[HN Gopher] The Atomic Airplane
___________________________________________________________________
The Atomic Airplane
Author : mpweiher
Score : 70 points
Date : 2025-05-29 22:16 UTC (4 days ago)
(HTM) web link (whatisnuclear.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (whatisnuclear.com)
| krunck wrote:
| Something that should never be built. Along with
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersonic_Low_Altitude_Missil....
| piombisallow wrote:
| Radiation effects are vastly overrated.
| gambiting wrote:
| I agree with you, I've engaged in multiple discussions here
| on HN with people claiming that a nuclear reactor-equipped
| rocket or plane makes everything below it poisoned for
| centuries and uninhabitable just by flying over it. TLDR is
| that it's simply not true. But, the radiation risks are still
| significant and cannot be dismissed - and likely mean that
| we'll never see this kind of propulsion used for anything
| other than a true "doomsday" weapon where the emissions don't
| matter but the infinite range and flight time are significant
| advantages.
| arethuza wrote:
| For a real "doomsday" weapon you don't even need a delivery
| mechanism.
|
| _" When you merely wish to bury bombs, there is no limit
| to the size"_
|
| For a real life example - Teller's Sundial design.
| Yeul wrote:
| This reminds me of something I read about the Vulcan
| strategic bombers:
|
| After dropping their bombs on Russia they were supposed
| to fly to North Africa and land on airstrips because
| England was expected to be gone.
| wat10000 wrote:
| There are huge variations in what's been proposed.
|
| A nuclear-powered airplane would most likely use a closed-
| cycle reactor with the heat replacing the combustion in
| otherwise fairly conventional jet engines. They'd be
| totally harmless in normal operation, with the radiological
| danger being if they crashed and scattered the contents of
| their reactor.
|
| Similarly, nuclear thermal rockets like NERVA are closed
| cycle and pose no radiological danger unless they explode
| or crash.
|
| And then there are open-cycle designs such as nuclear
| ramjets, fission-fragment rockets, and Orion. Those are bad
| news bears for anyone nearby, and possibly the entire
| planet.
| gambiting wrote:
| I mean even the "worst" of all designs, the one linked in
| the comment we're all replying to(SLAM - ramjet design)
| says this:
|
| " Specifically, he states "The reactor radiations, while
| intense, do not lead to problems with personnel who
| happen to be under such a power plant passing overhead at
| flight speed even for very low altitudes." In both
| documents, he describes calculations that prove the
| safety of the reactor and its negligible release of
| fission products compared to the background. Along the
| same vein of these calculations, the missile would be
| moving too quickly to expose any living things to
| prolonged radiation needed to induce radiation sickness.
| This is due to the relatively low population of neutrons
| that would make it to the ground per kilometer, for a
| vehicle traveling at several hundred meters per second.
| Any radioactive fuel elements within the reactor itself
| would be contained and not stripped by the air to reach
| the ground"
|
| Orion is obviously incredibly bad due to the fact it uses
| actual nuclear detonations for prepulsion. But it's never
| been a very serious project, while SLAM has been built
| and tested.
| wat10000 wrote:
| Of the things I listed, SLAM seems like the least bad.
| The reactor at least tries to keep the fission products
| within the reactor. That said, I would be very skeptical
| of safety claims from someone who needs it to be safe for
| their project to be successful, especially from the
| 1950s.
| cycomanic wrote:
| It's worth remembering that airplanes have to start, land
| and taxi as well. So while radiation levels might be safe
| while the plane is flying at altitude, things might be
| very different where planes have to land and start.
| lupusreal wrote:
| I'm convinced that nuclear salt water rockets would be
| safe to operate in space. And a much better idea than
| Orion.
| wat10000 wrote:
| Not frying every satellite above the horizon when used
| near Earth would certainly be a plus.
| perihelions wrote:
| The Russians already built one, supposedly [0].
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9M730_Burevestnik
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Way to bury the lead. The NATO reporting name for this
| missile appears to be "SKYFALL", maybe the best codename
| ever.
| acidburnNSA wrote:
| There's a pretty slick film on nuclear propelled cruise
| missiles as well: https://youtu.be/8qMuS5kaDBI
| christkv wrote:
| Definitively up there with most fallout design idea.
| acidburnNSA wrote:
| If you like nuclear powered flight, you'll also really enjoy this
| other one that I got digitized in February: "Aircraft Nuclear
| Propulsion: Manned Aircraft Progress Report" [1]. It's actually
| from back in the 50s and digitized extremely well.
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-8q8INxQEY
|
| I also have a blog announcement of it if you just want to see
| some screenshots up front before deciding to dig in: [2]
|
| [2] https://whatisnuclear.com/news/2025-02-03-declassified-
| nucle...
| webdoodle wrote:
| The engine to one of these atomic airplanes is on display at
| Idaho National Labs, near Sun Valley, Idaho.
| acidburnNSA wrote:
| Two of them actually! Those are HTRE-1/2 and HTRE-3 mentioned
| in the transcript, (and shown back in the day here [1]). HTRE-1
| was disassembled and turned into HTRE-2 which is why you only
| see two of them now.
|
| [1] https://youtu.be/V-8q8INxQEY?t=372
| waffletower wrote:
| Thunderbirds are go!
| petalmind wrote:
| Here are some scans from a 1957 Soviet book on nuclear aircraft:
|
| https://xplanes.tumblr.com/post/30938386375/from-the-cover-o...
|
| https://xplanes.tumblr.com/post/30941448265/from-nuclear-pow...
|
| https://xplanes.tumblr.com/post/30944519719/from-nuclear-pow...
|
| https://xplanes.tumblr.com/post/30947450568/from-nuclear-pow...
|
| https://xplanes.tumblr.com/post/30952419021/from-nuclear-pow...
| glimshe wrote:
| Beyond SpaceX, do we still work on crazy futuristic stuff like
| this and things such as windowed user interfaces (which was very
| futuristic at one point)?
| t1234s wrote:
| I remember seeing an interview with UFO researcher Stanton
| Freedman and he claimed he worked on nuclear airplane projects.
| loph wrote:
| This is related.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Nuclear_Aircraft_Labor...
|
| my understanding is that the area is still a bit "hot" with
| radiation.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-06-02 23:01 UTC)