Orion drive is wasting energy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter G777GUN
  • Start date Start date
G

G777GUN

Guest
The Orion drive idea of dropping nuclear bombs out the back, the blast hits a big plate to push the ship forward. But only a small amount of the bomb is actually propelling the ship. But why not make a nozzle on the engine instead of wasting so much energy. I have a few ideas why they haven't done that, one would be that the nozzle would be destroyed. But then cant the nukes be smaller? I would think an engine like this or Small 'Nozzled' Orion drive would be more efficient?
 
Nuclear driven MHD drives, (with their possiblity of a 'ramjet' option at
really high velocities) offer higher efficiency,as do the 'ion drives' currently
being tested.
Remember, 'critical mass', (even with explosive compression to
phase change), places a lower limit on the size of a 'nuke'.
IIRC Some very large engines of the type with expendable reaction mass
cooloing the nozzled 'combustion chamber', such as you mention,
and a sort of 'shock absorber to cushion the payload compartment were proposed.
 
There's a minimum blast that a nuke can sustain... you need a 'critical mass', which will produce a certain amount of blast - and below that critical mass... it's a dud.
The answer would be a wider, stronger nozzle - allowing the blast wave to dissipate with distance, but then you're adding weight and complexity to the craft.

And, essentially.... you don't *want* to propel anything with nuclear bombs. They cause an awful lot of debris and radiation that's just not good for anybody.
 
While I applaud you on your train of thought, don't you think you are a little late as The Partial Test Ban Treaty of 1963 is generally acknowledged to have ended the project.
 
Back
Top