Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
Let’s hope it doesn’t live-up to its name!
The miniaturised reactor is impressive even though details are scant the fact that the US have recognised it for a while and complains about it shows the reactor is real and works.
The idea is terrifying but it is one of those last resort weapons so it's not like they will send them loitering around the pole during peacetime.
The idea is quite terrifying. It is doubly so since there have been a number of accidents in the testing, one in the White Sea, and a number of the missiles crashing.
Constant Phoenix has been sniffing around the Bering Sea lately. Most likely for one of these flying, I'd say.
The US started down this route of a raw nuclear reactor for an engine in the 60s and stopped when someone rational could intervene. Project Pluto was horrific enough even General Curtiss LeMay is said to have called it insane. LeMay. That man was two flaps short of being batshbt insane.
There's nothing intrinsic to a technology that makes it terrifying, it's all about who has it. Russia can be trusted with this technology, America cannot.
A raw and exposed nuclear reactor, uncooled, used to heat air for thrust? um. that's more than a little insane. This is doubly so since all the prototypes have crashed or exploded on the pad.
So, I am going to have to ask for something to back your position.
A tiny nuclear reactor. The usual
If I'm wrong about that and the weapon is as dangerous (to its launchers, it's deliberately very dangerous to those it's aimed at) as you claim, then it's America's fault for forcing its development.
Without accounting for any nuclear payloads being detonated intentionally, this weapon's propulsion at most risks a radiation leak if it crashes unintentionally. This is the terrifying part. Given what the purpose is for, this isn't something like nuclear submarines on patrol around the world, the scale of fuel and contamination being much greater if accidents happen. I doubt the Russians would loiter more of these cruise missiles than there are nuclear subs on patrol by all SSN and SSBN operators. And personally do not think they would be launching them in any significant numbers unless it is nuclear war, in which case, any faults are the least of humanity's worries.
Calling this a flying Chernobyl is rather jingoistic and what we can expect to hear from mouth foaming mindless western journalists. The genuine extra risk would be the fact that the missile flies around and would naturally be dealing with hazards that a nuclear submarine is far more engineered to overcome in corresponding hazards when operating underwater. I doubt you have the space and weight to engineer extra "protections" and redundancies for this cruise missile than nuke boat engineers have for their vehicles. Nevertheless the scale of operation and the type of weapon means it is seldom used, if ever. Overall the risks are no greater than having about 70 nuclear boats in total constantly operating around the worlds oceans. Unless of course the Russians intend for these missiles to operate in the same manner in which case yes it will pose a greater threat but the chances of that being the intention is slim to none.
They will insist on working this project out and that unfortunately for everyone else including Russia, is dangerous. That's a matter for states to discuss and if there are accidents during testing and development that involve another nation, then that's a bilateral matter first and then an international matter if the scale is serious and the outcomes uncertain. It's a type of weapon Russia considers useful I suppose. The reactor technology and propulsion is definitely interesting but the weapon itself is of course scary to have flying around. Gee I suppose that would mean some belligerent nations should stop being so belligerent and constantly attacking others? Maybe then people and countries won't even feel a need to risk these things
But of course it's always our faults and never theirs right. But Russia attacked Ukraine and so on... well look further back and see the bigger picture.
Calling this a flying Chernobyl is rather jingoistic and what we can expect to hear from mouth foaming mindless western journalists. The genuine extra risk would be the fact that the missile flies around and would naturally be dealing with hazards that a nuclear submarine is far more engineered to overcome in corresponding hazards when operating underwater. I doubt you have the space and weight to engineer extra "protections" and redundancies for this cruise missile than nuke boat engineers have for their vehicles. Nevertheless the scale of operation and the type of weapon means it is seldom used, if ever. Overall the risks are no greater than having about 70 nuclear boats in total constantly operating around the worlds oceans. Unless of course the Russians intend for these missiles to operate in the same manner in which case yes it will pose a greater threat but the chances of that being the intention is slim to none.
They will insist on working this project out and that unfortunately for everyone else including Russia, is dangerous. That's a matter for states to discuss and if there are accidents during testing and development that involve another nation, then that's a bilateral matter first and then an international matter if the scale is serious and the outcomes uncertain. It's a type of weapon Russia considers useful I suppose. The reactor technology and propulsion is definitely interesting but the weapon itself is of course scary to have flying around. Gee I suppose that would mean some belligerent nations should stop being so belligerent and constantly attacking others? Maybe then people and countries won't even feel a need to risk these things
But of course it's always our faults and never theirs right. But Russia attacked Ukraine and so on... well look further back and see the bigger picture.
Last edited:
Do we even know if it works anything like that or its just an assumption based on the half-assed american project?
It could very well be a shielded nuclear reactor powering a turbofan/turbojet, which was feasible already back in the 60's.