ahead from visiting contaminated sites? Using pictograms, symbology, folk lore, nursery rhymes and actual religions because these are the things that have a chance of lasting long enough to survive 10'000 years of evolution and change? Designed to communicate with civilisations that could be as far removed from us as Neanderthals are? Google "Long-time nuclear waste warning messages"
This place is a message... and part of a system of messages ...pay attention to it!
Sending this message was important to us. We considered ourselves to be a powerful culture.
This place is not a place of honor... no highly esteemed deed is commemorated here... nothing valued is here.
What is here was dangerous and repulsive to us. This message is a warning about danger.
The danger is in a particular location... it increases towards a center... the center of danger is here... of a particular size and shape, and below us.
The danger is still present, in your time, as it was in ours.
The danger is to the body, and it can kill.
The form of the danger is an emanation of energy.
The danger is unleashed only if you substantially disturb this place physically. This place is best shunned and left uninhabited.[1]
>no forces
No forces? You’ve got a bomb between an explosion and a spaceship! The explosion cause the ship to move off and you throw another bomb into the turbulence of the previous explosion!
Well, I’m going home and going to bed. Shift change here at the nuclear power station happens at 8:00.
Goodnight everyone.
Chernobyl
>operated with impudence and built by a corrupt industry
>to save money
Fukushima
>built with blatant disregard for geography and with zero redundant systems
>to save money
the only problem with nuclear power is that bureaucracies ruin its potential by under-valuating it.
kind of the same way the atom was weaponized by a militarized government at the moment we understood it.
there's no doubt this stuff is important and you must plan for any eventuality, like you said. you have to be responsible, these are not toys. But they are not weapons and we are not lawless.
later based user.
Space is a near vacuum. This is nearly a ton of steel hurtled with spin out of a steel gun, encountering maybe some thousand atoms of rarefied gas per cubic meter.
this isn't just an 'explosion,' it's a nuclear detonation. there's no smoke and fireball. and again, we're in space for the large yield ones.
and to clarify, there is never going to be an explosion happening while a bomb is fired. there is ample time between the events, much more than needed honestly.
They experimented and settled on nuclear, so - fallout
Nuclear fusion produces no fallout.
modern fission-primed fusion demolition devices have a 93% fusion rate, which can be increased.
this is basic stuff... you should read the thread before commenting again
oops, I meant 98%
>98%
>With special designs of the nuclear explosive Ted Taylor estimated that fission product fallout could be reduced tenfold, or even to zero, if a pure fusion explosive could be constructed instead. A 100% pure fusion explosive has yet to be successfully developed, according to declassified US government documents, although relatively clean PNEs (Peaceful nuclear explosions) were tested for canal excavation by the Soviet Union in the 1970s with 98% fusion yield in the Taiga test's 15 kiloton devices, 0.3 kilotons fission, which excavated part of the proposed Pechora–Kama Canal.
Not if the ship is taking off from the surface of a planet. It will take repeated explosions one after another.
Me? I said leave from orbit but some other user was going “Nooo, it’s always been blast off from planet surface!!!”
Please, mofo
>hears the word atom
>screams
Yes yes we've all heard this shit, the reason it get so much mileage is because its 'deep' and artistic not necessary or useful and really only reinforces its anti-nuclear message. Its not relay a design concern anymore than putting up obelisks in areas regularly contaminated with arsenic, asbestos or unsafe ground water due to natural or human means. Any future primitives capable yet dumb enough to go digging around in near depleted nuclear waste have much bigger problems than an elevated rate of cancer, such as being short lived fucking primitives.
> Chernobyl
Probably a few hundred early deaths due to cancer caused by soviet incompetence and exacerbated by misinformation and cover ups, much of the contaminated produce could have been disposed off.
> Fukushima
Almost no impact, no statistical cancer deaths, exposure exacerbated by a chaotic and hasty evacuation despite procedure to stay indoors. Problem caused by Japanese negligence despite being warned by the (American) NRC in 1990 that the set up was unsafe.
> Honorable mentions: Windscale fire, Three Mile Island.
The first was probably the worse but that was a incredibly shonky weapons plant and the later also had no lasting effects.
Ok lets talk about footprint. Outdoor air pollution, mostly smog which dirty power generation and industry including the massive mining and refining needed to produce non-energy dense/efficient renewable kills over 4 million people a year according to the WHO. Not to mention the massive amounts of radiation just blown out of smoke stacks at fossil power plants, far more than any nuclear disaster in history when added. This is just some of the current cost of our ways. Safer/safe nuclear options have been developed that could end our reliance on fossil fuels and rapidly provide more energy and produce less greenhouse gasses than renewable ever could in a more reliable and scale-able fashion.
