Nukes in Space?

[Morfius]

Some times in Sci-Fi, Nukes are shown, sometimes exploding on impact, sometimes exploding in proximity to their target.

My Question is: What would a Nuke do in the vacuum of space? Without an atmosphere for it to push against, would it produce anything more than an intense burst of radiation?

I Suppose you could cover the outside of the warhead with plates of unobtainium to make a sort of super-fragmentation grenade. But if a substance that wouldn't vaporise in nuclear detonations existed, wouldn't space ship hulls be made of the stuff?

 

[skep155]

Im presuming it would still create some form of shockwave since NASA came up with an idea for nuclear pulse propulsion in the 50's, to cut a long story short, craploads of nukes are shot out of the rear of the rocket every minute and spaceship rides the shockwave. Theoretically it could get us to Mars in four weeks, but NASA mothballed the plan when a treaty with the Russians banned nukes in space. I can't remember how they were actually planning on producing a shockwave of that kind in space, i think it had something to do with plasma.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

Well even in space there's dust and particles and an exploding nuke emits that much radiation that a burst of it against something will cause some kind of push i'm sure.

 

[Alpha_Geek]

A bright light and hard radiation. The only matter dispursed would be the material of the bomb itself, and the few molecules and atoms in the vacuum of space.

If you were fairly close to the detonation, you'd get the impact of that materia,l but as distance increased from the detonation point, the force would decrease rapidly as the relatively small amount of matter from the bomb would be spread over the perimiter of an ever increasing front.

There would be no shock wave like on earth, that's an atmospheric effect.

 

[skep155]

A bright light and hard radiation. The only matter dispursed would be the material of the bomb itself, and the few molecules and atoms in the vacuum of space.

If you were fairly close to the detonation, you'd get the impact of that materia,l but as distance increased from the detonation point, the force would decrease rapidly as the relatively small amount of matter from the bomb would be spread over the perimiter of an ever increasing front.

There would be no shock wave like on earth, that's an atmospheric effect.

Then how were NASA planning on using the detonation of atomic bombs behind a rocket to propel it forward?

 

[All Seeing Eye]

A bright light and hard radiation. The only matter dispursed would be the material of the bomb itself, and the few molecules and atoms in the vacuum of space.

If you were fairly close to the detonation, you'd get the impact of that materia,l but as distance increased from the detonation point, the force would decrease rapidly as the relatively small amount of matter from the bomb would be spread over the perimiter of an ever increasing front.

There would be no shock wave like on earth, that's an atmospheric effect.

Then how were NASA planning on using the detonation of atomic bombs behind a rocket to propel it forward?

The bombs would be detonated against the actual plate itself. At least that's what I think was the plan.

On another note, if the bomb was covered with a cavity and within this cavity was a dense gas or perhaps liquid this might possibly increase the force exerted on the asteroid.

 

[Alpha_Geek]

Taccy is pretty close to right this time. The Orion depended on the detonation occurring in close proximity to the plate, and the the portion of the matter and energy released would push against the massive plate/shield at the aft end of the spacecraft.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

My Question is: What would a Nuke do in the vacuum of space? Without an atmosphere for it to push against, would it produce anything more than an intense burst of radiation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_altitude_nuclear_explosion

 

[Jadzia]

Taccy is pretty close to right this time. The Orion depended on the detonation occurring in close proximity to the plate, and the the portion of the matter and energy released would push against the massive plate/shield at the aft end of the spacecraft.

I'm not sure what the fluid mechanics of the engine would be since it would be rather low density. The exploding material would be fluidic in the form of a superheated gas plasma. The explosion would also have a supersonic flow, which is an immediate problem since a lot of that energy would not be doing useful work if it were against a flat plate.

I'm inclined to think the gas would be best contained in an explosion chamber, and then forced into a controlled expansion over an inverted funnel (like on most rocket engines) to pass as much momentum from the gas to the craft as possible.

 

[Alpha_Geek]

Jadzia, some Orion concepts (Footfall by Niven and Pournelle for example) featured a dome rather than a plate. Perhaps that's a compromise between the early flat plate designs and having to engineer a combustion chamber capable of holding a nuke?

 

[The Squire of Gothos]

Then how were NASA planning on using the detonation of atomic bombs behind a rocket to propel it forward?

Project Orion.

I like the photographic of the nuclear testing at high altitude, although at the time, without knowing what was happening, it must have been quite worrisome looking for the populations below.

 

[Alpha_Geek]

...and a crucial bit of data from that wiki page... here's the working mass that did the pushing!

Reaction mass for Orion would have been built into the bombs or dropped between 'pulses' to provide thrust. Polyethylene masses, garbage and sewage were all considered for use as reaction mass.

So, the actual explosion would yield little more than energy, but the (plasmafied?) working mass would push on the plate to provide the thrust.

 

[JustAFriend]

My Question is: What would a Nuke do in the vacuum of space? Without an atmosphere for it to push against, would it produce anything more than an intense burst of radiation?

Makes a pretty light show.

In the early '60s both the US and Russia tested nuclear bombs in space before treaties banned such tests.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/conghand/nuclear.htm

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/nuclear/hane.html

 

[sojourner]

Then how were NASA planning on using the detonation of atomic bombs behind a rocket to propel it forward?

Project Orion.

I like the photographic of the nuclear testing at high altitude, although at the time, without knowing what was happening, it must have been quite worrisome looking for the populations below.

What photo? Can't find one in that link.

 

[flux_29]

Mabye something like this:

 

[buzzknox]

...and a crucial bit of data from that wiki page... here's the working mass that did the pushing!

Reaction mass for Orion would have been built into the bombs or dropped between 'pulses' to provide thrust. Polyethylene masses, garbage and sewage were all considered for use as reaction mass.

So, the actual explosion would yield little more than energy, but the (plasmafied?) working mass would push on the plate to provide the thrust.

Exactly. That's where the concept of nuclear shaped charges come from.

 

[Alpha_Geek]

Nah FLux, there wouldn't be a Cylon base ship nearby... at least I hope not! Wait.. if there IS a cylon base ship, NUKE! LOL

The view would be more like this, at least from the ground:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime


It also notes the effects of the EMP on electronics nearly 900 miles away from a blast that occurred at an altitude of 250 miles from the 1.4 MT nuke.

The Orion sized nukes were .03 KT in the largest configuration. While the EMP effect would certainly be reduced, you'd probably not want to launch from a populated area...