Spartan95
Junior Member
Interesting points you brought up.
1. Coolant. You are right that the ocean provides a virtually unlimited supply of coolant for a naval nuclear reactor. However, space offers its own advantages because heat can be radiated away (particularly in the frigid regions in the Earth's shadow). This is a useful feature for most types of satellite orbit that criss-crosses the planet's day and night zones in a matter of hours.
2. Maintenance. Does not have to be done entirely by astronauts. That's why NASA and GM developed the Robonaut 2:
3. Orbit load. The benchmark of an Astute SSN with a displacement of 7,400 in relation to a space shuttle's load carrying capability is hardly representative due to the following issues:
a. A sub has a significant portion of its weight on its pressure hull (2 hulls to be exact) that is designed to take the huge pressures in the ocean's depths. It also includes life support and combat systems for its entire crew (including food and water storage, air handling systems, refrigeration and heating systems, etc). The propulsion system(s) of a sub also takes up tremendous weight, since it is designed to propel the sub (all 7,400 tonnes of it) at high speeds when needed. Take away all these, and the weight of the sub's nuclear reactor is a lot less. With miniaturisation that trades power output for weight, I would think that it would be light enough to be launched into orbit. Particularly since the current sub's nuclear reactor is likely to have a power output of more than 50MW. Even India's indigenous nuclear sub has a declared power output of 180MW.
b. It is interesting that you choose the space shuttle as the benchmark for putting loads into orbit. That is hardly the heaviest lifting means to put loads into orbit. For that, the US have the Saturn V series of rockets:
The payload it can carry into orbit is 129,300 kg (285,000 lb). That's more than sufficient to launch 2 M1 Abrams MBTs (other than the bulk) in 1 launch.
--- EDIT ---
Some interesting excerpts from the link you provided about Nuclear Powered Space Missions.
On the Russian RORSAT nuclear powered satellites, this was mentioned in the link:
"Disposal" of the nuclear reactor after use (trust the Russians to do this):
Weight and dimensions (built with USSR's technology in the 50s):
More interestingly:
1. Coolant. You are right that the ocean provides a virtually unlimited supply of coolant for a naval nuclear reactor. However, space offers its own advantages because heat can be radiated away (particularly in the frigid regions in the Earth's shadow). This is a useful feature for most types of satellite orbit that criss-crosses the planet's day and night zones in a matter of hours.
2. Maintenance. Does not have to be done entirely by astronauts. That's why NASA and GM developed the Robonaut 2:
3. Orbit load. The benchmark of an Astute SSN with a displacement of 7,400 in relation to a space shuttle's load carrying capability is hardly representative due to the following issues:
a. A sub has a significant portion of its weight on its pressure hull (2 hulls to be exact) that is designed to take the huge pressures in the ocean's depths. It also includes life support and combat systems for its entire crew (including food and water storage, air handling systems, refrigeration and heating systems, etc). The propulsion system(s) of a sub also takes up tremendous weight, since it is designed to propel the sub (all 7,400 tonnes of it) at high speeds when needed. Take away all these, and the weight of the sub's nuclear reactor is a lot less. With miniaturisation that trades power output for weight, I would think that it would be light enough to be launched into orbit. Particularly since the current sub's nuclear reactor is likely to have a power output of more than 50MW. Even India's indigenous nuclear sub has a declared power output of 180MW.
b. It is interesting that you choose the space shuttle as the benchmark for putting loads into orbit. That is hardly the heaviest lifting means to put loads into orbit. For that, the US have the Saturn V series of rockets:
The payload it can carry into orbit is 129,300 kg (285,000 lb). That's more than sufficient to launch 2 M1 Abrams MBTs (other than the bulk) in 1 launch.
--- EDIT ---
Some interesting excerpts from the link you provided about Nuclear Powered Space Missions.
On the Russian RORSAT nuclear powered satellites, this was mentioned in the link:
"Disposal" of the nuclear reactor after use (trust the Russians to do this):
Weight and dimensions (built with USSR's technology in the 50s):
More interestingly:
Last edited:
ff