To be continued...
Why the FUCK haven't you joined this server yet?
https:\\discordapp.com\invite\w47xFGg
n
user repeated is relative the pusher plate still needs to get back in position we are talking some seconds, plenty of time for the pushing to stop and the turbulence be safe for another detonation especially as I said properly aerodynamic/ propelled like a bullet or spherical unshaped explosive .
user, you keep making assumptions I already said were dead wrong.
>1
>explosion
>at
>a
>time
they crunched the numbers and tested it almost 70 years ago. modern simulations will give you the same results. it's a proven design, they shopped it to the US Air Force
this is an important point. the plate has a cycling motion to distribute the impulse from the blast.
Underrated
>I am become death, destroyer of worlds
sex magick cult confirmed
Furthermore nuclear waste is a political problem exacerbated by fear not an engineering one. Plenty of locations exist for safe permanent storage of waste, sealed in salt rock in mines, under the deserts of Australia, in any deep geologically stable area of which their are numerous, such as the currently under construction Onkalo repository in Finland. Any of these facilities could take the worlds waste. The thing with nuclear the more infrastructure you build the more you can close the waste cycle. One reactor may not be able to breed and burn all its potentially fissionable 'waste products' while that may be adequate to fuel another design. The miracle of nuclear 'transmutation', waste not want not.
Many of these sites have reached the end of their lives and been sealed and none I know have any of the foreboding messages or structures of doom brewed up sociologists as a mental exercise. Its just not necessary.
Look the main benefit of Orion is the payload to orbit otherwise its just heavy as fuck. While you take the stairs I'll ride it all the way from the ground.
'Non not all radiation and fallout is created equal, 1 cigarette VS 10 years in the coal mines. Its the dose that makes the poison.
it's the jews, stupid
we'd be among the stars already if we werent dealing with humankind's parasite
Why the FUCK haven't you joined this server yet?
https:\\discordapp.com\invite\w47xFGg
t
Space elevator is the way to go.
Gods, you keep making excuses for your own inadequacies. It’s read quite pathetic. Do you kick puppies to make up for the size of your rute?
Maybe but its a lot further away possibly over a century by my unoptimistic guess and currently untested. There will probably be one on the moon before there is one around Earth.
>rute
jewish words
disagrees
must be jewish
it's going to need decades of development and there are no guarantees. You're better off with a space catapult if you want to go non-chemical, but again that's a whole new branch of development.
Work on Orion is done, it's ready to fly and is ready for modern crew-rating.
elevators would be better for the future, when transit down to earth is becoming needed for industrial material coming from Luna and other bodies.
Opps wrong post
the jews did this
>full circle
if we ever have a honest military in space, it will disproportionately feature Orion drives surely. even if we have venting artificial black hole drives, the nuclear pulse is just so effective for its mass and cost that it will stay relevant.
they are perfect for situations demanding extreme performance and generate very little waste heat.
it's the jews, stupid
you dont know shit
read and learn
nice propaganda, nuclearjew
how's your tumor growing?
try to stay on topic, user with highly predictable opinions and no extolling virtues
Its pronounced jewclear
Fukushima. Government inadequacy huh? Didnt have anything to do with an earthquake and tsunami? I must've read a different book.
>let's give the jews more power to enslave and ruin us all
brilliant
I already talked about this above, you should read the thread if you want to have a constructive discussion.
The Japanese government was highly negligent in overseeing the site's construction.
Its backups were unprotected from flooding and had numerous issues caused by funding constraints.
The entire disaster would have been averted had its diesel backups been either isolated or waterproofed. An extremely obvious measure against an extremely obvious danger.
ackshully the only survivors from heavy cherno-radiation followed a fasting program, liquid and solid
>you're
it's your
your an idiot
They were warned by the NRC in 1990 that the back up generators on the ground floor in a seismically active coastal area was unsafe and did nothing. That seems like inadequacy to me. Ok the one two punch of a massive tsunami earthquake that made the meltdown look like a small radioactive drop in the ocean didn't help BUT THEY WERE WARNED.
nice bait, idiot.
>i watched Chernobyl
>now I'm an expert radiologist!
i didnt
i watched a fasting expert on jewtube
no idea if what he reported is tru but i tend to belieb it
i never fasted liquids but fasting is amazing
thing is you do need a source of life, fasting is good because you have fresh earth air and sunlight
>fasts
>posts big tiddy bitches on /b
ok...
>Wan Hu
Wan Hu (万户 or 万虎) is a legendary Chinese official — supposedly of 2000 BC, or else the middle Ming dynasty (16th century) — who was described in 20th century sources as the world's first "astronaut" by being lifted by rockets into outer space. The crater Wan-Hoo on the far side of the Moon is named after him.
