Scroll down to read this post.

 

Genesis cover

On Christmas Eve 1968 three Americans became the first humans to visit another world. What they did to celebrate was unexpected and profound, and will be remembered throughout all human history. Genesis: the Story of Apollo 8, Robert Zimmerman's classic history of humanity's first journey to another world, tells that story, and it is now available as both an ebook and an audiobook, both with a foreword by Valerie Anders and a new introduction by Robert Zimmerman.

 

The print edition can be purchased at Amazon. from any other book seller, or direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit. The ebook is available everywhere for $5.99 (before discount) at amazon, or direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit. If you buy it from ebookit you don't support the big tech companies and the author gets a bigger cut much sooner.


The audiobook is also available at all these vendors, and is also free with a 30-day trial membership to Audible.
 

"Not simply about one mission, [Genesis] is also the history of America's quest for the moon... Zimmerman has done a masterful job of tying disparate events together into a solid account of one of America's greatest human triumphs."--San Antonio Express-News


General Atomics successfully tests fuels to be used in an in-space nuclear propulsion system

The company General Atomics announced yesterday that it has successfully tested the fuels it wants to use in an in-space nuclear propulsion system for transporting ships to the Moon and beyond much faster and more efficiently than is presently possible with chemical engines.

[General Atomics] executed several high-impact tests at NASA’s MSFC in Huntsville, AL. The nuclear fuel was tested with hot hydrogen flow through the samples and subjected to six thermal cycles that rapidly ramped-up to a peak temperature of 2600 K (Kelvin) or 4220° Fahrenheit. Each cycle included a 20-minute hold at peak performance to demonstrate the effectiveness of shielding the fuel material from erosion and degradation by the hot hydrogen. Additional tests were performed with varying protective features to provide further data on how different material enhancements improve performance under reactor-like conditions.

It has been known since the 1960s the nuclear propulsion is more efficient that chemical engines. It can burn for longer time periods at higher levels, thus making it possible to get to other planets more quickly, in some cases bypassing the need to depend on orbital mechanics.

The problem however has been political. Getting these nuclear engines into orbit has been too much of a political hot potato. The fear of such engines and radioactivity, largely irrational, has made it impossible to get them built. NASA is now trying again.

Readers!

 

Every February I run a fund-raising drive during my birthday month. This year I celebrate my 72nd birthday, and hope and plan to continue writing and posting on Behind the Black for as long as I am able.

 

I hope my readers will support this effort. As I did in my November fund-raising drive, I am offering autographed copies of my books for large donations. Donate $250 and you can have a choice of the hardback of either Genesis: the Story of Apollo 8 or Conscious Choice: The origins of slavery in America and why it matters today and for our future in outer space. Donate $200 and you can get an autographed paperback copy of either. IMPORTANT! If you donate enough to get a book, please email me separately to tell me which book you want and the address to mail it to.

 

Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black. My analysis of space, politics, and culture, taken from the perspective of an historian, is almost always on the money and ahead of the game. For example, in 2020 I correctly predicted that the COVID panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Every one of those 2020 conclusions has turned out right.

 

Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.

 

You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are four ways of doing so:

 

1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.

 

2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
 

3. A Paypal Donation or subscription:

 

4. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
 
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

 

You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above.

17 comments

  • wayne

    Why is it we have to pay for the same research over & over again?

  • Jeff Wright

    Because folks keep killing it

  • Milt

    Speaking of which…

    I wonder what Stanton Friedman (who passed in 2019) might say about all of this?

  • Rodney

    Fuel?
    They actually used the word “Fuel?” How quaint, like something out of an H.G. Wells novel. The word is propellant and the only rational propellant to use in a solid core nuclear rocket is Hydrogen. So, why didn’t they say “we heated up hydrogen and ran it through a novel to mimic a nuclear rocket?” I have no idea as to why other than they were looking to be mysterious about nuclear rockets. Or the fact that they are repeating tests done more than 50 years ago.

    With a temperature of 2600 K, I can guess the Isp.
    Isp=2.3*sqrt(1.405*4126*2600)/9.81=910 seconds. I’m guessing at the vacuum nozzle’s efficiency, but 900 is the number people have been playing with for first generation nuclear rockets since the 70s.

    same ol’ same ol’

  • wayne

    Nuclear Propulsion for Space (1968)
    https://youtu.be/eDNX65d-FBY
    23:48

  • David

    I’ve come to believe that the government funds research into some subjects every generation not to learn anything but to keep a living and active corps of people who hold the knowledge in reserve.

    When the project was called Timberwind, Dr. Bussard had a lot to say about it. Mind you, he would never whisper a word about Kiwi/Nerva, but he wasn’t limited in what he could say about a project he wasn’t signed off on. He felt that Timberwind could not work unless they dumped the laminar flow heat exchangers.

  • Dick Eagleson

    Rodney,

    The word “fuel” applies to the radioactives and their encapsulation technology that constitute the active core of a nuclear thermal rocket. In any rocket, fuel is what creates the heat. In chemical rockets, the fuel also becomes part of the reaction mass as it is chemically transformed in the process of generating said heat. In a nuclear thermal rocket, these roles are entirely separate – the fuel generates all the heat and the reaction mass picks up said heat and carries it while expanding to generate thrust.

  • Edward

    Rodney wrote: “… and the only rational propellant to use in a solid core nuclear rocket is Hydrogen.

    The article sounds to me as though they were testing the core with hydrogen to make sure the propellant did not react with the core and degrade it.

