"Burevestnik" Nuclear-powered cruise missile

PapaDragon wrote:
First thing they would be doing with flying prototype of something like this would be to install landing gear

Who the hell would want to chase nuclear device across the Arctic instead of landing it on the runway?

Not to mention that whole thing would have disintegrated on impact with water surface and/or ice

Not if parachuted

Gibraltar wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:
First thing they would be doing with flying prototype of something like this would be to install landing gear

Who the hell would want to chase nuclear device across the Arctic instead of landing it on the runway?

Not to mention that whole thing would have disintegrated on impact with water surface and/or ice

Not if parachuted

Tehy still wouldn't be dropping it in the ocean

Do you know what salt water does to sensitive equipment?

dino00 wrote:   garbage alert

US intel report says mysterious Russian explosion was triggered by recovery mission of nuclear-powered missile, not a test

A U.S. intelligence report says the mysterious explosion off Russia’s northern coast occurred during a recovery mission to salvage the Kremlin’s nuclear-powered missile from the ocean floor.

The mysterious explosion sparked fears that Russia had tested its nuclear-powered Burevestnik missile, also known as Skyfall.

CNBC learned last year of similar plans Moscow made to try to recover a nuclear-powered missile lost at sea.

WASHINGTON — A U.S. intelligence assessment found that the mysterious explosion off of Russia’s northern coast occurred during a recovery mission to salvage a nuclear-powered missile from the ocean floor, according to people with direct knowledge of the report.

The mysterious explosion on Aug. 8 killed five scientists and sparked fears that Russia had tested its new nuclear-powered Burevestnik missile, also known as Skyfall.

“This was not a new launch of the weapon, instead it was a recovery mission to salvage a lost missile from a previous test,” said a person with direct knowledge of the U.S. intelligence assessment. “There was an explosion on one of the vessels involved in the recovery and that caused a reaction in the missile’s nuclear core which lead to the radiation leak,” said another person, who spoke to CNBC on the condition of anonymity.

The U.S. intelligence report did not mention potential health or environmental risks posed by damage to the missile’s nuclear reactor.

Makes no sense.

Total Bullshit.

The Burevestnik engine is essentially a ramjet wher the air is heated by a nuclear reactor rather than combustion of a fuel. Follwoing burnout (and ejection?) of its solid boosters, there are no combustibles onboard, so no source of explosion. Reactor malfunction might cause it to overheat (and maybe even meltdown) but explode? No, not gonna happen.

This is simply a pack of stupid lies from the Pentagram and their enablers in corporate lamestream media.

And once things go underwater they can become rather hard to find.

Equally when hit at speed water is no softer than rock so why bother?

Of course the US traditionally landed their spacecraft in water so they wouldn't appreciate the error.

Big_Gazza wrote:

dino00 wrote:   garbage alert

US intel report says mysterious Russian explosion was triggered by recovery mission of nuclear-powered missile, not a test

A U.S. intelligence report says the mysterious explosion off Russia’s northern coast occurred during a recovery mission to salvage the Kremlin’s nuclear-powered missile from the ocean floor.

The mysterious explosion sparked fears that Russia had tested its nuclear-powered Burevestnik missile, also known as Skyfall.

CNBC learned last year of similar plans Moscow made to try to recover a nuclear-powered missile lost at sea.

WASHINGTON — A U.S. intelligence assessment found that the mysterious explosion off of Russia’s northern coast occurred during a recovery mission to salvage a nuclear-powered missile from the ocean floor, according to people with direct knowledge of the report.

The mysterious explosion on Aug. 8 killed five scientists and sparked fears that Russia had tested its new nuclear-powered Burevestnik missile, also known as Skyfall.

“This was not a new launch of the weapon, instead it was a recovery mission to salvage a lost missile from a previous test,” said a person with direct knowledge of the U.S. intelligence assessment. “There was an explosion on one of the vessels involved in the recovery and that caused a reaction in the missile’s nuclear core which lead to the radiation leak,” said another person, who spoke to CNBC on the condition of anonymity.

The U.S. intelligence report did not mention potential health or environmental risks posed by damage to the missile’s nuclear reactor.

Makes no sense.

Total Bullshit.

The Burevestnik engine is essentially a ramjet wher the air is heated by a nuclear reactor rather than combustion of a fuel.  Follwoing burnout (and ejection?) of its solid boosters, there are no combustibles onboard, so no source of explosion.  Reactor malfunction might cause it to overheat (and maybe even meltdown) but explode?  No, not gonna happen.

