Nuking Europa, Nukes and other 'futuristic' ideas for exploring Europa |
Nuking Europa, Nukes and other 'futuristic' ideas for exploring Europa |
Dec 5 2005, 07:45 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 5-December 05 Member No.: 597 |
Hi all! In my opinion, Europa explorer must be cheap and simple.
It must consist of 5 parts - 2 orbiters, 3 small and robust landers, and 3 nuclear and termonuclear bombs. I think that 10 Kt - 100 kt - 1 Mgt sequence is optimal. First orbiter is robust, high protected from radioactivity, armed device. On high orbite over Europe With simple and primitive long focused camera, laser-radar. It must to spectacle and record all nuclear explosion parametres. has also a radio recever from landers. second orbiter is orbiting low over the Europe. It must to fly over epicenter of nuke and drop lander to measure and see all. To defend more complex second orbiter from radioactivity rays of nuclear explosion, we struck and explode a nuke in another side of Europe Why nukes? Because it reveal all. First one, we"ll have a great quake of Europe. And can record all seismic infomation without landers. next one. we can to melt ice and see a clear water - just hollow in the crust!!! at 3 rd. We dont need a special lander. If we can melt great hollow in crust - we'll have a liquid water to catch our lander! We dont need airbags, rockets. Just an robust "lander" like small susmarine!! 4 th. we ll have great cloud of water vapour and ice to take from there any chemical information. |
|
|
Dec 6 2005, 02:52 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 5-December 05 Member No.: 597 |
QUOTE The 50 Mt Soviet "Tsar Bomba" was reduced in yield only to prevent a catastrophic increase in total world fission fallout since the beginning of nuclear testing era. It alone would have increased the fallout by some 25 %. That's the reason the fusion stage uranium jackets were replaced by lead, cutting the yield in half, perhaps even to a third of nominal, yet proving the design. The bomb by all means was not detonated in water, it (along with the majority of the other soviet bombs) was detonated several kilometers above the ground over the Novaya Zemlya peninsula. 1. estimated yield was 50 and 100 Mgt. 2. real yield was 57-62 Mgt. 3. bomb was detonated on 4000 m altitude. 4. all veterans says that radioactivity wasnt cause of reducing yield. 5. Sakharov's myth about reducing yield for lowering carbon-14 fallout - it a really myth. Untill 1962 Sakharov dont take in mind this. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 20th June 2024 - 07:11 AM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |