[Professor Mega-Mind (OP)]

Then it's BS that the space community is desperately pursuing  , and for damned good reason !
P.

[Professor Mega-Mind (OP)]

Gentlepersons ,
Let us consider the Daedalus Project of Alan Bond & company .
Powered by ICF fusion engines , it's  specific impulse could exceed 140k .  I propose that they make it a hybrid fission/fusion rocket with gatling-gun type propulsion layout.
Such a system gives us the entire Solar System , even the Oort Cloud , with effective cryogenic stasis (see Japan's Cells Alive System) .  Any add-ons or critiques ?
P.M.

[Bored chemist]

Let us consider the Daedalus Project of Alan Bond & company .

OK, let's consider it.
There are details here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Daedalus
which include "Daedalus would be propelled by a fusion rocket using pellets of a deuterium/helium-3 mix".
So, their  plan is fusion power. That makes sense because it's got the best energy storage density.
And your version

I propose that they make it a hybrid fission/fusion rocket with gatling-gun type propulsion layout.

spoils it by adding a redundant fission reactor.

Any add-ons or critiques ?

Yes; you should leave this sort of thing to the grown-us.

[Professor Mega-Mind (OP)]

To Old Guy ,
MY proposal is a fission reactor powering the ship's systems AND the laser ICF igniters .  Firstly , this provides a proven , reliable , rugged , and highly controllable power source for the ship .  Secondly , it allows the design of the fusion system to be optimized for propulsion , not power production .  On a related note ; no fusion reactor yet has managed to achieve SUSTAINED break even power production .  A stand-alone fusion ship would be an assured failure . 
Long live the " 'stro-nuts " !
P.M.

[Bored chemist]

On a related note ; no fusion reactor yet has managed to achieve SUSTAINED break even power production . 

I know of one that has worked for a few billion years.

[Professor Mega-Mind (OP)]

...Galaxy Express 999 .
The Solid Chunks Rocket .
Imagine if you will , a solid rocket that runs , not on one big stick of propellant , but on many small chunks of it , similar to the old steam-engines . This solid-chunks engine would offer operational flexibility , and safety factors , that monolithic , solid-propellant engines could not .  "Chunks" engines could be low-thrust , long-firing , and could have their fuel pre-positioned along their route .  This would obviate the "Rocket Equation" , enabling far greater propulsion efficiency , and mission capability , than standard rockets .  The safety factor of this type of engine , towers over that of normal solid rockets .  The risk of explosion from voids , cracks , and mis-formulation , is negated . The fuel is never exposed to an ignition source , except when it is "fed" into the combustion-chamber .  Most of the time , it's not even inside of the room .  Low-thrust means that the engine can be tiny , and lightweight , generating a lesser heat-flux as well . 
Alright , let's here it for coal-powered rocket-ships !
D.H.
Note-Designed for In-Space propulsion .
Addendum : This engine can also have a nuclear-powered , RF-injection , thermal-exhaust "super-charger" . This would multiply it's specific-impulse , while reducing exhaust-coking .
Addendum-2 : A more efficient propellent alternative would be frozen hydrazine/hy.peroxide . Easily stored at below 0°C in space , these could be safely handled as ices .  They would not be subject to void/crack explosions , and would burn much cleaner than the "rubber" type solid-fuels .

[Bored chemist]

This would obviate the "Rocket Equation"

How?

Low-thrust means that the engine can be tiny

Low thrust means an engine that's not much use.

[Kryptid]

Low thrust means an engine that's not much use.

I wouldn't go that far, since ion engines have very low thrust but are efficient and have high exhaust velocities.

I'm not sure how his idea to have chunks of fuel floating around in space en route would even work. They would have to be in orbit around something, since they can't just sit still (they'd drift towards the nearest source of gravity otherwise). Plotting the rocket's path to intercept those fuel pellets sounds tedious and very limiting in terms of the launch window. You'd also have to get the pellets into place somehow beforehand, which would require another rocket to have gone there first.

[Bored chemist]

I wouldn't go that far, since ion engines have very low thrust but are efficient and have high exhaust velocities.

A good big one beats a good little one.

[Professor Mega-Mind (OP)]

...The joys of pre-positioning .
On surface , in orbit , on Phobos , on Blitzen !
Seriously , fuel-depots were invented right after fire !  Now ; What's old is new again !
Ja-ai guru deva , ohhm !
P.M.

[Bored chemist]

Seriously , fuel-depots were invented right after fire

Yes, local ones.
But what you are proposing is absurd.

[Bored chemist]

This would obviate the "Rocket Equation" ,

How?
(Second time of asking)

[Professor Mega-Mind (OP)]

......Transpiration Rocket Engine .
This engine is designed with jet-engine technology in mind . It is , however , nuclear-powered .  It begins with ultra-high pressure propellent-pumps .  The CH4 cryogenic fluid is forced through several thousand channels , at 50k.psi , into the 360° atomizing-powerheads.  These spray the fluid sideways , so that it coats the chamber walls , and then  evaporates into gaseous form . The gas is then super-heated by massive , high-energy RF injection , producing a 20+k°C , 50+k.psi , ball of " cold-plasma" .  This is then vented through a similarly cooled , narrow (10") nozzle .  The exhaust velocity should exheed 20 times that of the SSME engines , causing a proportionate increase in thrust-specific impulse .  Having a high mass , but a modest thrust-level ,  this type engine is best suited  for interplanetary travel , not surface propulsion .

Interplanetary space-drive it is !
D.H.

[Bored chemist]

20+k°C , 50+k.psi , ball of " cold-plasma"

Do you mean cold or do you mean over 20,000 K?

[Professor Mega-Mind (OP)]

20k°Celsius is categorized as cold, in plasma physicist-talk .
P.M.
Ref : voltaicplasma.com/hot-and-cold-plasma   

[Bored chemist]

20k°Celsius is categorized as cold, in plasma physicist-talk .
P.M.

OK, so that's another area of science which we now know that you don't understand.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonthermal_plasma

[Professor Mega-Mind (OP)]

Alrighty then !
If we consider that exhaust-velocities from a fusion-rocket could well exceed 30km.sec. , we definitely must consider the exiting gases to be a "hot" plasma .
Deuterium-Tritium fusion liberates ~ 20-million times as much energy per pound as kerolox .
This equates to ~ 1400 times the thrust/acceleration of the chemical-rocket , with identical fuel-burn , excepting ; that the fusion exhaust products have a much lesser molecular mass . This means those molecules will exit at a much higher speed than the heavy molecules of the chem-rocket , multiplying the ISP to as much as 6-million for fusion .

[Bored chemist]

we definitely must consider the exiting gases to be a "hot" plasma .

It only took you 6 months to work out that 20,000K is not cold.
It's also about 3 or 4 times as hot as the surface of the sun, so it will be quite bright.
How do you plan to shield the rocket from the radiation?

[Professor Mega-Mind (OP)]

It's just the nomenclature .
As far as technical details go , the above is only a theoretical analysis of a future possible design pathway . 😐

[Bored chemist]

As far as technical details go , the above is only a theoretical analysis of a future possible design pathway .

And it's pointless.
It's obvious that getting the rocket  exhaust hotter is better.
It's obvious that a nuclear reactor will get things hotter.
All you have done is state the obvious.