Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: Russia "missile explosion" - ???

  1. Top | #1
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    23,203
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    65,676
    Rep Power
    99

    Question Russia "missile explosion" - ???

    So, something happened in Russia. Trump Admin wouldn't want to embarrass their pal Putin, so we won't hear much (granted, probably want to protect sources as well). But I was really curious about the "missile". There is a video showing a fire first and then a notable explosion, a nuclear like explosion. There was a shockwave not similar to what is seen when you look at the ATBIP conventional weapon explosion. I'm no expert on such things so I could be mistaken. There is also the other thing about if a missile explodes... shouldn't the fire come after the huge boom?

    I suppose it is possible a fire started at the site, the missile never took over and it kaboomed, but if they were testing a missile... why is there a warhead in it? Would a nuclear like blast result in a nuclear propelled weapon occur?

  2. Top | #2
    Veteran Member Cheerful Charlie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    4,544
    Archived
    3,884
    Total Posts
    8,428
    Rep Power
    56
    Vodkastanis and nuclear materials, always a bad combination.
    Cheerful Charlie

  3. Top | #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    always on the move
    Posts
    883
    Archived
    801
    Total Posts
    1,684
    Rep Power
    42
    Oh no, Trump mentioned the Russians were trying to develop a new missile engine... then said we are making the same thing, which is believed to have pissed off various national security agencies.... now that I’m thinking about it, could Russia have gotten the idea for this system from Trump? Who knows what he has bragged about to Putin.

  4. Top | #4
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    23,203
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    65,676
    Rep Power
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by marc View Post
    Oh no, Trump mentioned the Russians were trying to develop a new missile engine... then said we are making the same thing, which is believed to have pissed off various national security agencies.... now that I’m thinking about it, could Russia have gotten the idea for this system from Trump? Who knows what he has bragged about to Putin.
    Not quite as bad as when W spilled we could arm our drones.

  5. Top | #5
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Burnsville, MN
    Posts
    2,797
    Archived
    2,911
    Total Posts
    5,708
    Rep Power
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by marc View Post
    Oh no, Trump mentioned the Russians were trying to develop a new missile engine... then said we are making the same thing, which is believed to have pissed off various national security agencies.... now that I’m thinking about it, could Russia have gotten the idea for this system from Trump? Who knows what he has bragged about to Putin.
    Not quite as bad as when W spilled we could arm our drones.
    To be fair, the first thing I thought about when drone technology was devised was "and then they put a gun barrel and firing pin on it and then killed people.with it"

  6. Top | #6
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    24,120
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    120,872
    Rep Power
    95
    The best explanation I have seen is that they were testing a nuclear-thermal missile. This means a reactor running at very, very high power levels--it would be very easy for things to go wrong. If the reactor went prompt critical we would see a result consistent with what has leaked out. We looked at the idea long ago and dismissed it because of the hazards. When you're testing this a successful test still leaves you with an unshielded reactor core--and you're going to have a very hard time avoiding splattering that reactor across the ground wherever it ended it's flight. (It's flying too low for a parachute. You could program a pop-up maneuver but that would mean your test missile was not the same as a warshot. We were looking at them before the era of the ICBM, Russia has no reason for that but if it's hypersonic it would be harder to shoot down than an ICBM.

    Note that they have already built a nuclear-powered torpedo. It probably doesn't need to run quite so hot and it's going slow, test torpedoes probably just dumped their reactor core onto the abyssal plain somewhere.

  7. Top | #7
    Veteran Member Treedbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    out on a limb
    Posts
    1,351
    Rep Power
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    The best explanation I have seen is that they were testing a nuclear-thermal missile. This means a reactor running at very, very high power levels--it would be very easy for things to go wrong. If the reactor went prompt critical we would see a result consistent with what has leaked out. We looked at the idea long ago and dismissed it because of the hazards. When you're testing this a successful test still leaves you with an unshielded reactor core--and you're going to have a very hard time avoiding splattering that reactor across the ground wherever it ended it's flight. (It's flying too low for a parachute. You could program a pop-up maneuver but that would mean your test missile was not the same as a warshot. We were looking at them before the era of the ICBM, Russia has no reason for that but if it's hypersonic it would be harder to shoot down than an ICBM.

    Note that they have already built a nuclear-powered torpedo. It probably doesn't need to run quite so hot and it's going slow, test torpedoes probably just dumped their reactor core onto the abyssal plain somewhere.
    How would a nuclear powered engine even work? I guess it heats a fluid that turns a propeller or turbine, right? But then somewhere in the cycle you need to cool the fluid. You'd probably need a huge radiator. There's no external source of cooling water when in flight.

  8. Top | #8
    Elder Contributor Keith&Co.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Far Western Mass
    Posts
    15,785
    Archived
    24,500
    Total Posts
    40,285
    Rep Power
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by Treedbear View Post
    How would a nuclear powered engine even work? I guess it heats a fluid that turns a propeller or turbine, right? But then somewhere in the cycle you need to cool the fluid. You'd probably need a huge radiator. There's no external source of cooling water when in flight.
    It's a jet turbine.
    A rocket gets it up to speed, then the air gets compressed into the jet, and the reactor superheats the air to blast it out the exhaust.
    Thing is, it just peppers the landscape with that exhaust, scattering radioactionative stuff all over hell and back.

    As a weapon goes, it's beyond 'last resort' and into 'Alas, Babylon.' There's no expectation of winning a war with this thing, or even surviving one. Just making sure if you go down, everyone goes down with you.

  9. Top | #9
    Veteran Member Treedbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    out on a limb
    Posts
    1,351
    Rep Power
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Keith&Co. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Treedbear View Post
    How would a nuclear powered engine even work? I guess it heats a fluid that turns a propeller or turbine, right? But then somewhere in the cycle you need to cool the fluid. You'd probably need a huge radiator. There's no external source of cooling water when in flight.
    It's a jet turbine.
    A rocket gets it up to speed, then the air gets compressed into the jet, and the reactor superheats the air to blast it out the exhaust.
    Thing is, it just peppers the landscape with that exhaust, scattering radioactionative stuff all over hell and back.

    As a weapon goes, it's beyond 'last resort' and into 'Alas, Babylon.' There's no expectation of winning a war with this thing, or even surviving one. Just making sure if you go down, everyone goes down with you.
    Got it. It's a ramjet.
    On March 1, 2018 President Vladimir Putin announced Russia had developed a (presumed) nuclear powered ramjet cruise missile capable of extended long range flight.

  10. Top | #10
    Veteran Member Cheerful Charlie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    4,544
    Archived
    3,884
    Total Posts
    8,428
    Rep Power
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by Keith&Co. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Treedbear View Post
    How would a nuclear powered engine even work? I guess it heats a fluid that turns a propeller or turbine, right? But then somewhere in the cycle you need to cool the fluid. You'd probably need a huge radiator. There's no external source of cooling water when in flight.
    It's a jet turbine.
    A rocket gets it up to speed, then the air gets compressed into the jet, and the reactor superheats the air to blast it out the exhaust.
    Thing is, it just peppers the landscape with that exhaust, scattering radioactionative stuff all over hell and back.

    As a weapon goes, it's beyond 'last resort' and into 'Alas, Babylon.' There's no expectation of winning a war with this thing, or even surviving one. Just making sure if you go down, everyone goes down with you.

    A Doctor Strangelove doomsday weapon.
    Cheerful Charlie

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •