Comments

blueskies1818 13th Sep 2023

ok but this is so unrealistic also thermal nuclaer propulsion is way more efficient
XBlueBeam 13th Sep 2023

also blueskies, the link you sent is literally describing a more detailed and much more realistic version of what i have made here WITHOUT ANY FUSION WHATSOEVER, but with FISSION.
XBlueBeam 13th Sep 2023

no ordinary fission nuclear engine uses fusion. we do NOT have the technology to do that, and if one desigh would involve fusion, it would not be called a nuclear fission engine, it would be a nuclear fission/fusion hybrid like username90000 said. how hard is it for you to google this stuff correctly? jesus christ..
XBlueBeam 13th Sep 2023

when did i say it was realistic? hm? i never said that. this is NOT meant to be realistic... jeez man
U42 13th Sep 2023

no one cares and nuclear thermal solid core engines suck better invest in nuclear pulse or fission fragment
blueskies1818 12th Sep 2023

also https://neutronbytes.com/2021/06/24/nuclear-thermal-propulsion-is-key-enabling-technology-for-darpa-effort/
blueskies1818 12th Sep 2023

ok but this is unrealistic he's using clone and portle as well as BIZR
U42 12th Sep 2023

and if it would have both fission and fusion it would be fission fusion hybrid nuclear engine
U42 12th Sep 2023

this thing is a NTR with convetional fuel
U42 12th Sep 2023

you all wrong nuclear engines use nuclear fission of fuel for propulsion most popular concepts are nuclear thermal rockets that use heat from reactor to heat up fuel or maybe even lightbulb or gas core or something like orion drive engine where special devices detonate send plasma to blast plate and graphite that evaporates or something like fission fragment engine

The Powder Toy

prototype nuclear engine by XBlueBeam

Comments