Rocket Propulsion Systems: Chemical, Nuclear, and Thermonuclear Engines in the Context of Kazakhstan’s Aerospace Future.

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.
Log in to save this article

Abstract

This research presents a comparative assessment of three major propulsion paradigms—chemical (RS-25), nuclear-thermal (NTR), and thermonuclear (PFRC)—to determine their relative feasibility for future deep-space missions and for emerging space programs such as Kazakhstan’s. A harmonized framework was developed to normalize thrust, specific impulse, system mass, and operating temperature under consistent assumptions, enabling direct cross-class comparison. Using data from NASA, DARPA, and NIAC sources, the study translates engine-level metrics into architecture-level outcomes including payload fraction, transfer duration, and readiness level. Results show that chemical engines, although fully mature (TRL 9), are constrained by the limits of combustion efficiency. Nuclear-thermal systems roughly double the specific impulse while maintaining practical thrust levels, making them the most realistic near-term option for Mars and cislunar missions. Fusion propulsion promises an order-of-magnitude leap in performance, yet its technology remains in an early conceptual stage (TRL 2–3). Overall, nuclear-thermal propulsion emerges as the most balanced solution—combining strong performance, proven principles, and strategic compatibility for nations with nuclear expertise—while fusion stands as a long-term goal for future exploration.

Article activity feed