New satellite images obtained by CNN indicate Russia is preparing to resume test flights of its nuclear-powered cruise missile at a previously-dismantled launch site near the Arctic Circle, according to experts who have analyzed the photos.
This is a figure from a 1962 patent assigned to TRW for a radioisotope thermal rocket engine. It is my understanding that a 65 pound force engine was built and tested. I have not seen any information on this project.
Now 1962 was a time when Ford had proposed a radioisotope powered car that had a 10 horsepower steam generator that was radioisotope powered. The Seattlite XXI.
Ford Motor Company 1962 Public Domain
Both the rocket engine and automobile were powered by trifling amounts of Polonium 210. Polonium 210 is easily made from Bismuth 209 through neutron bombardment in the core of a nuclear reactor. The Polonium 210 would then radiate alpha particles at 5 MeV decaying to Lead 206 in the process. No long lived radioisotopes!
The temperature is easy to figure. You make a high temperature alloy out of bismuth, and coat it on to a stainless steel surface to a specified thickness. The thicker the layer the hotter the surface. In this way you will have a continuously hot surface that cools as the inverse of the fourth power of temperature given the Stephan Boltzmann relation for hot surfaces.
The 10 horsepower boiler could run dry and stay at a little above its peak operating temperature of 300 C. It produced high pressure steam at 300 C under normal conditions and stored it in an insulated steam tank in the front of the vehicle when not otherwise in use. The steam fed a 1/8th horsepower alternator that ran the vehicle electronics, and primary power was through a 1000 horsepower steam turbine that delivered power to all wheels. Adsorption cooling and steam heater provided a comfortable cabin and clean dry windows under all weather conditions. The turbines and heat exchangers were of the condensing type and the water reused. Every two months or so you stop at your Atomic Cafe and swap out an old heater core for a new one, and the old one gets reprocessed removing the lead and polonium, separating them with a time of flight mass spectrometer, and redepositing fresh polonium with old to the specified thickness and purity. This would be no more difficult than a brake job. The shop would have its own compact nuclear power plant to spin out polonium on demand. Lead would be sent to a battery manufacturer and a gamma shield maker.
The radioisotope rocket used radioisotopes to heat a working fluid to an operating temperature which was then ejected through a delaval nozzle. A radioisotope powered jet engine is also possible. GE was working on the GX-89 which was two J-57 jet engines heated by a small nuclear reactor. However, a radioisotope powered jet engine is also possible. Though I can't find any patents on it. I have found a recent article about it
Download Citation | Radioisotope Heated Aero-propulsion for Unmanned Flight on Titan | The thermodynamics of a radioisotope heated turbojet, turboprop and ramjet engine are investigated for flight on Titan. The turboprop and turbojet... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate
www.researchgate.net
Which suggests its an obvious application of the technology and could be a secret aerospace project that isn't talked about. No data though except data surrounding the idea.
HTRE-3 Nuclear Jet Engine
Though any good engineer can figure out some details...
The alpha particles emitted by Polonium 210 generates 147 Watts per GRAM! That means a 10 horsepower thermal source for the Seattellite XXI requires 50.73 grams of Po-210 occupying 5.516 cc!! At 300 C in vacuum that means 1.219 m2 of surface area and a 4.529 micrometer thick coating either on a sheet or on fine bearings.
The J-47 engine produces 26.56 kN at peak thrust and consumes 28.7 grams/kN second of thrust and Jet fuel contains 43 kJ/gram so you need a combustion chamber power source that's 32.78 MW. This is 223 kg of Polonium 210 occupying 22.49 liters and when spread over 94.39 square meters at a thickness of 246.9 micrometers has an operating temperature of 1300 C.
