The problem with your argument is that we already have an excess of cost effective targets without wasting fortunes developing chancy technologies or further isolating the goal by gratuitous political foolishness.

To repeat: many flyby missions to the outer solar system could just about be flown solar with existing technologies (although i would agree that in many cases this would not the ideal solution due to the loss of data return); & that there are no really interesting science mission that HAVE to have nuclear propulsive technologies. The idea that we should try to sell expenditure developing this hangar queen branch of technology by accentuating missions which are still difficult with this expensive technology at the expense of missions which are simple with current OTS systems tells me that your goal isn't scientific or even space developmental but simply budget busting of the old Apollo school.

It's 2002 not 1969; & we need to develop our missions on a needs rather than wants basis if this incredibly expensive research has a chance of being sustainable.

Robert