Why don't ejectable fission reactors proliferate if meltdown is still a concern?

Set in the not-so-distant future, interplanetary travels are the norm. Most spaceships are powered by fission reactors, and accidents do happen due to negligence or flaws in the system. It will probably take decades before we can see high-yield fusion reactors on the market; in the meantime, we just have to deal with meltdowns. I am wondering why it is not a good idea to have an ejectable nuclear reactor on board so that it can be immediately tossed into the vacuum of space at supersonic velocity in case of emergency? Isn't there vast emptiness between planets and the redundancy measures to ensure that every spaceship must have at least 2 reactors, so why don't spaceships adopt such a design?

is a duplicate

This question has been asked before and has already been answered. It should be marked as a duplicate.

Please enter the URL of the proposed duplicate in the details field below.

not constructive

This question cannot be answered in a way that is helpful to anyone. It's not possible to learn something from possible answers, except for the solution for the specific problem of the asker.

Communities

Why don't ejectable fission reactors proliferate if meltdown is still a concern?

0 comment threads

0 answers