Nuclear jet

[JMBuilder]

No, this is not a "MOAR PARTZ" thing, it's a "one part" thing.

It's basically a very heavy and bulky jet engine with excellent fuel efficiency and the ability to work in any atmosphere. This would be perfect for atmospheric vehicles on other celestial bodies (with atmospheres, of course).

Here's one idea for a name: C7-NJ AtmoNuke.

[Dooz]

One problem REALISM BRAKER the only aircraft with nuclear engines IRL were nuclear turboprops nuclear jet engines were never used in real life

Edited October 14, 2013 by Dooz

[softweir]

Sorry, but "one more part" is still "more parts".

[Canopus]

One problem REALISM BRAKER the only aircraft with nuclear engines IRL were nuclear turboprops nuclear jet engines were never used in real life

I've never heard of nuclear Turboprops. And tell me Dooz, were NTR's ever used IRL?

I think a nuclear jet engine would be a good idea if its balanced right.

Edited October 14, 2013 by Canopus

[allmappedout]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_aircraft

AFAIK, they never flew on nuclear power. How would a Nuclear jet even work? Since a NERVA works without requiring oxidiser (in real life, rather than in game), what's the benefit of adding air intakes to it, unless it's to generate some sort of explosion from a superheated fuel-air mixture?

[Canopus]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_aircraft

AFAIK, they never flew on nuclear power. How would a Nuclear jet even work? Since a NERVA works without requiring oxidiser (in real life, rather than in game), what's the benefit of adding air intakes to it, unless it's to generate some sort of explosion from a superheated fuel-air mixture?

The benefit is that it wouldn't need fuel. They would heat up compressed air from the surrounding Atmosphere.

Edited October 14, 2013 by Canopus

[TwoHedWlf]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_aircraft

AFAIK, they never flew on nuclear power. How would a Nuclear jet even work?

Exactly the same as a fuel powered jet engine. Suck, squeeze, bang blow. Except the heating in the combustion chamber by burning jet fuel would be replaced with glowing hot fuel rods.

[JMBuilder]

The only fuel it would need is atmosphere and a bit of electricity. It wouldn't be overpowered because of its weight.

[Pds314]

We could also add electrical element jets/props and a fission reactor... More-or-less the same.

The thing with this AtmoNuke is that it would be running for a very long time... like... months. Considering that currently, physics warp is itself extremely dangerous and still only goes up to 4, it might be necessary to have a class of object than can simulate in background.

[JMBuilder]

You could shut it off and land.

[PDCWolf]

I've never heard of nuclear Turboprops. And tell me Dooz, were NTR's ever used IRL?

I think a nuclear jet engine would be a good idea if its balanced right.

They were tested multiple times, they didn't fly because of things like the anti-nuclear propaganda.

Also, under the "it's ok if it's balanced" concept, then we should have warp drives and alcubierre drives. Which in my opinion is pretty stupid.

Sorry, but "one more part" is still "more parts".

The WNTS thread says "moar parts" is wrong, unless you really specify what you want.

[pa1983]

There are documentarys on the subject. I think the conclusion was that it could not be made back then due to wight but to day with modern reactor technology and shielding it could probabley be done.

[Canopus]

They were tested multiple times, they didn't fly because of things like the anti-nuclear propaganda.

Also, under the "it's ok if it's balanced" concept, then we should have warp drives and alcubierre drives. Which in my opinion is pretty stupid.

The WNTS thread says "moar parts" is wrong, unless you really specify what you want.

Sorry but there is no such thing as a nuclear Turboprop. And the difference between a Warp drive and a nuclear jet is that the later one is actually perfectly possible, so it fits in the game.

[jwenting]

They were tested multiple times, they didn't fly because of things like the anti-nuclear propaganda.

A direct cycle engine was tested, indirect cycle AFAIK was never built and exists only as design studies (and maybe subscale prototypes of components).

And a direct cycle engine isn't something you want to have anywhere near you when it's lit off, as it spews highly radioactive materials over a wide area behind it as part of its exhaust (which is the reason design on an indirect cycle engine was started in the first place).

The tested engines were furthermore designed not for aircraft but for supersonic intercontinental cruise missiles, would have had next to no radiation shielding anywhere.

What was flown in aircraft were only a few small scale test reactors, in programs to measure the radiation exposure of aircrews and to test various shielding materials.

There are rumours the Soviets may have gone further, but those are largely unsubstantiated.