Whilst Polonium has a low melting point, a liquid solid alloy of Polonium and Steel can be made with Steel retaining most of its strength. 120 million 1 mm diameter beads have the requisite area and occupy 85 liters of volume and weigh 580 kg. Adjusting for cruise thrust as in the nuclear jet, and using kerosene (or steam? like in the SkyCycle designed by Truax, but maybe a molten salt system would work) to take off cuts the weight to less than 250 kg and les than 40 liters volume, Which is less than the fuel would weigh per engine in most jet aircraft. The advantage is you would be able to cruise for months at a time before refueling with Polonium in a manner similar to the Seattelite XXI from Ford. Using beads you would drop them into a receiver and run them through a mill that was adapted to polish ball bearings. A spiral groove in two counter rotating plates admits bearings single file at the center and spits them out the edge, free of their coating. the coating drops as flakes and is vacuumed up. They are processed through a time of flight mass spectrometer after heating to ionisation with an electron beam. The mass spectrometer separates lead from polonium 210 from steel, and fresh polonium 210 is coated with the old on to the bearings and they're dropped back into the engine heater. Button up and take off. Air craft that hovered continuously in ground effect would be preferred to keep the cooling systems working at full efficiency in the engine. You would still need a small amount of kerosene (or accumulated heat somehow) to take off.
This is a figure from a 1962 patent assigned to TRW for a radioisotope thermal rocket engine. It is my understanding that a 65 pound force engine was built and tested. I have not seen any information on this project.
This is a figure from a 1962 patent assigned to TRW for a radioisotope thermal rocket engine. It is my understanding that a 65 pound force engine was built and tested. I have not seen any information on this project.
Thanks for that. Google Search did not bring it up on my browser. hmm..
I looked at the references for Wikipedia article. As is usual for Wiki the editors didn't get the details right. At least not in the context of the TRW engine. For example, the first reference given is about a radioisotope thermal power source driving an ion engine. I suppose you could call that a radioisotope rocket, but it is not the type that TRW built and patented, and doesn't really give much information about the design -- none at all in fact.
Like I said the patent is the best I could find on the topic. I'm looking for more if you happen to know where I might find it. I would greatly appreciate any leads. Thanks.
Studies over the last decade have shown radioisotope-based nuclear electric propulsion to be enhancing and, in some cases, enabling for many potential…
Polonium 210 is seriously nasty stuff;- mind bogglingly poisonous (the room where it was slipped into a cup of tea by an assassin is still sealed, nearly twenty years on), its the key extremely difficult component of a relatively simple atomic bomb and staggeringly difficult to contain;- it was noted to almost mysteriously move against the direction of a purging gas flow. I’d sleep a lot better if this was kept far away from general use.
From wiki
“one gram of 210Po is enough to kill 50 million people and sicken another 50 million”
Like I said the patent is the best I could find on the topic. I'm looking for more if you happen to know where I might find it. I would greatly appreciate any leads. Thanks.
If you really want the source:
Ogren, J.R., J.L. Blumenthal, and R.C. Ham: Radioisotope Propulsion Technology Program (Poodle), Final Report, Vol. III, STL -517–0049, Oct. 1966.
Wait, I thought RTG could not truly propel vehicles in the sense of high thrust / high speed in a strong gravity well ?
We have been told again and again they were merely good enough for ALSEP or Voyager in non-propulsive roles...
So RTG could power a car or even a jet ? now that's interesting !
Couldn't JPL use its intensive RTG experience to get a practical car ? For example, a RTG combined with a lithium battery to extend range beyond Teslas ?
As for nuclear aircraft... the more I think about it, the more I think it would the ultimate answer to global warming. What's more, if RTG could replace nuclear reactors... they are less prone to failure, simpler, more robust (see Apollo 13 LM RTG).
We did come a long way on downsizing nuclear reactors from using train rails to wheeled trailers and have gotten to the point of using it for deep space travel. The trend for them right now is working on pulse detonation engines for aircrafts before considering a nuclear option. Successful flights tests instead of ground tests of either Burevestnik and Nuklon would deserve applause.
Wait, I thought RTG could not truly propel vehicles in the sense of high thrust / high speed in a strong gravity well ?
We have been told again and again they were merely good enough for ALSEP or Voyager in non-propulsive roles...
If by "power" you mean run the AC and crank up the tunes, sure. If you mean propel it down the road... naw. The Cassini RTG put out 4400 watts of heat, about 300 watts of electricity. The Volkswagen Beetle originally had a whopping 25 horsepower. Not a lot. But 300 watts of electricity works out to 0.4 horsepower. If you could somehow magically 100% convert 4.4 kilowatts of heat into useful horsepower, you'd have 5.9 horses to play with. If you wanted to have the full 25 horsepower, you'd need 4 and a quarter of the 100% efficient Cassini RTGs. That RTG massed about 56 kilos. So your 25 horsepower RTG would be 237 kilograms. Stuffing that into an 800 kilo Beetle would seem a challenge.
