Ever feel guilty when dropping nuke engine on planet?

[Hannu]

I can not say that I feel guilty but I have my own rules that nuclear engines are not allowed to land or intentionally crash anywhere. Their radioactive pollution would surely be negligible in radiation conditions of space (or Kerbin) but I roleplay that there are environmental activists and green political parties in Kerbin and also planetary scientists do not want that artificial radioactivity (even Nerva's low levels) disturb their radiation measurements.

However I do not care what happen to abandoned spacecrafts. Sometimes they have been left on orbits which can be changed by celestial bodies and hit to something after that. And if there is an emergency situation the crew safety is more important. Typical such situation is return from interplanetary orbit to Kerbin's atmosphere. I try to install a pod to service modules so that they can maneuver out of atmosphere after uncoupling from command module in Kerbin's SOI. But if I forget the pod I allow service module to hit into the atmosphere. Now I prefer large crew transport ships which brakes to space station around Kerbin. They are too expensive to be abandoned after each mission.

[viktor19]

I don't think I've ever dropped a NERVA on a planet..... well, not deliberately. I think I may have lost one in Jools atmosphere, but I tend to think the radiation a NERVA would create is a drop in the ocean compared the rads Jool must give out (ie based on it being like Jupiter).

But yeah, I'd feel funny dropping one on Kerbin... maybe even the other atmospheric planets.

I tend to use them as part of reusable "tow-trucks", and on a few, long abandoned probes, floating aimlessly.

Reminds me of that Lucifer Project conspiracy theory.

[ArchGaden]

I would feel bad dropping an LV-N anywhere, but not because "OMG nukular!" They're expensive, heavy and vacuum-optimized, so I tend to put them in orbital tugs and reuse them.

I don't think I would feel bad about dropping them in lifeless areas, but I follow the same tug strategy. LV-Ns are amazing for interplanetary tugs, and pretty bad at just about everything else. I use them for tugs. I reuse my tugs, particularly with mining/refining in stock now. The only other use I get out of LV-Ns now is for interplanetary probes that need a ton of d/v... in which case the LV-N will stay fixed to the probe and end up forever in orbit around something far away from Kerbin. I have never had a scenario come up in 1.0.x where I would want to drop an LV-N on Kerbin.

I do feel bad about leaving debris in Kerbin orbit. Earth has an orbital debris problem because we so much junk up there. I always feel a little sadness for Kerbin's future when I leave stages behind up there... but I still do it, often intentionally and for a variety of reasons that mostly boil down to cost. Before career mode, I would overdesign missions to avoid leaving debris in Kerbin orbit... or send up another mission to deorbit it if the debris was unavoidable or accidental. As I play Career now, I leave cleanup to a future generation where the cost of a bunch of orbit cleaning robots is low. Those brats should be thankful we paved the way to their space colonies.

[Gerandar]

WHy would I feel guilty about dropping a nerva on a digital planet that doesn't have life or even exist?

[Geschosskopf]

Especially Kerbin, call me a treehugger... I even feel bad when dropping them on Duna or Eve, the scene of radiation fallout is on the back of my head. What do you guys think?

Pas moi. There's not enough bad stuff in an LV-N to make a real mess. During testing of NERVAs, they had one barf its core out and the mess was small and easily cleaned up. So dropping the occasional LV-N on any planet is no big deal. Things that are environmentally far worse happen naturally all the time.

[Brotoro]

I used to always have my nukes mounted on side pods equipped with parachutes so that they could be separated and recovered, both to prevent creating a little radiation hazard site and (mostly) to recycle them. In general, I don't drop nukes on other planets/moons...but mostly because my nukes tend to be on reusable Tugs.

One of the problems with the goofy new overheating aspect of the nukes is that I can no longer do this (because the nukes have to be attached directly to a structure with lots of thermal mass).

[zxczxczbfg]

If I remember correctly, didn't Apollo 13 have an RTG in a ceramic container inside the LM, which burned up on re-entry, with the capsule and contents surviving both the heating and the impact with the ocean? If that's the case, I think the LV-N would probably be fine.

EDIT: I did remember correctly!

http://www.spacesafetymagazine.com/aerospace-engineering/nuclear-propulsion/will-anyone-recover-apollo-13s-plutonium/

[Voidryder]

Our most competent Flight Directors at Voidryder's Aerospace do not worry of such dropping of Nuclear Rocket Engines on planets' surfaces. All serial numbers and other identifying markings are completely and thoroughly removed before launch. It is protocol.

Most Respectfully,

The Grand Designer

Voidryder's Aerospace.

[Hannu]

If I remember correctly, didn't Apollo 13 have an RTG in a ceramic container inside the LM, which burned up on re-entry, with the capsule and contents surviving both the heating and the impact with the ocean? If that's the case, I think the LV-N would probably be fine.

a RTG has just small amount of some radioactive isotope. It decays to less dangerous stuff. Nerva is a fission reactor, practically like in power plants. Fission process products large amounts of very radioactive nuclides and that is much more dangerous. RTGs are also quite small and light and they do not need material change with environment. Thermal flow is only in kilowatt range. They are easy to pack in hard shell. Nuclear engines are very much larger and huge amounts of propellant must run through because heating power is at least hundreds of megawatts even in smallish upper stage engine. You can not conduct such power through thick protective shell.

But of course most of fears against nuclear pollution are unrealistic fear against unknown. Probably it would be relatively safe to use Nervas. Possible accidents would be small and local like severe power plant accidents have been. This kind of rolegame restrictions are mostly balancing of the game. Even properties of the LV-N are severely nerfed compared to real counterparts they are very overpowered compared to other engines. If using of real Nervas were allowed there probably would not be any large or middle class chemical engines. Nervas would be outstanding in every aspect and there were as many reasons to use chemical engines than ride with horse instead of jet airliner in intercontinental journeys.

[merendel]

No because I prety much never have a reason to return one back down to the surface of the planet. Once I start useing LV-N's they are almost exclusively used on tug drones. Said tug docks with a craft and pushes/pulls(depending on design) said craft to its destination. Any tugs returning craft to kerbin settle into LKO and wait for the next craft while the payload deorbits on smaller thrusters. Theres no good reason to launch something as expensive and heavy as a NERVA into orbit only to deorbit it and launch it agian with the next craft. Just leave it up there and send up a new craft with a tank of fuel to get it where its going and reuse that rocket.