Russian Explosion
#1
Moderate Moderator
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Russian Explosion
This is either the weapons-storage area explosion, or the experimental nuclear-powered jet/rocket engine that blew up in the last ten days.
I’ve seen a lot of conventional weapons explosions (made a few of them myself). None of them have ever looked like this.
Ahh. Fixed it. Raw link below as well.
Saw another article this morning, more video of this, where the Russians admit it was their nuclear scramjet project.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=...&v=Y4c6Lqt_1HU
I’ve seen a lot of conventional weapons explosions (made a few of them myself). None of them have ever looked like this.
Ahh. Fixed it. Raw link below as well.
Saw another article this morning, more video of this, where the Russians admit it was their nuclear scramjet project.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=...&v=Y4c6Lqt_1HU
Last edited by UAL T38 Phlyer; 08-20-2019 at 09:23 AM.
#4
Although the Russians have actually built power units capable of going prompt critical, so maybe that thing could have used a PAL. It frankly looks like a powerful enough explosion that it might have been very low-grade prompt critical, ie a small percentage of the core graduated from power core to bomb status for just a tiny moment. That's what happened at chernobyl too.
Worth noting that all western power cores are designed with core physics such that they are self-damping, ie runaway power produces material affects which dampens the chain reaction. Russians don't seem to see the need though.
Last edited by rickair7777; 08-20-2019 at 10:40 AM.
#5
Also harder to detect the launch, and harder to detect an inbound. Although a hypersonic nuclear scramjet will spew so much heat from the reactor and aerodynamic friction that it would light up like a meteor in the visible, to say nothing of IR.
A subsonic version would be harder to detect, it would look like any other small airplane.
#7
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
They would be easy to track yes, but if they plan on flying these things for months on end just off our coasts, tensions will certainly boil over. This is certainly not the direction the world needs to be going.
#8
The airflow through the engine would get massively neutron irradiated in the core, which would generate radioactive isotopes of air component atoms and any air particulates. That would be detectable after the fact, by ground monitoring or airborne sampling. But that would not be anything close to real time.
#9
Moderate Moderator
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
#10
I seriously doubt the russians intend a permanent airborne nuclear alert using these things.
- Airframes don't fly forever, how do you recover it?
- Other people (ie us, Europe) would be VERY nervous when such things were launched for alert duty. In the cold war, airborne alert was intended for survivability. This would obviously have a tremendous first strike potential. By "very nervous" I mean DEFCON 1.
- Such gadgets won't be very reliable, how many bombs are you willing to lose control of due to crashes?
No, I think it's intended to get around our ballistic missile defenses, probably as a deterrent but unfortunately it opens up a big can of first strike worms. US missile defense were actually implemented to defend against small attacks from the likes of DPRK and Iran, not against russia which could easily overwhelm all US missile defense with sheer numbers. But MDA probably makes the russians nervous.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post