Radioisotope thrusters are high thrust compared to *ion* engines, but that's like being smart compare to a sea cucumber.
The bit I’m struggling with is the concept of putting enough toxic material to kill the entire world population many times over in a single car so somebody can drive for a couple of months.... Call me old fashion but this hasn’t got a good vib of a successful venture about it.
Another thing, If this is the container you need to safely store just one gram of Californium (similar toxicity ball park);-
What does the container look like for 255Kg of comparatively potent Po210? ........ for that matter what does the car look like?
Although the claim is that Po210 is easily cooked up, it’s safe separation and containment is beyond a nightmare. Also when it’s made within the Bismuth it’s in super tiny concentrations which itself forms a difficult product limitation. I wonder what’s the largest pure mass of Po210 that’s ever been assembled ?
Polonium-210 is the radioactive isotope that caused the death of former Soviet spy Alexander Litvinenko in London in 2006. It is lethally toxic but rare.
New satellite images obtained by CNN show Russia may be preparing another test of its nuclear-powered cruise missile, known as "Skyfall"-- a controversial weapon that is designed to defeat US defense systems.
The mind wonder... what if they used that thing with a conventional warhead against Ukraine ? it would be kind of "flying dirty bomb" but not obviously a nuclear tipped missile.
(I know, I know, it is far from being operational - but if it ever enter service someday, that will be a worthwhile question to be asked).
The mind wonder... what if they used that thing with a conventional warhead against Ukraine ? it would be kind of "flying dirty bomb" but not obviously a nuclear tipped missile.
(I know, I know, it is far from being operational - but if it ever enter service someday, that will be a worthwile question to be asked).
If the test is successful, I wonder what the flight time will be…and obviously the recovery method. I think there were several failed tests already which required the recovery of radioactive wreckage.
The mind wonder... what if they used that thing with a conventional warhead against Ukraine ? it would be kind of "flying dirty bomb" but not obviously a nuclear tipped missile.
(I know, I know, it is far from being operational - but if it ever enter service someday, that will be a worthwhile question to be asked).
Russia doesn't have any problem delivering conventional warheads to Ukraine now, though some of its systems are more accurate than others. I don't see an advantage to using an expensive nuclear engine that would contaminate the impact site (if not the whole flight path, depending on the design). It would be a radiological weapon even sans warhead, plus it is an expensive way to deliver explosives. More over not only is this weapon not in service, but it also has never been successfully tested (per OSINT). It remains to be seen if the design is workable. The US design based on similar principles (presumably) showed promise in ground testing but never flew at all.
If the test is successful, I wonder what the flight time will be…and obviously the recovery method. I think there were several failed tests already which required the recovery of radioactive wreckage.
If the test is successful, I wonder what the flight time will be…and obviously the recovery method. I think there were several failed tests already which required the recovery of radioactive wreckage.
I don't see an advantage to using an expensive nuclear engine that would contaminate the impact site (if not the whole flight path, depending on the design).
A missile like this would have two roles, if actually used (as opposed to merely threatened):
1) Long range flight in truly strategic attack roles, such as flying into the CONUS from Russia
2) A "salt the earth" terror weapon when used on "lesser" enemies. It woud lightly irradiate the flight path if it flew low, causing some envornmental damage... and would badly irradiate the crash site, which presumably would be programmed in. That might not do so much to, say, Ukraine, which is already being trashed... but the example would presumably weigh heavily on the minds of other nations that might dare to consider not being annexed.
Spend a few weeks pouring concrete on it and send some miners to make a tunnel for more concrete under it and then build a steel tomb for it 20 years later.
It'll still be off. And presumably, somebody else's problem. If the Soviets could have shoveled Chernobyl into, say, Turkey, they would have done it and called it a day.
It'll still be off. And presumably, somebody else's problem. If the Soviets could have shoveled Chernobyl into, say, Turkey, they would have done it and called it a day.
New satellite images obtained by CNN show Russia may be preparing another test of its nuclear-powered cruise missile, known as "Skyfall"-- a controversial weapon that is designed to defeat US defense systems.
Is this the best thread to monitor for up to date information on the Skyfall? I just saw this HI Sutton article as well and a few searches lead me to this thread.
Out of sheer curiosity, has there been anymore on the Nyonoska incident beyond the reports that came out during the first two weeks of it? Was the release just short lived isotopes?
To the best of my knowledge, there is no more information in the public domain than what is already in the wiki of the incident. It has been alleged in other articles that sources have stated that was a result of the third failed test (or rather the recover of the third test) but nothing hard. Also the exact mechanism of the missile itself is in question; there have been articles to suggest it doesn't operate the same way as the US SLAM project but nothing convincing in open source. The project is largely a big question mark outside the basic fact that it is nuclear powered.
This whole thing has been incredibly confusing. My 6th grade science teacher worked on DSMAC and TERCOM and would discuss Pluto (and the NB-36) at length. He may have quantified the danger of the engine exhaust on open-cycle engines and I didn't understand it, but I was still left with the impression that any use of open-cycle left a huge exclamation point for RDE (Radiation Detection Equipment). Any major incident like an explosion or crash and the whole area would become a "superfund site" in his words. In reviewing video from the 2019 incident, it does seem plausible that it was just a chemical rocket accident that had some type of SNAP unit that got damaged causing a limited release. Maybe even multiple incidents of such a nature. Like Josh said there is no way this could be a SLAM reactor and not have created a massive mess that Northern European detectors (or sampling aircraft) would still be picking up...unless such information is suppressed by both sides. I was born right before the end of the Cold War but I assume the speculation and observations echoed by this thread are in a way similar to how we would be discussing the Nuclear Bomber (the Bounder was marked as a "nuclear powered bomber" by Aviation Week if I recall). All of us trying to make sense of the facts vs. the propaganda to find out what is the truth.
My aforementioned teacher recommended back then (1998) that I watch out for the Discovery Wings video on SLAM/Pluto. No streaming back then so I had to patiently wait to see it. It is on YouTube now.
Russia is about to scale up its dangerous testing of the Burevestnik nuclear-powered cruise missile, according to a study of satellite images obtained by military analyst Tony Roper.
Picture a jet engine. Replace the combustion chamber with the reactor or at least the reactor cooling loop. Reactor heats air, which expands and drives a turbine (and produces thrust), the turbine spins a compressor to stuff more air in the front and make more thrust. That's a nuclear turbojet in a nutshell.
Project Pluto's nuclear ramjet was a full sized reactor and ran the air straight through the reactor for heating. A convergent/divergent nozzle at the back end gets the air flow up to supersonic speeds, and the forward motion of the craft rams more air into the front to be heated.
President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday that Russia had successfully tested a potent new strategic missile and declined to rule out the possibility it could carry out weapons tests involving nuclear explosions for the first time in more than three decades.
www.reuters.com
“Putin said for the first time that Moscow had successfully tested the Burevestnik, a nuclear-powered and nuclear-capable cruise missile with a potential range of many thousands of miles”
President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday that Russia had successfully tested a potent new strategic missile and declined to rule out the possibility it could carry out weapons tests involving nuclear explosions for the first time in more than three decades.
www.reuters.com
“Putin said for the first time that Moscow had successfully tested the Burevestnik, a nuclear-powered and nuclear-capable cruise missile with a potential range of many thousands of miles”
It might use a relatively “clean” propulsion compared to PLUTO when it doesn’t explode. I’m guessing we’ll hear some kind of anonymous statement from the intel community one way or the other at some point. They knew it was coming and likely have some means of detecting a launch.
You would never just flight test this engine, it would see extensive ground testing, and given the way the Pluto type works it’s gonna leave a detectable mark.
Anyone else noticed the recent exponential price rise of Hafnium? It’s five times the price it was just a year ago.
Since the previous test was an unplanned kinetic disassembly that vaporised a number of engineers maybe they are considering any test that didn’t show up on seismometers as a success
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
amp.cnn.com
www.researchgate.net
www.medicalnewstoday.com
edition.cnn.com
www.armscontrolwonk.com
thebarentsobserver.com
www.reuters.com
