In online posts and calls to local officials, Russians on Monday expressed anger that the explosion of a small nuclear reactor at a military test site last week has gone unacknowledged for days by their government.
“Even if it is not as dangerous as it seems, we deserve to know,” said Danil Kotsyubinsky, a resident of St. Petersburg who has been pressing local officials for information.
The accident, which has been cloaked in secrecy, took place on Thursday at the Nenoska naval weapons range on the coast of the White Sea in northern Russia, and it apparently involved a test of a new type of cruise missile propelled by nuclear power, American analysts say.
The explosion killed at least seven people, released radiation that briefly elevated readings in a city 25 miles away and set off a scramble by Western experts to ascertain what happened.
They're testing development of a nuclear engine for cruise missiles.
To whom would that seem like a good idea?
Or, "what could go wrong?"
"Think of it like a mini Chernobyl on a missile," MIT's Narang said.
"It's an air-breathing cruise missile and they put an unshielded mini nuclear reactor on it. Obviously, that's pretty bats--- insane.
"We tried this in the 1960s and gave up for a reason, and this is why. It's very risky."
Thursday's accident is the latest sign that Russia's attempts to succeed where the U.S. failed are not going to plan.
Thursday's accident is the latest sign that Russia's attempts to succeed where the U.S. failed are not going to plan.
This is the latest of several failed tests since they started in 2017.
Cheryl Rofer, a retired chemist at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the birthplace of the atomic bomb in New Mexico, believes Putin will never succeed.
"There are basic and fundamental engineering considerations that suggest that a nuclear-powered cruise missile with a very small power source will be very difficult or impossible to build," she wrote on the Nuclear Diner website Sunday.
That's because of how difficult it is to make this type of missile light enough but with enough power to fly.
Cheryl Rofer, a retired chemist at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the birthplace of the atomic bomb in New Mexico, believes Putin will never succeed.
"There are basic and fundamental engineering considerations that suggest that a nuclear-powered cruise missile with a very small power source will be very difficult or impossible to build," she wrote on the Nuclear Diner website Sunday.
That's because of how difficult it is to make this type of missile light enough but with enough power to fly.
But the main reason it was abandoned in the past is the design has the potential to spread radioactive particles over the ground as it flies.
In the 1960s, the U.S. did not want to test its rocket in Nevada or over the Pacific because of the risk it could veer off course and cause an environmental catastrophe.
"Is it dangerous? Yes!" Lewis said.
"Is it dangerous? Yes!" Lewis said.
"I think the phrase 'flying nuclear reactor' tells you all you need to know.
"You've got air blowing through an open nuclear reactor and spewing out the back."
Putin is worried US anti-missile technology, reputedly now practically useless, will improve sufficiently to provide the US with what American policy leaders - though perhaps only the loonier - might think of as a first strike capability.
An unlimited range cruise missile looks like an answer, and a nuclear engine looks like the way to power it.
Putin is worried US anti-missile technology, reputedly now practically useless, will improve sufficiently to provide the US with what American policy leaders - though perhaps only the loonier - might think of as a first strike capability.
An unlimited range cruise missile looks like an answer, and a nuclear engine looks like the way to power it.
No comments:
Post a Comment