/sp/ - Football

Yea, for the Denver Broncos are Football Now and Forever


Welcome to the new code.
If you want to see the latest posts from all boards in a convenient way please check out /overboard/
Note: JS is required to be able to post, but I am working on a system where that won't be needed.


Archived thread


orion-40kt.jpg
Project Orion
Anonymous
No.5615
5617
Why did our retarded government have to cancel project Orion? We could have been exploring the solarsystem by now.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)
Anonymous
No.5616
5617
Good luck testing a prototype that uses nuclear bombs. Also, what if one is entering orbit and a bomb fails to detonate and falls back to earth?

Seems like a very efficient means of propulsion, though. I should weld a blast plate to my rear bumper and throw dynamite behind me as I drive. I would save thousands in gas money!
Anonymous
No.5617
5620
>>5615
Hey, something I can speak knowledgeably about.
The main problem is how they proposed the idea. They didn't propose a bomb powered star cruiser that just reloaded in orbit and never landed. They proposed traditional rockets, so they would have blown a lot of nukes into the atmosphere. Plus tense political relations during the cold war led to no nukes in space.
Was it a good idea? Yeah, they just needed some changes and a different political climate.
>>5616
>Fall to Earth
Okay, 2 things
1: Unless the original ship was gonna hit Earth, the bomb wouldn't hit Earth because how orbits work.
2: the nukes would burn up on re-entry, never hitting the surface.
Anonymous
No.5620
5621
>>5617
>They proposed traditional rockets, so they would have blown a lot of nukes into the atmosphere.
Would vacuum bombs work today? (At least until we got the Orion out of Earth's atmosphere)
Anonymous
No.5621
5622
>>5620
Thanks for telling me about a new peice of technology.
From what I'm reading, I would have to say yes.
It wouldn't provide as much thrust as a nuclear warhead, so it would be less efficent, but it should work for a first stage and then it can be a nuclear second stage.
10/10 idea anon, I like the way you think.
Anonymous
No.5622
5623
>>5621
Would the Orions have to be scaled down and if so by how much?
Anonymous
No.5623
5649
>>5622
I don't know, cause I can find the power of a vacuum bomb, so I don't knww how efficient they would be compared to a nuclear weapon.
Then again, the option of assembly in orbit still stands.
Anonymous
No.5649
5650
>>5623
1 MOAB = 11 tons of TNT
1 MOAB costs $170000
Davy Crocketts are between 10 and 20 tons of TNT not sure how much they cost but I am guessing they cost a lot more than 170k
The Orion was to use .03kt bombs or 30 tons of TNT.

Anonymous
No.5650
>>5649
Thanks, I'll do some caculations tonight on how many would me needed to get a ship to orbit.
;