Are Nuclear Powered Ships The Key to Mars?
They might be our best option for colonising another world
Could a spacecraft surf the shockwaves of atomic blasts all the way to Mars? As an idea it seems completely mad; probably one reason it never got further than the drawing board. But it was, at least briefly, seriously considered by NASA.
During the late 1950s, under the name Project Orion, the space agency drew up plans to use nuclear bombs in space. Spacecraft would carry a supply of the bombs, and chuck one out of the back whenever they needed to accelerate. The blast wave, together with a careful spacecraft design, would boost the ship forward at tremendous speeds.
Project Orion was put aside, no doubt by some alarmed senior executive, but NASA did put effort into building a nuclear-powered rocket. The result, NERVA, or Nuclear Engine for Rocket Vehicle Application, completed a number of test firings in the 1960s. By then it was under serious consideration for use in manned flights around the Solar System.
In the end, NERVA was cancelled as part of a cost-cutting drive by the Nixon administration. The idea of nuclear powered spacecraft has never quite gone away, however, and made something of a comeback in a recent NASA report.
That report, looking at how human missions to Mars might one day pan out, recommends NASA look again at building a nuclear rocket. Rather than relying on exploding atomic bombs, these rockets would be more akin to a modern nuclear power station. Instead of dramatic explosions, these reactors generate electricity from the heat of controlled nuclear reactions.
This, engineers reckon, produces thrust twice as efficiently as our current chemical rockets can manage. The result is to cut the amount of fuel that needs to be carried along. Considering that around 95% of the mass of a typical modern rocket is taken up by fuel, any gains in efficiency can have big pay-offs.
Is this report likely to come to anything? After all, nuclear technology is often looked at with paranoia, especially following the disasters in Chernobyl and Fukushima. Two previous attempts to put nuclear reactors in space — one American and one Soviet — ended up falling back to Earth, spreading radiation across the planet.
The idea has supporters in Congress, who have in recent years directed NASA to spend money on investigating the possibilities. The agency is currently looking at two nuclear development projects: one considering propulsion techniques, and a second using nuclear reactors in future lunar bases.
The current pace of development is far too slow to reach Mars, as the NASA report warns. If we want to get serious about nuclear rocketry, the space agency must soon decide to invest big money into developing it. If not, expect chemical rockets to maintain their dominance, and see the idea of landing on Mars recede into the distance.
Last week NASA successfully landed their Perseverance rover on the surface of Mars. The landing went off without a hitch, and was even captured by a satellite orbiting overhead. Mission operators are now checking out the rover after its long voyage, and preparing for its first steps across the planet.
Carried on the rover is Ingenuity, a small helicopter that will soon make the first powered flight on any planet other than Earth. Ingenuity carries no scientific instruments; its only purpose is to demonstrate that flight is possible in the thin Martian atmosphere.
The helicopter will attempt at least five flights in temperatures as low as -90°C (-130°F). Given the minutes long communication delay between Earth and Mars, the flight will be partially autonomous. If all goes successfully, Ingenuity will be a first step towards future exploration by air on Mars and even Titan.
SpaceX suffered a rare failure to land a booster. The rocket company had managed a run of twenty-four successful launches and recoveries. This booster was making its sixth flight, demonstrating the overall success of Musk’s reusable rocket strategy. And even though the booster failed to land, the mission did succeed in putting another sixty Starlink satellites in orbit.
So much reporting around health, science and space exploration is unrealistic, hyperbolic and misleading. These are complicated topics, and there are often no easy or straight forward answers. Instead what is needed is analysis, discussion and an exploration of the possible ways forward.
Follow me, and subscribe to my free Substack newsletter to get the latest. Articles are published regularly, and by signing up you will never miss an update.