Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Phys Org2)   Clearly having never seen "Space:1999," NASA is looking for ideas for a nuclear reactor on the moon   (phys.org) divider line
    More: Interesting, Nuclear power, Nuclear fission, Electricity generation, nuclear fission power plant, Space exploration, fission surface power system, Mars, Nuclear physics  
•       •       •

349 clicks; posted to STEM » on 20 Nov 2021 at 12:50 PM (26 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



49 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-11-20 9:35:36 AM  
God I loved that show as a kid.  I should look it up again and see if it still stands up to time and my adult mind.
 
2021-11-20 9:42:21 AM  

Diogenes: God I loved that show as a kid.  I should look it up again and see if it still stands up to time and my adult mind.


It doesn't.

Still a guilty pleasure though
 
2021-11-20 9:43:53 AM  
It wasn't a reactor in the show, it was a waste dump.
 
2021-11-20 10:47:10 AM  

Diogenes: God I loved that show as a kid.  I should look it up again and see if it still stands up to time and my adult mind.


Don't.  The model work is nice, but that's it.
 
2021-11-20 11:09:58 AM  
play KSP with the interstellar mod. You can put nuclear reactors pretty much anywhere.
 
2021-11-20 12:13:00 PM  
They have to get to this stage first
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-11-20 12:24:27 PM  
Simply have it built by the Amazon women who already live there.
 
2021-11-20 12:32:07 PM  

fragMasterFlash: Simply have it built by the Amazon women who already live there.


Well, there goes my lunch.
 
2021-11-20 12:34:04 PM  

phygz: They have to get to this stage first
[Fark user image 425x318]


Bendydick Cumbersnoochie's IRL mom -

metatroniks.netView Full Size
metatroniks.netView Full Size
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-11-20 12:36:32 PM  

labman: Diogenes: God I loved that show as a kid.  I should look it up again and see if it still stands up to time and my adult mind.

Don't.  The model work is nice, but that's it.


I agree some of the story lines were cringey along with the premise however I did enjoy the interaction between Martin Landau and Barry Morse in season 1.  Two great actors.  And who ever came up with the space ships (Eagles?) they were practical functioning ships compared to some sci-fi shows.

However, this episode scared the fertilizer out of me when I watched it:

Space: 1999 Season 1 Episode 8 Dragon's Domain
Youtube --3Che2WhaI
 
2021-11-20 1:07:46 PM  
So they're using the homeless & itinerant workers as reactor shielding now? That's some Cave Johnson shiat right there...

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-11-20 1:38:43 PM  
Why not focus on putting more on Earth?
 
2021-11-20 1:49:51 PM  
I'm curious what will be producing the power?

Reactors don't create power, they create heat. How do we plan on turning this into power on the moon? (in a vacuum, with lots of dust to fark up any machinery)

I guess NASA is curious too, which is why they're asking :P
 
2021-11-20 1:52:47 PM  

FrostbiteFallsMN: labman: Diogenes: God I loved that show as a kid.  I should look it up again and see if it still stands up to time and my adult mind.

Don't.  The model work is nice, but that's it.

I agree some of the story lines were cringey along with the premise however I did enjoy the interaction between Martin Landau and Barry Morse in season 1.  Two great actors.  And who ever came up with the space ships (Eagles?) they were practical functioning ships compared to some sci-fi shows.

However, this episode scared the fertilizer out of me when I watched it:

[YouTube video: Space: 1999 Season 1 Episode 8 Dragon's Domain]


IIRC, free on TUBI.

I rewatched a bunch of months ago just for kicks.
 
2021-11-20 1:56:28 PM  
Well the good news is we have made remarkable progress on making reactors more compact


The bad news is we have yet to make a reliable reactor that meets the requirements. Also, the whole lack of gravity means entirely new design parameters have to be created to account for a lot of things acting differently
 
2021-11-20 2:18:48 PM  

lifeslammer: Well the good news is we have made remarkable progress on making reactors more compact


The bad news is we have yet to make a reliable reactor that meets the requirements. Also, the whole lack of gravity means entirely new design parameters have to be created to account for a lot of things acting differently


Agreed but that having been said their is gravity on the moon it is just far less than earth and as you wisely stated it will need to be accounted for.
 
2021-11-20 2:50:00 PM  

labman: Diogenes: God I loved that show as a kid.  I should look it up again and see if it still stands up to time and my adult mind.

Don't.  The model work is nice, but that's it.


There's a lot of great acting , so stiffle yourself.
 
2021-11-20 2:53:04 PM  

Circusdog320: It doesn't.


It kind of does. Of course the premise is silly, but if I recall correctly--

Ach, dammit. Just bough Season 1 on Amazon. BBL.
 
2021-11-20 3:01:19 PM  
It's not impossible to design the reactor. The problem is that if it explodes on takeoff you've got a big farking problem. And if it crashes on landing you've got a problem on the moon.
 
2021-11-20 3:03:23 PM  

Russ1642: It's not impossible to design the reactor. The problem is that if it explodes on takeoff you've got a big farking problem. And if it crashes on landing you've got a problem on the moon.


