Who killed the Atomic automobile?

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.damninteresting.com/the-atomic-automobile

The Atomic Automobile

During the 1950s, much of the world was quivering with anticipation over the exciting prospects of nuclear power. Atomic energy promised to churn out clean, safe electricity that would be “too cheap to meter.” It seemed that there was no energy problem too large or too small for the mighty atom to tackle during the glorious and modern Atomic Age.

It was during this honeymoon with nuclear energy– in 1957– that the Ford Motor Company unveiled the most ambitious project in their history: a concept vehicle which had a sleek futuristic look, emitted no harmful vapors, and offered incredible fuel mileage far beyond that of the most efficient cars ever built. This automobile-of-the-future was called the Ford Nucleon, named for its highly unique design feature… a pint-size atomic fission reactor in the trunk.

Ford’s engineers imagined a world in which full-service recharging stations would one day supplant petroleum fuel stations, where depleted reactors could be swapped out for fresh ones lickety-split. The car’s reactor setup was essentially the same as a nuclear submarine’s, but miniaturized for automobile use. It was designed to use uranium fission to heat a steam generator, rapidly converting stored water into high-pressure steam which could then be used to drive a set of turbines. One steam turbine would provide the torque to propel the car while another would drive an electrical generator. Steam would then be condensed back into water in a cooling loop, and sent back to the steam generator to be reused. Such a closed system would allow the reactor to produce power as long as fissile material remained.

Using this system, designers anticipated that a typical Nucleon would travel about 5,000 miles per charge. Because the powerplant was an interchangeable component, owners would have the freedom to select a reactor configuration based on their personal needs, ranging anywhere from a souped-up uranium guzzler to a low-torque, high-mileage version. And without the noisy internal combustion and exhaust of conventional cars, the Nucleon would be relatively quiet, emitting little more than a turbine whine.

[baldguy]

1. A rare instance of common sense?

[Th1onein]

2. Wouldn't car wrecks be really dangerous, though?

Just asking. And what about fires? And floods?

[baldguy]

9. They toyed with nuclear-powered bombers in the glorious '50s too.

[Ikonoklast]

3. A sane and rational person.

This wasn't only a bad idea, it was The Bad Idea.

[DJ13]

4. I think what killed it was the ugliness

:puke:

[MineralMan]

5. Well there is that, for sure.

[madokie]

6. Same designer as designed the edsel looks to me like

who in the hell would put the front wheels under the middle of the vehicle. what would be the purpose?

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. To help support the heavy shielding

its passenger area was situated quite close to the front of the chassis, extending beyond the front axle. This arrangement was meant to distance the passengers from the atomic pile in the rear, and to provide maximum axle support to the heavy equipment and its attendant shielding

"Hey kids, who wants to sit in the back and glow?"

[SharonAnn]

7. More important. Who killed the nuclear PC? I wanted one!

[FarCenter]

10. Probably died along with the proposal for nuclear lighting of farmer's fields

Observing how some crops grow so well near the arctic in the long days, there was a proposal to mount reactors on top of pylons in fields to power lights that would extend the day.