World powers are conducting research progressively to make missiles powered by nuclear engine. This type of missile would facilitate to destroy countries located far away, from the launch pad/vehicle.
Even though impacts of nuclear powered engine (of missile) are not significant compared to nuclear bomb attack, environmental damages of failures of test fires would seriously affect atmosphere in peaceful time.
Incident happened around Nyonoksa, Russia in august, 2019 could be an example for this.
I would like to discuss this issue with environmental specialist.
Difficult to discuss unless we have something more information. Obviously, if there was contamination in August 2019, it did not reach reliable measurement stations yet. That is not much, even compared with the Ru-106 accident a few years ago, which also remains partly a riddle.
I think, at this point we can only speculate.
Than you Erik Strub,
Yes, correct.
But the problem is, unfortunately, people don't know about the quantity of nuclear fuel used in such missile. Is there an estimation about the quantity of nuclear fuel available in similar kind of engines/mini-reactors ?
A. G. Piyal Aravinna, I am just speculating: The most concepts rely on a propellant (eg hydrogen) which is rapidly heated and exhausted. You will need less of such propellant than for a conventional rocket, but it is not another order of magnitude. So you have to construct the reactor as small as possible, because it is adding additional weight. So the most convenient way is probable to stay near the critical mass (around 10kg for pure Pu or U) and to use highly-enriched U or Pu fuel. The core must be stable to high temperatures and to the aggressive chemistry of the propellant at that temperature.
That means (probably) that the fuel can/will retain also the largest part of the fission products, even if the (mechanical) structures are destroyed by eg a hydrogen explosion.
I would expect, that mostly volatile fission products (like noble gases, Cs, I) would be set free in a catastrophic scenario. Probably a lot of the other contamination can be kept quite local. Especially (also speculation) if the reactor consists of a fresh fuel element and is started the first time just before the rocket launches.
Dear Erik Strub,
Thank you for the comprehensive explanation.
Piyal Aravinna
The US spent quite a lot of money in the 1950s trying to design a workable nuclear aircraft based on liquid reactors but gave up because the problems were seen as too difficult when compared with the advantages a nuclear aircraft offered. I suspect the same will be true of missiles.
Yes, It is difficult to think that What are the improvements of the desing of the latest unsuccessful Russin nuclear powered missile compared to 1950s US's desing.
Piyal
A recent press release said they found amounts of Sr-91, Ba-139 and Ba/La-140. These can all interpreted as progeny from noble gases with half lives of < 1min. This is in agreement with my statements above.
Is it possible to use same fuel for all possible Nuclear Powered Intercontinental Missiles (NPICBM) ? then, what would be the nature of pollution ?
- Badges
- Science topic