High Definition Standard Definition Theater
Video id : ShF0R5pbNvI
ImmersiveAmbientModecolor: #d9bb8e (color 1)
Video Format : 22 (720p) openh264 ( https://github.com/cisco/openh264) mp4a.40.2 | 44100Hz
Audio Format: Opus - Normalized audio
PokeTubeEncryptID: 241f4ba6ed2fa8bc26b851a90eb2288073e87e8d494096f2b2f198adbeddd89e7a23517566a375fd8c81a719cf104203
Proxy : eu-proxy.poketube.fun - refresh the page to change the proxy location
Date : 1716389528246 - unknown on Apple WebKit
Mystery text : U2hGMFI1cGJOdkkgaSAgbG92ICB1IGV1LXByb3h5LnBva2V0dWJlLmZ1bg==
143 : true
The Real Reason NASA Is Developing A Nuclear Rocket Engine!
Jump to Connections
393,353 Views • Feb 4, 2023 • Click to toggle off description
Compare news coverage. Spot media bias. Avoid algorithms. Be well informed. Download the free Ground News app at ground.news/spacerace
The Real Reason NASA Is Developing A Nuclear Rocket Engine!

Last Video: Artificial Intelligence Is Landing On Our Moon!
   • Artificial Intelligence Is Landing On...  

► Join Our Discord Server: discord.gg/zfMNSnuRQN
► Patreon: www.patreon.com/theteslaspace
► Subscribe to our other channel, The Space Race: youtube.com/c/TheTeslaSpace
Mars Colonization News and Updates
   • Mars Colonization News and Updates  

SpaceX News and Updates:    • SpaceX News and Updates  

The Space Race is dedicated to the exploration of outer space and humans' mission to explore the universe. We’ll provide news and updates from everything in space, including the SpaceX and NASA mission to colonize Mars and the Moon. We’ll focus on news and updates from SpaceX, NASA, Starlink, Blue Origin, The James Webb Space Telescope and more. If you’re interested in space exploration, Mars colonization, and everything to do with space travel and the space race... you’ve come to the right channel! We love space and hope to inspire others to learn more!

► Subscribe to The Tesla Space newsletter: www.theteslaspace.com/

Business Email: derek@ellify.com

#Spacex #Space #Mars
Metadata And Engagement

Views : 393,353
Genre: Science & Technology
Date of upload: Feb 4, 2023 ^^


Rating : 4.785 (569/9,996 LTDR)
RYD date created : 2024-05-21T07:25:54.217661Z
See in json
Tags
Connections

YouTube Comments - 1,340 Comments

Top Comments of this video!! :3

@TheSpaceRaceYT

1 year ago

Compare news coverage. Spot media bias. Avoid algorithms. Be well informed. Download the free Ground News app at ground.news/spacerace

37 |

@dfgggg89

1 year ago

What kills me is that we had this technology for more than half a century.

492 |

@connorrichards955

1 year ago

9:20 The nuclei are bombarded by "Neutrons", not "Electrons". It is shown correctly in the video but narrated incorrectly.

407 |

@kashmiradixit

1 year ago

Narrator- "Liquid Rocket Engines are fairly simple in their design" Me, and other fellow students who are studying propulsion- "Uh hold up... When did that happen?!"

152 |

@MarkGardner66Bonnie

1 year ago

Growing up in the 60's and watching the "space race" was so exciting. We got to the moon....and then nothing. I for one am happy to see the world get excited about going into space...

135 |

@PaulADAigle

1 year ago

How realistic would it be for Starship to get into orbit, and then have a nuclear frame waiting to take it to Mars? Figuring Nuclear being the best Space transport.

208 |

@lenm2857

1 year ago

So, it's basically the NERVA project from the 60's, shocked it took this long to start working on it again.

34 |

@stephenkingsley5815

1 year ago

It was written correctly, but I heard it twice. "Uranium atoms bombarded with free electrons splitting into two parts and releasing energy". Uranium atoms being bombarded by neutrons... Oops.

