![]() ![]() If disaster struck and the rocket’s reactor broke up, the pieces would not land on Earth or any other planet, for tens of thousands of years, he says. Once in orbit, it could do little harm, he says, as blasts and thermal radiation cannot move through a vacuum. Instead, a regular chemical rocket would hoist it into orbit, and only then would it fire up its nuclear reactor. To protect people on the ground, NTP spacecraft would not lift-off directly from Earth, Mr. Sheehy, and any NTP design would place the living quarters at the other end of the rocket to the reactor. ![]() The distance between the crew and reactor also provides a buffer, says Mr. The liquid propellants, stored between the engine and the crew area, block out radioactive particles, acting as “a tremendously good radiation shield,” he says. This would be mitigated through the rocket’s design, Mr. Shorter missions would limit the crew’s exposure to space radiation, but there is still concern about the radiation emitted from the nuclear reactor inside the spacecraft. This means the technology could get astronauts to Mars and back in less than two years. NTP rockets produce twice the thrust per unit of propellant than a chemical system which is like saying it does “double the miles per gallon,” says Mr. That thermal energy heats a liquid propellant, usually liquid hydrogen, which expands into a gas and is shot out the back end, producing thrust. An NTP system uses a nuclear reactor to generate heat from a uranium fuel. That’s why the space agency is looking to develop nuclear-powered rockets. “The longer you’re out there, the more time there is for stuff to go wrong,” he adds. It would also decrease the overall risk of the mission. This would reduce their exposure to space radiation, which can cause health problems including radiation sickness, increased lifetime risk of cancer, central nervous system effects and degenerative diseases. NASA wants to get there faster, to minimize the crew’s time in outer space, he says. These could get you to Mars, but it would take a long time, says Jeff Sheehy, chief engineer of NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate. Most rockets today are powered by chemical engines. Along enabling human space travel, it could open up space for galactic business opportunities, he adds. “Nuclear technology will expand humanity’s reach beyond low Earth orbit, and into deep space,” he said. Michael Eades, director of engineering at USNC-Tech, says that nuclear-powered rockets would be more powerful and twice as efficient as the chemical engines used today, meaning they could travel further and faster, while burning less fuel. The major countermeasure will be a human centrifuge that will simulate artificial gravity.Currently, the shortest possible trip for an unmanned spacecraft is seven months while a crewed mission is expected to take at least nine months. The idea is to simulate the negative effects that weightlessness has on the human body and develop methods to counteract those effects. In addition, the beds will be at a slight incline in order to cause fluids in the body to shift toward the head. During that time they will have to perform all manner of daily tasks while laying down. Only 24 volunteers are needed but each one will have to remain in bed for 60 days. ![]() The study will be most likely taking place later this year. Why would NASA pay so much money for people to just lay around? Well, the answer has to do with the effects of weightlessness on astronaut health. Seems like a sweet deal for the subjects but it almost seems to good to be true. They will eat, sleep, dress, and shower all while laying down. During this time the subject will do everything while in bed. ![]() NASA, along with the German Aerospace Center and the European Space Agency, is looking for people to lay in bed for 60 days and earn $18,522. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |