Is it time to develop atomic/nuclear engines for prop aircraft?

[On the way]

With the advent of electric engines for prop aircraft, light the re-engining of DH Beavers with Magni500 electric engines,  it should be time to look at a small and lightweight nuclear reactor to power these electric engines, rather then batteries. Something simple to operate and maintain. Something jetttisonable if anything goes wrong. I read somewhere that the world's smallest nuclear reactor weight under 5kg. Not sure what the power yield on that was. The range on the aircraft would be phenomenal vs a battery powered electric aircraft. Any studies out there looking into this?

[DB]

No.

[Stuart Galbraith]

You only have to look at what happened when the Russians tried an Isotope fuel engine which blew up, to see there are significant issues with this idea.

 

[JWB]

Vastly too expensive.

[Josh]

I suspect cooling a reactor achieving the needed power density would be incredibly difficult, with the added problem of the weight of shielding if you wanted anyone to fly on it. All of this is before you consider any safety or political issues that might arise from flying reactors.

[sunday]

4 hours ago, On the way said:

With the advent of electric engines for prop aircraft, light the re-engining of DH Beavers with Magni500 electric engines,  it should be time to look at a small and lightweight nuclear reactor to power these electric engines, rather then batteries. Something simple to operate and maintain. Something jetttisonable if anything goes wrong. I read somewhere that the world's smallest nuclear reactor weight under 5kg. Not sure what the power yield on that was. The range on the aircraft would be phenomenal vs a battery powered electric aircraft. Any studies out there looking into this?

There are Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators, but they present a series of quite major drawbacks when used in Earth.

[TrustMe]

The Russians have these in R&D https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9M730_Burevestnik

[shootER5]

Convair NB-36H

[Kenneth P. Katz]

The three horrible, terrible, inherently bad ideas in aerospace vehicle design:

1. Nuclear air-breathing propulsion for aircraft
2. Single stage-to-orbit launch vehicle
3. Flying cars aka roadable airplanes

These ideas seem to be irresistable and yet they never work or work well.

[bojan]

Flying cars could work... until the moment that people realize they need full pilot license even if they want to only drive them on the ground. 

[RETAC21]

9 hours ago, Kenneth P. Katz said:

The three horrible, terrible, inherently bad ideas in aerospace vehicle design:

1. Nuclear air-breathing propulsion for aircraft
2. Single stage-to-orbit launch vehicle
3. Flying cars aka roadable airplanes

These ideas seem to be irresistable and yet they never work or work well.

Hopefully, we can count on Elon Musk building a Nuclear air-breathing, single stage-to-orbit launch vehicle that also is a flying car.

 

[glenn239]

I want an atomic powered cell phone, because recharging all the time is a bother.

[Josh]

I think there actually are very low power batteries made from nuclear waste.

Edited March 1, 2022 by Josh

[bojan]

Radio isotope generators.

[DB]

Have been used in pacemakers in the past, but they're not ideal for most purposes.

[futon]

17 hours ago, bojan said:

Flying cars could work... until the moment that people realize they need full pilot license even if they want to only drive them on the ground. 

It may not be so farfetched. Airlines are only a step or two away from being flown entirely autonomously. Autonomous driving is being introduced in cars as well. A flying car probably won't hand over the flying to the driver. 

[sunday]

Trains could be operated autonomously since decades ago, especially in high traffic lines, and subway trains without driver cab are not so uncommon nowadays. But the problem of driving a train is simpler, as steering is not necessary.

[bojan]

6 hours ago, futon said:

It may not be so farfetched. Airlines are only a step or two away from being flown entirely autonomously. Autonomous driving is being introduced in cars as well. A flying car probably won't hand over the flying to the driver. 

Cars are way less problematic to fully automate then planes. Plus there is a marketing and liability issue, none cares for one "fender bender" per day in any city, while any news of problem with aircraft are big news and potential company killing lawsuits (unless you bribe off aviation authorities like Boeing did...). Technology is not there and will not be there for a while to have fully autonomous planes w/o pilot transporting people.

Another thing, cheapest thing about aircraft is a pilot, no matter how good his salary is and how much his training costs. Because for every pilot you need to have number of various maintenance personal running checks daily. And those people who can afford it tend to hire their own drivers anyway, leaving only real enthusiasts to bother with piloting. So not even market is there ATM.

 

 

Edited March 2, 2022 by bojan

[KV7]

4 hours ago, bojan said:

Cars are way less problematic to fully automate then planes. Plus there is a marketing and liability issue, none cares for one "fender bender" per day in any city, while any news of problem with aircraft are big news and potential company killing lawsuits (unless you bribe off aviation authorities like Boeing did...). Technology is not there and will not be there for a while to have fully autonomous planes w/o pilot transporting people.

Another thing, cheapest thing about aircraft is a pilot, no matter how good his salary is and how much his training costs. Because for every pilot you need to have number of various maintenance personal running checks daily. And those people who can afford it tend to hire their own drivers anyway, leaving only real enthusiasts to bother with piloting. So not even market is there ATM.

 

 

They are at best a sort of compromised light helicopter. And there isn't much of a market for private helicopter transport.

[BansheeOne]

Y'all thinking way too small.

 

[Ssnake]

[RETAC21]

There are always spoilsports lurking

 

[17thfabn]

On 2/28/2022 at 9:58 PM, Kenneth P. Katz said:

The three horrible, terrible, inherently bad ideas in aerospace vehicle design:

1. Nuclear air-breathing propulsion for aircraft
2. Single stage-to-orbit launch vehicle
3. Flying cars aka roadable airplanes

Where is my jet pack?

I should have had a jet pack by 2001. Here it is mid 2022 and still NO JET PACK!!!!

[Steven P Allen]

On 2/17/2022 at 7:08 AM, On the way said:

 Something jetttisonable if anything goes wrong.

😲

What possible good would that do?  It would simply change the trajectory of the falling power plant by separating it from the air frame.

Choosing between having an entire nuc aircraft falling on my house or just its nuclear plant doesn't really give me much choice, does it?

 

[Ssnake]

At least the passengers would not get irradiated, just some peasants on the ground.