/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15848680
The Can can-do!

>>12187335
This is fair. I'm just against the aesthetic because I associate it with small-thinking politically-friendly aerospace concepts.

>>12011665
Space art?

Could an in-space transportation service be profitable, or does such a company have to own launch vehicles too?

>>11440205
>1969 plan
We've been robbed.

What do you think would be the type of propulsion used for the future interplanetary cargo transport vehicle, barring super advanced technology like fusion and beyond?

Nuclear thermal engines definitely have the specific impulse to be able to power transports economically, but there is a wide concern about the use of fissile materials. This concern is even greater if the concept of lots of commercial trade vessels were introduced. Electronic thrusters have the specific impulse needed too, but they're limited in power options. Atomic is out due the the above reasons, and solar limits where the transport can go. The "next best option" is a hydrolox chemical engine, but the specific impulse is just low enough to where refueling is required for both legs of the journey which can impact the economics of the transport.

I think that hydrolox would be used unless something happens that allow for most governments to feel comfortable with lots of nuclear reactors flying about in space.

>>11387536
This. America needs to get over it's phobia of setting up proper space infrastructure.

>>11380319
Moon industry I like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ffx7gY1_BXw
Krosia - Slight Days

>>11300507
Moon-Earth transport craft would probably look something like this if nuclear rockets in low Earth orbit were allowed.

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/realdesigns4.php#nuclearshuttle