>do you have amoon crater named after you? i didnt think so, loooser
OP here. 250 posts in, I have yet to hear a convincing argument against the Orion.
for immediate alleviation of our current problems with finding a capable launch vehicle and also for rapid escalation of space exploration and exploitation, it seems to be the only realistic option for the short term.
>You are an idiot.
its you're
you're are an idiot
Orion is gay and jewish
Debunked
>PNEs (Peaceful nuclear explosions)
you've been lied to all your life
the eearth is flat
WAKANDA!!
what took you so long, baseless user? was expecting you hours ago
they did that because they were family men or satanic homos
in many cases both
hahahahahaha
*yawn*
so fucken predictable
Orion is no good for getting off earth, the fallout from regular, routine launches would be insane.
But there is a solution...
dude, you ignored the whole thread. Orion produces virtually no fallout in atmosphere
It produces a hell of a lot, actually. Where the fuck did you read that bullshit?
Stop right there criminal scum, we spent all thread arguing that its not that bad. Read a little you might learn something. Launching the Orion conventionally is wasting its massive payload to orbit capacity one of its main advantages.
not to mention you'd never need routine launches with an Orion. just one can manage 20 complete ISS
No, you'll always need routine launches, or no one is getting off earth.
You people know jack shit about this subject.
It's a fission primed fusion device. Full stop, end of 'debate'
You should learn how modern nuclear devices work, but you don't have to. They experimented with fusion bomblets in the 1950s with the Orion test models as well.
So, my question is where did you read your "bullshit"?
I already learned how modern nuclear devices work a long, long time ago.
Read up on the amount of radiation in the atmosphere from one Orion launch. Or don't. I don't care.
the entirety of the remaining nuclear fuel would take up less than a 100m cube of space, we could litterally blast it into fucking space for about 1.5 billion a year
there has never been a full size Orion launch. Point me to your 'source' because I believe you are lying.
They calculated how much they would produce back in the late 50s.
Orion payload to LEO 6,100 tons
Soyuz Payload to LEO 9 tons
Saturn V payload to LEO 160 tons
Sure you want something smaller for unplanned supply runs, but no user.
Orion does it all at once.
what about all of the fallout and EMPs?
But the main unsolved problem for a launch from the surface of the Earth was thought to be nuclear fallout. Freeman Dyson, group leader on the project, estimated back in the 1960s that with conventional nuclear weapons each launch would statistically cause on average between 0.1 and 1 fatal cancers from the fallout.
Freeman Dyson. Disturbing the Universe.
Because I don't want to keep parroting what I said all thread. Now this risk could be minimized with cleaner bomb design and launch a isolated launch
oof
The largest 8,000,000 ton model Orion produces the same amount of fallout as the smallest ~ 30 ton variant. This would allow you to jump start orbital industry minimizing launches. Its way safer than conventional for a similar payload.
I have read all firsthand subject material and references from the original program.
You're cherrypicking projections for pure fission devices.
They had fusion bombs with very low emissions even then, and they discuss using these at low altitude all the time during development of Orion.
Don't pretend to be an expect, we see right through you.
Respectfully,
>Learn how modern nuclear devices work and APPLY that knowledge.
>read the thread user
You don't see shit. Pure fission devices? They never bothered with that in the first place.
Imagine one of these launching every week, for decades...
EMP is a problem for unsheilded civilian equipment, it wasn't a concern in the 60s but wont affect the ship. It can however be minimized with careful planning, location and a precise understanding of magnetosphere conditions.
Its true user no one has launched an 8,000,000 ton Orion but as stated in thread were looking at > 0.1 statistical caner deaths as calculated by Dyson in the 60s in 'Disturbing the Universe'. This could be reduced today with careful consideration and better bomb design.
They experimented with fission, fusion, hydrogen, thermonuclear and fusion-coupled fission bombs just during the Orion's development phase.
Again, what is your source?
You're blowing smoke.
except you don't have to because that would never happen.
The Orion is a kickstart, not a permanent solution for human space access.
521 weeks in a decade 0.1 statistical caner deaths per launch without precautions = ~52 people a decade for as much as 4168000000 tons to orbit. I'm sure more people would die from the air pollution of transporting that much on earth with trucks. Remember thats using conventional 'dirty' bombs for lift off.
>better bomb design
just curious, what is it that you know about nuclear weapon design that the nuclear weapons designers at the time didn't?
Nah, far too expensive to be a kickstart. And you'd be launching hardware with no purpose or demand. It wouldn't accomplish what you hope it would.
