SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Ethan Siegel has written an interesting article on the success of the Philae lander, and how much more could have been achieved with an alternate power source:
Rather than choosing to make this lander solar powered, we could have chosen, instead to equip it with a nuclear-powered radioactive source. This is proven technology that’s been used in space missions for more than 40 years, including on all the Mars rovers
The article makes the case that the politics, related to unfounded safety fears around nuclear power, have unnecessarily limited the operational life, and the possible scientific payback, of the Philae lander mission.
Quora has a more detailed description of the discussion around this topic.
Spotted via Scientific American's Physics week in review
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 24 2014, @10:34PM
Yes, what could go wrong? What would happen? If you think an RTG on a rocket probe will cause an accident like a reactor meltdown, then you are an absolute dumbass and should not be allowed to participate in this discussion.
Why not toss in a "You can't hug your kids with nuclear arms" or some other irrelevant dipshit statement?
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by kaszz on Monday November 24 2014, @11:50PM
Don't worry, the rocket can provide the opportunity to blowup the core material. And the rest can be blasted by high velocity air braking.