ar81
Active member
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2008
- Messages
- 2,350
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 38
- Location
- Costa Rica
- Website
- www.orbithangar.com
I have a question. Are nuclear engines pollutant?
Just watched the interviews, and Alan Bond(M.D.) seems quite upbeat. Interesting comment toward the end. He says when the current generation of expendable rockets need to be replaced, there would have to be good reasons for not using Skylon/Sabre technology. I assume he means the Arianne series, wonder if he's told ESA yet...
I have a question. Are nuclear engines pollutant?
In general, you have to say yes. In special, the nuclear thermal engines are not pollutant in nominal operation, as the nuclear fuel is encased and moderated by the fuel flow around them.
Yeah, from what I remember the SR-71 intake cones are controlled by an analog computer and took a lot of testing to get them working correctly: even then Lockheed had to add an automatic restart capability for when engine cut out at Mach-3.
Thats for two engines.The thrust during airbreathing ascent is variable but around 200 tonnes. During rocket ascent this rises to 300 tonnes but is then throttled down towards the end of the ascent to limit the longitudinal acceleration to 3.0g.
A nice video actually. Good to see someone not afraid to get into some technical detail and to use proper units (except for thrust in tonnes...).Here is a video of Richard Varvill talking about the engine:-
Ummm, on the front? Perhaps I have misunderstood the question...Where do you put the air inlet though?...
Now I see what you mean. That went straight over my head the first time roundAnother attempt at humour fails, such is life!
I was thinking of a Thunderbird 1? rocket type, with the engines on pods, probably rotating as the pitch changes.
Got my Thunderbirds wrong, 3 was the rocket.
N.