What you want to start with is a solution that gives you very routine and cheap per launch access. Then you build out organically.
wow.
after nearly 70 years of nuclear weapons development and the advent of neutron bombs, people still think fat man is peak performance... I never...
Your solution is what's already happening, and it's causing an existential threat to the ISS.
The Orion is extremely cheap. I discussed this already and it's pretty common sense; the R&D is already done, which is a huge part of costs.
well, between 52 and 520 from the numbers you stated, not to mention that was an estimate made in the 60s so it's validity is dubious. what's your source for these numbers? oh and what would the consequences be for a failed launch? thousands of undetonated nuclear weapons falling into the sea? a low level detonation on the scale of megatonnes?
well the nuclear test ban treaty was signed while orion was in development. so the amont of real world development of the actual warheads since can't have been much. what is it that you know specifically though, you seem certain of the ability to develop these clean nuclear weapons
>what's your source for these numbers
Read the thread, user
>what would the consequences be for a failed launch
READ THE THREAD
we've already talked about and sourced all of this...
Sorry thats not to orbit some of that is reaction mass, but it is propelling that much at launch.
Well for one those calculations used existing 'dirty' warheads in the arsenal for the fallout figures not ones specifically designed as shaped nuclear charges for mass production and clean use in the low atmosphere. A specially designed weapon minimizing the fissile tamper and maximizing staged fusion such as the many peaceful nuclear excavators would provide many advantages over your garden variety weapons nuke. That and other technologies have advanced some since the 60s, especially computing which could allow better simulation of core compression and of how the fissile material is utilized in the reaction, reducing nuclear material cost and thus fallout.
520 using weapons grade nukes not custom ones and launching not to far from populate areas. The calculation uses the 'no threshold model' which we still use and the fallout was probably better understood then as they were still doing tests. As for a failed launch, yes the bombs would be scattered but much of the nuclear material should be retrievable. No a chain reaction would not occur, a nuclear weapon requires far too precise an event to trigger to allow proper core compression and detonation. Some models of Orion don't assemble cores and bombs until they are being jettisoned making them even safer.
user, you must be delirious. The nuclear test ban was short lived and warhead development did not cease.
My third time posting this, because people cannot read the thread they're commenting in:
>With special designs of the nuclear explosive Ted Taylor estimated that fission product fallout could be reduced tenfold, or even to zero, if a pure fusion explosive could be constructed instead. A 100% pure fusion explosive has yet to be successfully developed, according to declassified US government documents, although relatively clean PNEs (Peaceful nuclear explosions) were tested for canal excavation by the Soviet Union in the 1970s with 98% fusion yield in the Taiga test's 15 kiloton devices, 0.3 kilotons fission, which excavated part of the proposed Pechora–Kama Canal.
>Freeman Dyson, group leader on the project, estimated back in the 1960s that with conventional nuclear weapons each launch would statistically cause on average between 0.1 and 1 fatal cancers from the fallout.
^ this is your claim but where is your source?
Not my claim but the user who posted it gave a source already. Twice.
>yes the bombs would be scattered but much of the nuclear material should be retrievable
yes, retrievable by WHOM. you'd have to stop even a small amount getting into the wrong hands
I laughed so hard.
You can't be serious.
Specific weapons of mass production were not designed for Orion except maybe this preliminary , but I haven't read enough about the bomb component but 'clean' peaceful nuclear device technology does exist and has been used as excavators and for industrial purposes. Further more shaped nuclear charge designs exists. Combining these technologies with feasible and cheap production is a key but not a particular great hurdle for Orion as it utilizes existing tech.
Freeman Dyson: 'Disturbing the Universe'. For maybe the 3rd time, its ok user I still love you.
Refer
>520 using weapons grade nukes not custom ones and launching not to far from populate areas. The calculation uses the 'no threshold model' which we still use and the fallout was probably better understood then as they were still doing tests. As for a failed launch, yes the bombs would be scattered but much of the nuclear material should be retrievable. No a chain reaction would not occur, a nuclear weapon requires far too precise an event to trigger to allow proper core compression and detonation. Some models of Orion don't assemble cores and bombs until they are being jettisoned making them even safer.
sounds like someone doesn't want to answer the question
Silly faggot, I don't need Orion to launch my ion cannon into low orbit!
It's a ridiculous postulation. In the middle of a technologically advanced and stable nation with a space programme, police and military, it will be impossible for anyone to run around collecting nuclear material with lightning response time, beating the authorities and cleanup scrubbers who are responding to distress calls from private, state and federal agencies.
If you get a little, what are you going to do with it? If you have the will to build a 'nuke', you don't need some illicit fragments of uranium. You can easily manufacture a dirty bomb using commercially available goods.