Russia - nuclear accident

Forums › Off topic › Russia - nuclear accident

gzt

18679 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7820

Lifetime subscriber

#255561 18-Aug-2019 13:00

Russia experienced a nuclear accident. There is not much information.

The missile was nuclear powered - this is new.

Maybe the attraction is low maintenance in theory. Compared to motor refuelling cycles for conventional nuclear warheads?

wellygary

8810 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5287

#2301209 18-Aug-2019 14:12

The missile was nuclear powered - this is new.

sort of,

Have you read this in the WaPo?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/08/15/russias-mysterious-new-nuclear-weapons-arent-really-new/?noredirect=on

"..These “new” missiles are a throwback to the early days of the Cold War. And back then, it was the United States that developed a nuclear-powered cruise missile, in the early 1960s. “Project Pluto” was part of a Pentagon program known as Supersonic Low Altitude Missile, a clunky name almost certainly designed to yield its catchier acronym, SLAM. The missile was canceled in 1964, never having taken flight. Nuclear-powered cruise missiles were not a good idea then, and they are not a good idea now."

Linux

12181 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8475

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2301210 18-Aug-2019 14:17

Cold war times saw test nuclear powered aircraft

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2301339 18-Aug-2019 18:27

gzt: Russia experienced a nuclear accident. There is not much information.

The missile was nuclear powered - this is new.

Maybe the attraction is low maintenance in theory. Compared to motor refuelling cycles for conventional nuclear warheads?

I suspect that the whole thing is probably BS - except the part about the accident - more likely imo to have been a normal-for-Russia stuff-up in nuclear fuel reprocessing.

The great story about the nuclear powered missile probably propaganda and deflection, convenient because Putin already delivered a load of rubbish about a new missile they claim to have developed. They stuffed up doing something routine because they're hopeless, and make up a story about a magic superweapon to keep the peasants content with the crap lot delivered to them while the state squanders billions on the military.

Afaik ICBMs etc use solid fuel these days. Even N Korea is working on solid fuel missiles.

tripper1000

1648 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1176

#2301386 18-Aug-2019 22:49

Yes, there is no proof yet that it was or was not a nuclear cruise missile, however a number of factors point to the accident being related to a military project, such as the projects re-location prior to the accident and the vessels that were in support of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nm24PtuhEg4

The west has restarted buying oil and gas from Russia, and this is what funded the soviet side of the cold war in the bad old days. The Iron Curtain was bought down by a lack of cash, and the lack of cash was in a large part because Reagan sabotaged soviet oil income. We have come full circle and restarted the cold war.

Those who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it.

From History.com

"The USSR also faced foreign attacks on the Soviet economy. In the 1980s, the United States under President Ronald Reagan isolated the Soviet economy from the rest of the world and helped drive oil prices to their lowest levels in decades. When the Soviet Union’s oil and gas revenue dropped dramatically, the USSR began to lose its hold on Eastern Europe."