Nuclear fusion: it's time for a reality check

Re:Nuclear fusion: it's time for a reality check by notahacker on Wednesday January 29, 2025 @09:07AM (#42865028)

Voyager and Pioneer used RTGs, as well as some more recent longer range missions and the planned Dragonfly to Titan. Agree that solar has much better unit economics, but I don't see any reason why the same wouldn't be true of fusion too.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nuclear fusion: it's time for a reality check by pfdietz on Wednesday January 29, 2025 @09:12AM (#42865087)

And none of those use RTGs to power electric rocket engines.

(EDIT: thrusters are rocket engines, just very small ones. All those missions used small chemical rockets for maneuvering, using storable propellants like hydrazine.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nuclear fusion: it's time for a reality check by notahacker on Wednesday January 29, 2025 @09:26AM (#42865226)

Edit: I stand corrected on Voyager/Pioneer exclusively using hydrazine, though you could get similar thrust from a modern HET without needing insane amounts of RTG power, and run other electrical equipment off that extra power when you've reached target velocity and aren't firing the thrusters for attitude control. The higher Isp of the EP system is an advantage too...

[ Parent | on HN ]