Timeline for What will be the best way to convert nuclear fusion energy into thrust for a rocket?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 23, 2018 at 2:20 | comment | added | Russell Borogove | You also have an intriguing definition of the word "minor!" :) | |
| Jan 17, 2018 at 19:58 | comment | added | Mark Adler | Practical in an engineering sense. There are no apparent showstoppers, and the performance of the system is tremendous. There are some minor non-engineering details like the availability and cost of thermonuclear weapons, and where you would be welcome to set them off. | |
| Jan 14, 2018 at 21:53 | comment | added | Mark Adler | The Orion engineering was analyzed sufficiently to be workable with no miracles. Medusa might be workable, but it's only really an idea so far without a sound, well-worked out realization. Either uses essentially the same source of fusion power, so in that sense they are equally realizable. Except Medusa might need fewer bombs for the same payload and mission. | |
| Jan 14, 2018 at 21:26 | comment | added | Nathan Tuggy | Do you include the tractor ("Medusa") variant of Orion's bomb-propulsion in this, or would you consider that to be impractical in the near future for some reason? | |
| Jan 14, 2018 at 20:59 | comment | added | Russell Borogove | You have an intriguing definition of the word "practical". | |
| Jan 14, 2018 at 16:18 | history | answered | Mark Adler | CC BY-SA 3.0 |