Meh.  There aren't any HOAs on the Moon yet, so you're good on that end.  You can have as much trash in your backyard as you want.
 
2021-11-20 3:07:13 PM  

MurphyMurphy: I'm curious what will be producing the power?

Reactors don't create power, they create heat. How do we plan on turning this into power on the moon? (in a vacuum, with lots of dust to fark up any machinery)

I guess NASA is curious too, which is why they're asking :P


They shop phys.org comments for ideas.
 
2021-11-20 3:26:44 PM  
Eagle: Firstest and bestest. <3
 
2021-11-20 3:38:51 PM  

MurphyMurphy: I'm curious what will be producing the power?

Reactors don't create power, they create heat. How do we plan on turning this into power on the moon? (in a vacuum, with lots of dust to fark up any machinery)

I guess NASA is curious too, which is why they're asking :P


Current nuclear non-reactors (just leave the plutonium as is) heat a thermocouple and let that produce electricity.  I'd assume you could scale this up a little as a "nuclear pile".  But in practice you'd simply wind up with a heat engine driving a generator.  Ghastly inefficient, as the "cold side" is largely "cold" because you turned said heat into electricity, but energy efficiency really isn't the issue with nuclear power in space (practically infinite).  No idea how bad the mass efficiency, nor how you deal with all the heat (always an issue in space).
 
2021-11-20 3:44:43 PM  
I've seen the Archer season that supposedly references it, but I have not seen the source material so I am probably missing a lot of jokes.
 
2021-11-20 4:09:16 PM  

Russ1642: It's not impossible to design the reactor. The problem is that if it explodes on takeoff you've got a big farking problem.


Stop thinking about explosion being problem! Maybe explosion happy solution!
 
2021-11-20 4:21:22 PM  

alienated: There's a lot of great acting , so stiffle yourself


And surprisingly complex plots, too.

Produced by Lew Grade, of course, a man whose ambition knew no bounds (save for UK television budgets).

No one will ever believe me, but Space:1999 was a miraculous achievement.

I have a misremembered quote within my head from him. It goes something like, "I made good shows. I made bad shows. But all of them were great shows."

Anyway I think one of his sons ran off to run the BBC or something.
 
2021-11-20 4:26:59 PM  

PartTimeBuddha: Russ1642: It's not impossible to design the reactor. The problem is that if it explodes on takeoff you've got a big farking problem.

Stop thinking about explosion being problem! Maybe explosion happy solution!


We already do that.  RTGs and reactor casings are designed to stay intact but we spread 1g plutonium pellets across probes to act as heaters and offer conspiracy fanservice.
 
2021-11-20 4:41:58 PM  
Season 1 is variable ...but has a few really good shows, and a sort of metaphysical approach. The science is rubbish but the ideas are interesting. Some phenomenal guest stars as well.

For season 2 they brought in the same producer who did season 3 of the original Star Trek to make it more American.. and it's absolutely unwatchable except for the visual effects by Brian Johnson, who would go on to do the visual effects for Alien and The empire strikes back, winning academy awards for both.
 
2021-11-20 5:31:19 PM  
Oh, NASA saw 'Space: 1999', all right!

They're *still* laughing their asses off.
 
2021-11-20 5:33:08 PM  

MurphyMurphy: Reactors don't create power, they create heat. How do we plan on turning this into power on the moon? (in a vacuum, with lots of dust to fark up any machinery)


Same as on Earth. The reactor creates heat and the heat is used to turn water into steam to drive a turbine.

The problem is the waste heat. Here on Earth we have large bodies of water to dump the waste heat. In space, you need to radiate it away. What we call a radiator on Earth mostly functions through convection, so a radiator in space has to be HUGE to radiate away that much waste heat.
 
2021-11-20 5:33:36 PM  

thehellisthis: PartTimeBuddha: Russ1642: It's not impossible to design the reactor. The problem is that if it explodes on takeoff you've got a big farking problem.

Stop thinking about explosion being problem! Maybe explosion happy solution!

We already do that.  RTGs and reactor casings are designed to stay intact but we spread 1g plutonium pellets across probes to act as heaters and offer conspiracy fanservice.


Reactors are a wee bit bigger.
 
2021-11-20 5:34:33 PM  

MurphyMurphy: I'm curious what will be producing the power?

Reactors don't create power, they create heat. How do we plan on turning this into power on the moon? (in a vacuum, with lots of dust to fark up any machinery)

I guess NASA is curious too, which is why they're asking :P


You could run a steam turbine with large radiator panels to condense it back to water, all in a closed loop not affected by vacuum or dust.
 
2021-11-20 5:41:43 PM  

Russ1642: thehellisthis: PartTimeBuddha: Russ1642: It's not impossible to design the reactor. The problem is that if it explodes on takeoff you've got a big farking problem.

Stop thinking about explosion being problem! Maybe explosion happy solution!

We already do that.  RTGs and reactor casings are designed to stay intact but we spread 1g plutonium pellets across probes to act as heaters and offer conspiracy fanservice.

Reactors are a wee bit bigger.


Then pack the rods separately.  Run a refueling program from the start.
 
2021-11-20 6:27:52 PM  

austerity101: Why not focus on putting more on Earth?


Well if their using the idea I sent them then they are going to cover the dark side of the Moon with nuculear power plants because it's so cold there that cooling won't be a problem and then run a really long power cable back here to Earth. We get all the power and none of the waste or radiation.
 
2021-11-20 7:18:09 PM  

Aardvark Inc.: So they're using the homeless & itinerant workers as reactor shielding now? That's some Cave Johnson shiat right there...

[Fark user image 654x433]


In the industry... and we call things like how the plant temperature and pressure change when you change the output power level, or turn on a 2nd coolant pump, a "transient". It was confusing as all hell when I first started...
 
2021-11-20 8:06:40 PM  
Gerry Anderson opening theme music appreciation thread.

Gerry Anderson's Space:1999 Opening Titles (Season 1)
Youtube 4SpX8bVEmJo
 
2021-11-20 8:08:24 PM  
This was the high point, for me.

UFO (TV series) - (Intro & Outro)
Youtube 1qDy4OMAkgY
 
2021-11-20 8:08:45 PM  

phygz: They have to get to this stage first
[Fark user image image 425x318]


The uniforms on UFO warped my fragile little mind
Fark user imageView Full Size
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-11-20 9:08:14 PM  

khitsicker: play KSP with the interstellar mod. You can put nuclear reactors pretty much anywhere.


IF you can figure out the heat dissipation.
 
2021-11-20 9:24:57 PM  
Seriously, guys, take a look at the 'Atomic Rockets' web page (http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/ ).

The focus is mainly on atomic power for driving a spaceship, but there's hard engineering info there covering damn near every aspect of reactor design and operation.

A lot of the good stuff is spread out all over the site, but one good place to start is the 'Engineering Deck' page (Engine Deck - Atomic Rockets (projectrho.com).

If you look at their index page -

Fark user imageView Full Size


- you'll see that the 'Atomic Fuel', 'Atomic Radiation', 'Power Plant', and 'Appendices' pages should be useful as well, but there's a lot of *great* information all over this huge site.
 
2021-11-20 9:27:48 PM  

phygz: They have to get to this stage first
[Fark user image 425x318]


UFO was my favourite TV show when it debuted. Back in late January 2020 when I was on death's door sick with the absolute worst cold I'd had in my life what little joy I could muster came from discovering all episodes of UFO were on Youtube for free. I rewatched it with an adult eye and was surprised at how well it held up. Yeah there was a lot of sci-fi cheese and social naivety but over all it was still pretty enjoyable.

Of course when I watched it as a kid it was on a 14 inch black and white television so it was really nice to finally see it in colour.
 
2021-11-20 9:30:29 PM  

labman: Diogenes: God I loved that show as a kid.  I should look it up again and see if it still stands up to time and my adult mind.

Don't.  The model work is nice, but that's it.


The models were actually made for a second season of UFO but that series got cancelled so they were repurposed for Space 1999.
 
2021-11-20 9:59:41 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-11-20 10:59:25 PM  

Enigmamf: I've seen the Archer season that supposedly references it, but I have not seen the source material so I am probably missing a lot of jokes.


You have to say it slow, sound it out.
 
2021-11-21 1:30:53 AM  

thehellisthis: Russ1642: thehellisthis: PartTimeBuddha: Russ1642: It's not impossible to design the reactor. The problem is that if it explodes on takeoff you've got a big farking problem.

Stop thinking about explosion being problem! Maybe explosion happy solution!

We already do that.  RTGs and reactor casings are designed to stay intact but we spread 1g plutonium pellets across probes to act as heaters and offer conspiracy fanservice.

Reactors are a wee bit bigger.

Then pack the rods separately.  Run a refueling program from the start.


Refueling? LOL. Nobody's running a nuclear reactor refueling operation on the Moon. It's a gigantic pain in the ass here on Earth. If anything gets built it'll have fuel for 30 years.
 
2021-11-21 10:36:19 AM  

elvisaintdead: phygz: They have to get to this stage first
[Fark user image 425x318]

Bendydick Cumbersnoochie's IRL mom -

[metatroniks.net image 600x603][metatroniks.net image 600x603][Fark user image 600x603]


damn. sorry about the triples.

/not really sorry
 
2021-11-21 12:17:19 PM  
Just watch out for the Queller Drive.
 
2021-11-21 8:03:15 PM  
Guys. Guys!!

Learn to deal with dust in general first.

Then get a company that can build a machine in 3-5 parts that can self assemble remotely on the moon. That machine must print >= 1 brick and move it off the machine.

Let's start blue collar, then move up to reactors.
 
2021-11-22 12:05:00 AM  

BullBearMS: This was the high point, for me.

[iFrame https://www.youtube.com/embed/1qDy4OMAkgY?autoplay=1&widget_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&start=0&enablejsapi=1&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&widgetid=1]


That's been my main ringtone for a decade or so.  Almost nobody recognizes it.
 
Displayed 49 of 49 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.