Skyfall - Russian nuclear powered cruise missile
Skyfall - Russian nuclear powered cruise missile
Author
Discussion

ShortBeardy

Original Poster:

469 posts

163 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
As discussed on Perun's recent video...

Some sort of subsonic cruise missile super weapon with `unlimited range', but since it's subsonic it's potentially readily intercepted. However, one thing that was not discussed is the visibility it would have with a trail of radioactive products being blown out the back... Surely any downward looking military satellite with sensors that `look for' non naturally occurring radio-nuclides would light up as soon as this thing was fired up. And there MUST be downward looking Military satellites with those types of sensors...
Seems impossibly daft and diametrically opposed to stealthy.
thoughts?


jimmyjimjim

7,876 posts

257 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
Unlimited range? He must really not have any confidence in his ICBMs. Or his SSBNs. So instead launch something that will pollute any land it flies over.

Not exactly groundbreaking either, the US looked at nuclear-powered aircraft and missiles in the 1950s and 60s. Didn't go anywhere as ICBM development progressed more quickly than expected and was a superior solution.


hidetheelephants

31,794 posts

212 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
It's not clear what the contamination would be or that it would have enough gamma radiation to be detectable from space, but as a subsonic and quite large cruise missile with a nuclear reactor onboard it's going to have a considerable radar and thermal signature. It's a wunderwaffe, a pointlessly silly doomsday weapon that does nothing useful that existing conventional weapons don't already do for much less money. Given the finite capacity of Russia to produce such weapons it's probably to NATO's and Ukraine's benefit that they build these things instead of more Iskander/Kinzhal/etc.

LuckyThirteen

863 posts

38 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
Might serve as a distraction.


BrettMRC

5,237 posts

179 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
Wasn't this done to death in the 60s by a few nuclear powers, (Russia, USA, UK) and rejected as a concept for the obvious reasons?

Only worth a punt if you've already lost and just want to salt the earth.

FourWheelDrift

91,366 posts

303 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
Russia always lies.

IanH755

2,450 posts

139 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
hidetheelephants said:
It's a wunderwaffe, a pointlessly silly doomsday weapon that does nothing useful that existing conventional weapons don't already do for much less money.
With the combination of this, and the new "super-nuke tidal wave" torpedo fitted to his newly launched Sub, it appears Putin has entered his Bond Villain stage!

TGCOTF-dewey

6,848 posts

74 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
Lol... project pluto revisited.

Even 1960s US carefree attitude to all things nuclear decided it was a ludicrous idea... irradiating your population as you launch was judged a step too far.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto

MadCaptainJack

1,391 posts

59 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
ShortBeardy said:
However, one thing that was not discussed is the visibility it would have with a trail of radioactive products being blown out the back...
Maybe the reason it wasn't discussed is because there would be no trail of radioactive products being blown out the back?

Top Banana

443 posts

231 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
US looked at something similar in the 60's......SLAM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersonic_Low_Altit...

Hugo Stiglitz v2

442 posts

13 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
As with Hitlers 'wonder weapons' its meant to be more of s domestic distraction to keep the populace on side.

Mr E

22,589 posts

278 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
TGCOTF-dewey said:
Lol... project pluto revisited.

Even 1960s US carefree attitude to all things nuclear decided it was a ludicrous idea... irradiating your population as you launch was judged a step too far.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto
Even the “nuke the commies” hardliners in the 60’s looked at Pluto and decided it was a step too far.

Gary C

14,202 posts

198 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
ShortBeardy said:
As discussed on Perun's recent video...

Some sort of subsonic cruise missile super weapon with `unlimited range', but since it's subsonic it's potentially readily intercepted. However, one thing that was not discussed is the visibility it would have with a trail of radioactive products being blown out the back... Surely any downward looking military satellite with sensors that `look for' non naturally occurring radio-nuclides would light up as soon as this thing was fired up. And there MUST be downward looking Military satellites with those types of sensors...
Seems impossibly daft and diametrically opposed to stealthy.
thoughts?
It only uses the heat from the reactor, easily conducted from the core without having to pass the gas flow through the neutron flux. There is no reason radioactive particles need to be discharged when its in flight.

Now when it hits the ground and explodes, it will spread fission products all over the place..

Nasty

hidetheelephants

31,794 posts

212 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
Gary C said:
It only uses the heat from the reactor, easily conducted from the core without having to pass the gas flow through the neutron flux. There is no reason radioactive particles need to be discharged when its in flight.

Now when it hits the ground and explodes, it will spread fission products all over the place..

Nasty
It may be an air cooled core, the US did experiment with direct cycle engines in the 60s, plus it's cheap st built by russians for single use, so the fuel is probably badly clad, or worse still not clad at all, which would guarantee there's fuel debris in the exhaust. hehe

jimothyc

699 posts

103 months

Wednesday
quotequote all
Scott Manley did a fairly comprehensive video on this the other day.


TGCOTF-dewey

6,848 posts

74 months

Thursday
quotequote all
hidetheelephants said:
Gary C said:
It only uses the heat from the reactor, easily conducted from the core without having to pass the gas flow through the neutron flux. There is no reason radioactive particles need to be discharged when its in flight.

Now when it hits the ground and explodes, it will spread fission products all over the place..

Nasty
It may be an air cooled core, the US did experiment with direct cycle engines in the 60s, plus it's cheap st built by russians for single use, so the fuel is probably badly clad, or worse still not clad at all, which would guarantee there's fuel debris in the exhaust. hehe
Russian build quality...it's already killed a handful of people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyonoksa_radiation_a...


Cristio Nasser

387 posts

12 months

Yesterday (06:23)
quotequote all
The chances of this being real are essentially zero. Just propaganda BS to make him look good in front of his own people. They have nowhere near the technical capacity, nor resources to be able to achieve anything close.

Politely smile, say “that’s nice”, and move on.

FourWheelDrift

91,366 posts

303 months

Yesterday (09:21)
quotequote all
Cristio Nasser said:
The chances of this being real are essentially zero. Just propaganda BS to make him look good in front of his own people. They have nowhere near the technical capacity, nor resources to be able to achieve anything close.

Politely smile, say that s nice , and move on.
Politely smile and say "are you still using that old technology?" and move on.

eharding

14,634 posts

303 months

Yesterday (11:56)
quotequote all
TGCOTF-dewey said:
Russian build quality...it's already killed a handful of people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyonoksa_radiation_a...
Which reminded me of Charles Stross' little gem of a short story A Tall Tail, the premise of which was that the CIA started trolling the Soviets by letting them think they were managing to get hold of the crown jewels of US rocket research by espionage, whereas in fact they were being fed designs using the most toxic and unstable fuels the Americans could think of in order to try and kill off the Soviet rocket scientists attempting to replicate the stolen "technology" - for example Dioxygen Difluoride (FOOF) as an oxidiser and Dimethylmercury as the fuel. Well worth a read.

ShortBeardy

Original Poster:

469 posts

163 months

Yesterday (18:11)
quotequote all
was amusing
thx