User:Ilenart626/sandbox/spare

As already mentioned above NERVA in Wikipedia is focussed on XE Prime ground testing as stated by the description "NERVA XE PRIME" below the picture in the info box and mentioned as reference "Figures for XE Prime". XE Prime does not have a specification for gross mass because it was never designed for flight. So your thorough comparison above has no meaning at all. David J. Darling quoted in https://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/N/NERVA.html the same parameters as Astronautix NERVA specifications with the following comment: "By the time the NERVA program (NRX and XE-Prime) was terminated, the NERVA-2 had been designed that would have met all of the program's objectives. Two of these engines would have been fitted to a NERVA stage capable of powering a manned interplanetary spacecraft." The mechanical dimensions (10 m; 43 m) are somewhat similar to the drawings in Borowski 1991 (pp. 79-82) for a Mars mission. SchmiAlf

SchhmiAlf, the above is again highighting your use of your own original research and synthesis of sources to justify your arguements. Astronautix NERVA specifications make no mention of NERVA-2. I could also say that Astronautix NERVA specifications are somewhat similar to the Starship Enterprise and it would be about as useful as your comparison.

It also highlights that with so many excellent sources such as David J. Darling's https://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/N/NERVA.html, NASA's An Historical Perspective of the NERVA Nuclear Rocket Engine Technology Program and the 33 other sources used on the NERVA wikipedia article, why Astronautix NERVA specifications were not used. Why use such an unreliable source when their are so many reliable alternative sources available?