Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Nasa to Test Nuclear Rockets that Could Fly Astronauts to Mars in Record Time

posted by hubie on Friday January 27, @08:19AM   Printer-friendly

fliptop writes:

The project, in concert with US government agency DARPA, aims to develop pioneering propulsion system for space travel as soon as 2027:

The project is intended to develop a pioneering propulsion system for space travel far different from the chemical systems prevalent since the modern era of rocketry dawned almost a century ago.

"Using a nuclear thermal rocket allows for faster transit time, reducing risk for astronauts," Nasa said in a press release.

[...] Using current technology, Nasa says, the 300m-mile journey to Mars would take about seven months. Engineers do not yet know how much time could be shaved off using nuclear technology, but Bill Nelson, the Nasa administrator, said it would allow spacecraft, and humans, to travel in deep space at record speed.

[...] Using low thrust efficiently, nuclear electric propulsion systems accelerate spacecraft for extended periods and can propel a Mars mission for a fraction of the propellant of high-thrust systems.

Also at CNN and Engadget. Link to Nasa press release.

Original Submission

 
This discussion was created by hubie (1068) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Nasa to Test Nuclear Rockets that Could Fly Astronauts to Mars in Record Time | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 23 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by gawdonblue on Friday January 27, @10:07AM (5 children)

    by gawdonblue (412) on Friday January 27, @10:07AM (#1288882)

    There's another new abbreviation: the m-mile.

    With Mars being just 300 of them, should not take long to get there :)

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 1) by BlueCoffee on Friday January 27, @01:35PM (3 children)

    by BlueCoffee (18257) on Friday January 27, @01:35PM (#1288900)

    The meter-mile? Is that metric or Imperial? :)

    At least they stopped using the silly "a thousand-million" for billion, and "a thousand-thousand" for a million. Those were annoying popular AFYA.

    • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Friday January 27, @03:05PM (2 children)

      by Immerman (3985) on Friday January 27, @03:05PM (#1288925)

      Is that a short-scale billion (10^9) or a long-scale billion (10^12)? Yeah, we've (mostly) laid the long scale to rest, thankfully.

       

      • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Saturday January 28, @08:06AM (1 child)

        by maxwell demon (1608) Subscriber Badge on Saturday January 28, @08:06AM (#1289053) Journal

        Thankfully? Most of the world uses the long scale. You are the odd one out.

        --
        The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.

        • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Saturday January 28, @06:00PM

          by Immerman (3985) on Saturday January 28, @06:00PM (#1289095)

          Have I been misinformed?

          In that case I'm 100% in favor of thousand million and million million.

  • (Score: 2) by Rich on Friday January 27, @05:56PM

    by Rich (945) on Friday January 27, @05:56PM (#1288954) Journal

    Wouldn't a (small) m-mile be more like roughly 5 ft 3 23/64 in?