Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, center, visits a space communications facility Wednesday in Medvezhye Ozera with Minister of Telecommunications Igor Shchyogolev at left. Medvedev urged his government to find resources for building a prospective nuclear-powered spaceship.
(Vladimir Rodionov, RIA Novosti, Presidential Press Service/AP)Photos (1 of 1)
Russians to ride a nuclear-powered spacecraft to Mars
President Dmitry Medvedev says Russia will spend $600 million on a nuclear-powered spacecraft to take men to Mars, and beyond. Is it safe?
By Fred Weir | Correspondent 10.29.09
MOSCOW – A nuclear-powered spaceship that can carry passengers to Mars and beyond may sound like science fiction.
But Russian engineers say they have a breakthrough design for such a craft, which could leapfrog them way ahead in the international race to build a manned spacecraft that can cover vast interplanetary distances.
They claim they’ll be ready to build one as early as 2012.
In a meeting with top Russian space scientists Wednesday, President Dmitry Medvedev gave the nuke-powered space craft a green light and pledged to come up with the cash to cover its $600-million price tag.
“It’s a very serious project, and we need to find the money,” Mr. Medvedev told the scientists.
Small nuclear reactors and atomic batteries have long been used to power unmanned spy satellites, and both NASA and the former Soviet space program spent huge sums trying to design a safe system that could propel a spacecraft once it left the Earth’s atmosphere (see Project Orion and Project Prometheus), analogous to the way nuclear-powered submarines operate.
Most manned spacecraft are propelled by chemical rockets, and supplement their energy needs with solar panels. But experts say existing rocket technology would be impractical for long-distance flights, even for a voyage to our nearest planetary neighbor, Mars.
“The energy requirements for a three-year flight is very great, and that calls for a technology that can deliver a lot of power,” says Andrei Ionin, an independent Moscow-based space expert.
“The former USSR had a lot of accumulated experience in this field,” lofting scores of nuclear-spy satellites over three decades, he says.
“The idea (of nuclear-powered spaceflight) has bright prospects, and if Russia could stage a breakthrough it could become our main contribution to any future international program of deep space exploration,” Mr. Ionin adds.
Russia’s space program has recovered from its post-Soviet slump but still has not succeeded in launching any major independent projects and remains a space-going taxicab for other nations and tour operator for wealthy thrill-seekers (such as Cirque du Soleil founder Guy Laliberte) willing to pay for a brief stay on the International Space Station.
Russian scientists complain that their post-Soviet space program is chronically underfunded. But when a project is endorsed by top leadership (the Sochi 2014 Olympics, for example), recent history indicates the funding is likely to be found.
A breakthrough in atomic-powered propulsion would loft Russia back into the front ranks of space-faring nations and make it the indispensable partner for future international space efforts. And with the US forging ahead with its own next-generation replacement for the space shuttle, the Ares 1-X (launched Wednesday), Russia could use a public relations victory in this realm.
But critics say the idea of nuclear-powered space travel, while alluring, is probably impracticable.
“Nobody has ever done it in the past, and I don’t think anyone ever will,” says Igor Lisov, an expert with Novosti Kosmonavtiki, a leading Russian aerospace journal.
“Both the US and the USSR tried very hard to master this technology, but neither ever got to the point of building something that could be used,” he says.
Environmentalists point to a long list of accidents with Soviet nuclear-powered satellites, including the crash of Kosmos-954 over northern Canada, which spread radioactive debris over a wide area.
Earlier this year, a US Iridium communications satellite collided in space with another Russian atomic-powered military satellite, Kosmos 2251, creating what scientists described as a huge and potentially hazardous cloud of debris in near-Earth orbit.
“The main danger with any nuclear activity in space comes with the transporting of these materials into orbit, and the sometimes unscripted return of them into the atmosphere,” says Vladimir Chuprov, an energy expert with Greenpeace-Russia.
“There is a history here that warns us to be very, very cautious about this idea,” he says.
Is space exploration too expensive for one nation? Click here to read about efforts to create an international Starfleet Command.
<< Maoists’ hijacking of Indian train reveals new audacity | MainComments
2. Mark | 10.29.09
I assume they intend the reactor to power an ion gas drive, which accelerates ionized heavy gasses with an electric charge. None of the articles about this have any real details. If we really want to go to Mars, this is good to carry people, but we also need to start a supply train, years in advance, of cargo ships carried along slowly by solar sails and slow ion drives, which require fuel only to adjust course.
3. Val | 10.29.09
Gary Williams: the “Soviets”? USSR disintegrated back in 1991. Welcome to almost 20 years ago. Brush up on some current events.
5. Russ | 10.29.09
I work at NASA, they release statements like this all the time… the cost estimate is DRASTICALLY underestimated so there is no need to worry. Plus nuclear powered rockets are not nearly as dangerous as people assume.
6. Go Russia | 10.29.09
Good on them. The Russians invernted space travel - first man-made object in orbit, first human in space etyc - and I hope they will excel again. Go Russia!
7. Voodoojedizin | 10.30.09
Here’s another one of those alarm articles!
The Americans have been experimenting with atomic powered rockets for many years. Where’s your alarm article about these experiments? In fact where’s your article these experiments I’ve never seen one at all?
I guess we only need to fear Russian Technology, because you never print any articles about American Technology and any negative effects it may have.
Cassini space probe got the same kind of headlines, is it safe!
Headlining articles like this turns it into nothing more than American propaganda. It specially when you don’t do your research concerning Americans use of atomic power in space.
8. Tess | 10.30.09
I am always proud of my Russian heritage, it gave my my blue eyes and my love of salted fish:) However, it’s articles like these that make my spirits sing! Imagine the information that could be gathered with even just one successful mission! Bring us back some sand! And repair those cute explorers up there while you’re at it!
Tess
9. Pete | 10.30.09
“Soviets”?! 
I am amazed by the amount of grudge/hatred some Americans have for Russians.
Sadly this has long gone beyond a mere political or economic ideological issue and became something of a religious nature.
I hope these people remember that when they need Russian cooperation again. Speaking of which, don’t forget to buy tickets for your next ride to the International Space Station…
10. Mark Duncan | 10.30.09
The Russians frequently come out with great pronouncements about new spacecraft that never happen. Nobody is going to Mars with even an unmanned nuclear powered mission with only six hundred million dollars. Please understand that I would be very, very, happy if they could but its just not possible. I sometimes believe that announcements like this are intended for domestic consumption in order to keep the Russian people thinking that they are technologically relevant in the world. As you mentioned in the the article they are little more than a courier for other nations to get into orbit with both manned and unmanned services. It will be easier for the rest of the world to believe and have confidence in them if they actually do anything new with their spaceflight heritage.
11. Jason | 10.30.09
I doubt Russia will ever be able to get this project off the ground. On the positive side though, it should at least make a good case to pump more money into NASA and to make space exploration an interest again. If there is one thing we Americans are good at, it jumping into something so we can tell the others involved that we can do it better.
12. superpator | 10.30.09
For all spacefans, it would be great to see the Russians re-launching the space-race, and sometime they can be surprising, so who really knows what’s behind this announcement ?
Furthermore - sorry to say - seen from Europe, the NASA is no longer what it used to be. In fact, today, Soyouz rockets seem safer than the old space shuttle to reach the ISS, so it’s really patronizing to consider the Russians as “taxis”.
So, if the Russians did a breakthrough, good for them, and maybe this will awake NASA and the interest of US citizens for space. But please stop considering them as “soviets”, I’ve got the feeling that Reagan’s ghost has entered the room…
Superpator
13. sena | 10.30.09
In US we do not have to bother about such “immpossible” and long term projects. All our managers and CEOS (who normaly have no science background)are only interested in shortterm gains so that they can show up the books to justify their huge salaries and bonuses.
14. Alan | 10.30.09
Two comments. First, “Is it safe?” Heck NO its not safe ! You are riding a giant lit powder keg into an oxygen free environment ! That is the point !! Get over it !! It is a little thing we like to call a challenge and human beings used to thrive on them !!
Second, don’t be so sure this can’t happen. Since the days of serious high energy nuclear rocket research there have been many breakthroughs in high temperature materials that would probably make some postulated designs almost child’s play today (admittedly I have not researched this). Look up the magnetically confined gaseous UF6 nuclear rocket design some time. With fixed magnet confinement, hydrogen propellant (light payload with additional diatomic recombination energy out in the nozzle), and solid state magneto-hydrodynamic generator at the nozzle, you have the whole propulsion and power plant package. And this was thought up by a few collage students two decades ago… Serious researchers should be able to do much better than this. I would bet we see a mission to Mars before we see a fusion power reactor, but they are both inevitabilities (perhaps not within our lifetime, though). Kudos to anyone who thinks they are up to the challenge and willing to try !!
15. Karl | 10.30.09
NASA, are you reading this?
This thing will fly almost at the same time your stone age “moon rocket” will.
And even if they will be over budget, say 100%, it still will be 50(100?) times cheaper.
16. Jim Wilson | 10.30.09
Would this be the same Russia that must buy its airliners from Airbus and Boeing and its computers from Dell?
17. Xsfizzix | 10.30.09
Erm… $600Mil? It costs $250Mil just to build a launch a dummy communications satelite into LEO.
Call me shortsighted, but the new design better be incorporating a lot of paper clips and a giant rubber band to meet that target pricetag…
18. Go Russia | 10.30.09
Bla bla bla. Mark Duncan - “…but its just not possible…” - that ’s what you thought when the Sputnik took off and then again when Gagarin became the fist (and Soviet!) human in space. Happened before and will happen again!
19. Richard Wolfe | 10.31.09
I did read an article that said that the Russians would use the reactor to power an ion drive. Fortunately, former American astronaut Chiang-Diaz invented an electrodeless ion drive called the VASIMR. They plan to test it on the ISS in 2013 and use it to maintain and boost the orbit of the ISS. It will save $120 million in fuel every year!!! It will be powered by the solar panels, but in a trip to Mars, it will need a reactor. Here is his really cool website with fantastic animation of a Mars trip at the bottom of the webpage: http://www.adastrarocket.com/ToMars.html This rocket can reduce the travel time and radiation exposure by months. One estimate 39 days.
20. Spacefan | 10.31.09
1)Russia is not paying 600 M$ for the Mars mission, this is the cost of only one of it component(out of many) - the nuclear reactor, that’s all. Also (imho) the main part of this progect will be done by RosAtom, not the RosKosmos.
2)Igor Lisov didn’t said that this reactor is impossible to be done, he said that nuclear rocket engine (which is a completely different thing) is impossible.
22. Max | 11.01.09
I always get a kick out of the Fulton Steamboat-like critics who utter comments like “It’s never been done before, and probably never will…” E.G. “It’ll never start! It’ll never start!” (It starts) “It’ll never go! It’ll never go!!” (It goes) Then in a final cry of desperation “It’ll never stop!! It’ll never stop!!” Har, har, har; when will these people ever take a break?
They remind me of the old Frankenstein movie with the wild-eyed Luddite villagers marching on the doctor’s castle with pitchforks and clubs in hand to put an end to that “dangerous technology”.
Let there be no doubt: nuclear-powered rockets are both possible and inevitable. It’s just a matter of time, money, and earplugs to shut out the environmentalist Luddites.
23. spacetarget | 11.02.09
i’m please to know that pay my gas bill will serve to something else than increase oligarch account.
It’s interessant that’s today, its not only benefit or curiosity but also the patriotism who continue to push the mankind to the conquest and understanding of space.
I usually dont have the feeling with patriotism, except in science
Its sad to say, but if we follow corporates interests, explore space is too expensive,
so Do we must stay on the earth and continue to watch the sky and only launch profitables satellit for some obvious money reasons ?
But just a question, does the budget is serious ? 600m $ for a fly to mars …
25. nick | 11.20.09
The many Soviet “firsts” in space exploration include: the first launch to Mars (”Mars-1,” November 1, 1962) and the first landing on Mars (”Mars-3″ – launched March 28, 1971; landed, December 2, 1971).
I am glad to see that Russia is continuing this tradition.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
1. Twitter Trackbacks for Russians to ride a nuclear-powered spacecraft to Mars | csmonitor.com [csmonitor.com] on Topsy.com | 10.29.09
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. Gary Williams, Signal Hill, CA | 10.29.09
An interesting concept, but can all of the adequate safeguards be taken. Hopefully safety is a major concern, more so than chauvinistic pride; however with the Soviets I have my doubts.