25 |

@richard77231

1 year ago

This is the type of pure space research that NASA should be focused on. Then allow private companies to refine/optimize/commoditize it. Little to nothing of what SpaceX is doing is revolutionary from the aspect of rocket science fundamentals. From the aspect of manufacturing, absolutely.

16 |

@Vindictus67

1 year ago

I would like to see Starship go to orbit under normal propulsion, then settle into a "framework", consisting of the nuclear engine(s), and fuel tanks. Once locked in, this setup could take them to Mars, or beyond, and still give them normal engines for landing, while saving fuel. Such a setup could be refueled from a tanker-style Starship, for repeated use. Use of a combined-cycle nuclear thermal engine, with the exhaust being hyper-accelerated through a Hall Effect thruster, might give the performance needed for long voyages, in a reasonable amount of time...

38 |

@johnstewart579

1 year ago

I applaud NASA and DARPA for this initiative. I remember that Werner Von Braun had a launch date to send humans to Mars in 1982 via nuclear propulsion

30 |

@mariusmeyer14

1 year ago

I feel positive about their time line. Surely the consept have been proven in the 60's so it will be a matter of implementing it to a test flight article.

14 |

@robintoonen8515

1 year ago

Using hydrogen has a couple of downsides, which is why it is usually not used in current rockets. 1 it has to be stored colder, has a lower density thus needs more space, it is highly reactive and corrodes metal containers and is also highly flammable.

13 |

@CapitalTeeth

1 year ago

The 2030's are going to get really awesome with space stuff.

5 |

@JesusChristDenton_7

1 year ago

"When science is on the march, nothing can stand in its way!"

4 |

@johnrobinson4445

1 year ago

The fastest trip to the Moon so far is 8.5 hours. We didn't stop there but crossed the orbit. At Apollo speeds, the Moon is about 12 hours away any time we choose to do it.

1 |

@msrich1982

1 year ago

The thing to consider on the timeline is that they aren't developing completely new technologies. They're taking existing ones and integrating them in a new way. As an integration project a five year timeline seems far more reasonable than, say, developing an entirely new engine using unproven theory. If anything delays this project it won't be the science. It may be the engineering (see the delays in the Blue Origin BE4 or Boeing Starliner) but it's most likely to be political and regulatory. With DARPA involved that will smooth a lot of political problems though which may well be why they've gotten involved.

10 |

@chrisantoniou4366

1 year ago

There's no question that a nuclear rocket engine would be a boon to space travel. Faster speeds, greater range, less consumables required for manned flight etc. etc. etc. ... However... Making a nuclear engine that works as advertised is the hard part. How heavy would a nuclear reaction engine be? How expensive is the Uranium and/or Plutonium required for the engine? How do you contain the constant 2700C degrees the engine operates at? How much thrust can such an engine produce, is it enough for launch or only for travel once orbit is achieved? All these questions have to be answered and engineering solutions have to be found, and yes, it IS rocket science and the rewards are there, but is it possible??? Time will tell.

8 |

@blythehaynes3765

1 year ago

The ability to design and test a nuclear engine was Preformed in the late 60's and early 70's, so hopefully they still have the technology. Basically the only thing DARPA needs to do is update the existing design and manufacture it for a interplanetary vessel. A nuclear engine could do two things. First it could get us to Mars in about 30 days and Jupiter in a few months. This should open up exploration to objects past the Moon like Starship (by Spacex) will hopefully do to getting large payloads into orbit. Secondly, the nuclear engine will provide enough thrust to maintain a 1g acceleration to provide artificial gravity. It is looking like we just might have a good chance of having a bright future in space! And I believe that this push for development is a direct result of China trying to do the same. Because the USSR was the main reason we landed on the Moon. Now with China trying to get the ability to out perform the USA, as a result we in the United States have taken the challenge and are in competition once again.

7 |

@patryn36

1 year ago

Since a working nuclear engine has existed since the 60s, it will be interesting to see how they solve the fuel supply issue. The video i seen on the subject indicated the fuel volume required was quite large and we still have no infrastructure in orbit to supply such.

9 |

Go To Top