Sorry misread the question, it's about another 1960s idea - to launch a nuclear reactor into space, small scale one, to use for nuclear thermal propulsion - I don't think there is anything to stop that. A google search turned up this (which I didn't know about before) - 2013 project. NASA team pushing towards thermal nuclear propulsion systems. And clearly under active development, here is another study NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)
Okay - it's actually the 1963 nuclear test ban treaty rather than the 1967 Outer Space treaty that stopped the project Orion.
Before they take off the ground, you would need to explode nuclear weapons on the surface of the Earth + air bursts.
I'm not sure if they breach the OST. On the face of it you'd think so because it bans placing weapons of mass destruction in orbit (not just their detonation).
Maybe you can argue that as a method of propulsion, it's not really a weapon of mass destruction?
But - you'd need a rather stable peaceful world before anyone could launch thousands of nuclear weapons into space and have nobody suspicious that it might have some other motive behind it.
Perhaps - if for instance there was an incoming asteroid, say 10 km across due to hit the Earth within a few years, and this was the only way to deflect it in time, maybe we could all come together and agree to just ignore the partial test ban treaty for once, and to treat it as a one off exception to the OST?
Chances of that though, very tiny, 0.0001% or thereabouts for such a meteorite to be headed our way before 2100. And I think probably the future without it is better than the future with it myself :).
It's a shame in a way I agree, that we have this technology that could launch thousand tons rockets into space, but then on the other hand it is hard to see it being safe enough to be reliable in the near future.
And again in our current world climate - if we find a way to launch thousands of tons into orbit - would that be used only peacefully?
I think that the ability to launch thousands of tons into space, however it is done, may need to be accompanied by development of other measures in parallel to keep this technology peaceful.
It's not impossible. After all, we now have technology that could have totally destabilized c19 world, say. Imagine what would have happened to our world if they had had our technology? Suddenly? Suppose that all C21 science and technology was developed in the end of the C19 instead - some amazing genius inventor who thought of everything? In that imaginary parallel present I think there probably wouldn't be too much left of our civilization. It would be just too much to handle, too soon.
I think we can move to a more peaceful future like this, but it may be as well that we don't yet have this technology. It could have been a similar case of too much power too soon.
Old answer about Orion:
Okay - it's actually the 1963 nuclear test ban treaty rather than the 1967 Outer Space treaty that stopped the project Orion.
Before they take off the ground, you would need to explode nuclear weapons on the surface of the Earth + air bursts.
I'm not sure if they breach the OST. On the face of it you'd think so because it bans placing weapons of mass destruction in orbit (not just their detonation).
States Parties to the Treaty undertake not to place in orbit around the earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner.
Maybe you can argue that as a method of propulsion, it's not really a weapon of mass destruction?
But - you'd need a rather stable peaceful world before anyone could launch thousands of nuclear weapons into space and have nobody suspicious that it might have some other motive behind it.
Perhaps - if for instance there was an incoming asteroid, say 10 km across due to hit the Earth within a few years, and this was the only way to deflect it in time, maybe we could all come together and agree to just ignore the partial test ban treaty for once, and to treat it as a one off exception to the OST?
Chances of that though, very tiny, 0.0001% or thereabouts for such a meteorite to be headed our way before 2100. And I think probably the future without it is better than the future with it myself :).
It's a shame in a way I agree, that we have this technology that could launch thousand tons rockets into space, but then on the other hand it is hard to see it being safe enough to be reliable in the near future.
And again in our current world climate - if we find a way to launch thousands of tons into orbit - would that be used only peacefully?
I think that the ability to launch thousands of tons into space, however it is done, may need to be accompanied by development of other measures in parallel to keep this technology peaceful.
It's not impossible. After all, we now have technology that could have totally destabilized c19 world, say. Imagine what would have happened to our world if they had had our technology? Suddenly? Suppose that all C21 science and technology was developed in the end of the C19 instead - some amazing genius inventor who thought of everything? In that imaginary parallel present I think there probably wouldn't be too much left of our civilization. It would be just too much to handle, too soon.
I think we can move to a more peaceful future like this, but it may be as well that we don't yet have this technology. It could have been a similar case of too much power too soon.
About the Author
Robert Walker
Writer of articles on Mars and Space issues - Software Developer of Tune Smithy, Bounce Metronome etc.Studied at Wolfson College, Oxford
Lives in Isle of Mull
4.8m answer views110.4k this month
Top Writer2017, 2016, and 2015
Published WriterHuffPost, Slate, and 4 moreHuffPost, Slate, Forbes, Newsweek, Business Insider, and Science 2.0