    In addition, hydrogen may be a good propellant at the velocities that this core can reach, but because the energy needed to increase the velocity increases with the square of that velocity, there comes a speed at which the power plant’s mass starts to increase faster than the momentum of the propellant. At that point, despite the high specific impulse of hydrogen, more massive propellants begin to produce a better delta-v for the whole system.

    There are other difficulties with using pure hydrogen, such as its low boiling point, making it difficult to store for long periods of time. Hydrogen may give an excellent mass-efficiency (high specific impulse), when considered in isolation of the rest of the system, but making it work could be the challenge.

  • wayne

    Phoebus-2A: LASL’s 4000-Megawatt Nuclear Rocket Engine
    https://youtu.be/LjU9kP_zd70
    11:45

  • wayne

    Kiwi: TNT (Transient Nuclear Test)
    https://youtu.be/4zSCdYu2Ps8
    28:12
    “A modified Kiwi Reactor was forced to go super-critical and destroy itself under controlled conditions.”

  • Robert Pratt

    I’ve always loved the name General Atomics!

    Agree with the reference to Stanton Friedman.

  • wayne

    Mr. Pratt:
    For absolutely great Company Names, take a look at the “Atomic Rolodex,”

    “The Lost History of the US Nuclear Program, As Told by Its Business Cards”
    https://www.fastcompany.com/3056291/the-lost-history-of-the-us-nuclear-program-as-told-by-its-business-cards

  • wayne

    Ever see 2,000 grams of enriched plutonium, on fire, in one place?

    “Burning and Extinguishing Characteristics of Plutonium Metal Fires”
    Hanford National Laboratory
    R.E. Felt (1967)
    https://youtu.be/ssH9o32CZtg
    18:13

    “All experiments were conducted within gloveboxes. The experiments were conducted twice to allow filming, because it was thought no one would believe the results unless they were actually seen. The total amount of metal utilized in the tests was on the order of 60-80 kilograms.”

  • Mark Sizer

    Interesting video, wayne, thanks. Although, I admit that I did not make it all the way through.

  • Patrick Underwood

    How many thousands of Starships could you throw to Mars for the cost of developing, funding, deploying, and defending against lawsuits, a single nuclear propulsion system?

  • Max

    I’ve daydreamed for years of a continuous thrust rocket using a nuclear reactor. (good for interplanetary travel or a generation ship)
    There have been theories of large nuclear reactors mounted on an astroid and using the astroid material as reaction mass for long-distance journeys. (Slow, but safe)
    I believe there is a more practical way…

    Picture the starship enterprise without warp engines/struts or the saucer section.

    That leaves just the cylinder body with the navigation/communication system on the front. (the deflector dish) a necessary radar dish for meteor avoidance with lasers around the lip to blast small grains that can’t be avoided.
    What makes my fantasy unusual is the rocket thrust motor is near the nose cone top of the ship, directly under the nuclear reactor surrounded by a radiation shield/water tank.
    The expanding thrust gas passes down the interior of the ship, keeping the ship warm in the cold of space, and condensing the spent fuel to be reprocessed back through the reactor continuously.
    Essentially a hollow ship, with the living quarters surrounding a thick expansion chamber/tube 500 to 1000 feet long.

    The reactor heats up the water (safe, non-toxic) forcing it through a power generator to supply the electrical needs of the ship,(similar to normal nuclear power plants) then the heated water passes through a super heater for immediate thrust. This also breaks down the water (at temperatures over 2000°) into hydrogen and oxygen which can be ignited in a secondary bell chamber for additional thrust and heat. Hot steam passes down the length of the ship providing warmth for hydroponics (Food farm) while cooling/condensing the steam back into liquid water. 90% or more of the condensing steam will be captured internally and pumped back into the storage tanks as it creates a near vacuum. (this chamber will contain no air! Only steam) Any overpressure will exit a low pressure valve at the end of the ship into a final condensing chamber who’s exterior is exposed to the cold of space. The final cold chamber is lined with a flexible inflatable membrane that can collect fugitive residue ice crystals. No fuel/H4O2 (H2O) is vented to space, even the positioning thruster jets are inside the chamber so the water vapor can be captured and recycled endlessly… As long as the nuclear fuel holds out… Which can be re-processed and recycled also.

    The larger and longer the ship, The greater thrust capacity for additional G forces for quicker travel.

    The condensing chamber would probably be more stable working at higher efficiency if it wraps at the end of the ship out, and around the outer skin of the ship back up to the top so it doesn’t have to be extending out so long, and increase the overall volume for possible expanding gases… and will also aid in preventing meteor damage, holding in the heat, additional radiation shielding.
    I like this last design best because the ship can land on low gravity moons without stirring up dust.

    A robotic scout ship with no environmental/life-support system could essentially be a tin can that can thrust at high G to place satellites and rovers on any planet/moon or astroid in the system in a short time, with the capacity to return with samples… or to fly to a neighboring star system in a fraction of the time it would take humans who cannot withstand high G continuous thrust.
    Just dreaming, I wonder if the math would work out?

Readers: the rules for commenting!

 

No registration is required. I welcome all opinions, even those that strongly criticize my commentary.

 

However, name-calling and obscenities will not be tolerated. First time offenders who are new to the site will be warned. Second time offenders or first time offenders who have been here awhile will be suspended for a week. After that, I will ban you. Period.

 

Note also that first time commenters as well as any comment with more than one link will be placed in moderation for my approval. Be patient, I will get to it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *