this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2026
25 points (100.0% liked)
Engineering
972 readers
37 users here now
A place to geek out about engineering, fabrication, and design. All disciplines are welcome. Ask questions, share knowledge, show off projects you're proud of, and share interesting things you find.
Rules:
- Be kind.
- Generally stay on topic.
- No homework questions.
- No asking for advice on potentially dangerous jobs. Hire a professional. We don't want to be responsible when your deck collapses.
The community icon is ISO 7000-1641.
The current community banner image is from Lee Attwood on Unsplash.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You really don't understand this.
EDIT: actually, I withdraw my comment. In fact it was I that didn't understand. I read your comment as "we could use it as a fusion reactor." A fission reactor would in fact work as the power source as well. You are correct.
Though, the big downside of a fission reactor in space is that you need giant radiators to cool it. In many applications it's probably easier just to use more solar panels and fewer radiators. At least solar panels don't generate tons of waste heat. You still need radiators, but 1 watt of solar power requires one watt of radiators. With a reactor, as its a heat engine, 1 watt of electric power requires 4 watts of radiators.
I’m still a much bigger fan of solar thermal rockets because I’m a sucker for steampunk spaceships with valves and giant mirrors.
But I’m sure there’s a limit where the number of solar panels or giant mirrors is less efficient than a nuke.
The fact that it runs on just straight electricity is what’s really cool about it. As long as you got juice you can store up for a big burn.
You did try real good though