This is simply a pack of stupid lies from the Pentagram and their enablers in corporate lamestream media.

The ramjet/scramjet aspect is likely 100% correct. It would also produce a hot exhaust which would look like flame at some angles.
Russian developers must have achieve power densities from the "nuclear battery" in excess of fuel allowing a total replacement.
This is a rather spectacular technological achievement. But I am certain it is not based around an isotope generator so all the talk
about electrical turbines and Cs-137 is BS diversion.

A nuclear reactor cannot be scaled arbitrarily since the neutron flux does not vary in a manner to compensate for the scale. Small
reactors generate fewer neutrons so it becomes nonlinearly more difficult to sustain nuclear reactions at small volumes. Obviously,
isotope generators do not have this issue since all they do is exploit some decaying isotope and deplete with time. In order to drive
a ramjet via air heating, this approach cannot be used since it is not indefinite by construction. So a small species of nuclear reactor
with actual nuclear reactions needed to be developed. Nobody can fob off Russian science as second rate. It is world leading.

I suspect that the neutron flux density problem is addressed by increasing the energy of the neutrons. So this small reactor is a
type of breeder reactor with a harder neutron energy spectrum.

kvs wrote:But I am certain it is not based around an isotope generator so all the talk
about electrical turbines and Cs-137 is BS diversion.

Do you think that Scott Ritter got it right in calling this a test of a RTG for powering the electrics and command electronics of seabed-installed missile canisters? The RTG apparently tested OK but the missile somehow leaked propellents and an explosion resulted.

Big_Gazza wrote:

kvs wrote:But I am certain it is not based around an isotope generator so all the talk
about electrical turbines and Cs-137 is BS diversion.

Do you think that Scott Ritter got it right in calling this a test of a RTG for powering the electrics and command electronics of seabed-installed missile canisters?  The RTG apparently tested OK but the missile somehow leaked propellents and an explosion resulted.

The size of a "nuclear battery" for such tasks can be very small. So the amount of radiation released would be tiny and blow detection
thresholds of instruments that registered a radiation spike (small one) for half an hour. I don't think Ritter thought the fallout aspect through
enough.

Also, to me it looks like the explosion was all about the "nuclear battery" since a missile's propellant blowing up would have incinerated the
floating platform. Everybody in proximity would have died quickly. Even the people blown into the water would have experienced heavy
burns and likely drowned. They managed to save some of the people thrown into the water. From what I can tell the burns are radiation
burns. This ain't no isotope generator. Rocket and missile accidents are very ugly.

We are in a new area of technology and applied science with the nuclear reactor being developed. I am not surprised that they had such an
accident since they do not have a perfectly working model living inside a computer. The problem is that they were too sloppy with handling
this device. There should have been no people exposed to danger until some metrics of the reactor were determined. That is, they needed
to monitor at the very least its heat generation continuously. Neutron flux monitors should have been installed as well. I guess the Soviet
era sloppiness has not worked itself out of the culture...

Hole wrote:It was a test of a new engine for a new missile. The radioisotope or nuclear battery is also used to generate the "spark" to ignite the fuel mixture. Could all be read in an article a few days ago. Iswestija. And Sputnik.

https://de.sputniknews.com/technik/20190816325614839-russland-atom-rakete-explosion/

I got it only in German.

For what sort of missile would a radioisotype battery be needed for to generate electricity, other than one based in outer space or the ocean depths?

Amanda's Alert
Russian nuclear missile with ‘unlimited’ range to be ready by 2025, US intelligence says

KEY POINTS
Russia’s nuclear-powered missile with so-called unlimited range will be ready for war within the next six years, a slightly accelerated timeline than previously reported, according to a U.S. intelligence assessment.

The revelation of the new, more ambitious timeline for the missile comes even though the Kremlin has yet to secure a successful test over multiple attempts, according to sources with knowledge of a U.S. intelligence report.

The rest is all the same
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/11/russian-nuclear-missile-with-unlimited-range-to-be-ready-by-2025-us-intel.html

flamming_python wrote:

Hole wrote:It was a test of a new engine for a new missile. The radioisotope or nuclear battery is also used to generate the "spark" to ignite the fuel mixture. Could all be read in an article a few days ago. Iswestija. And Sputnik.

https://de.sputniknews.com/technik/20190816325614839-russland-atom-rakete-explosion/

I got it only in German.

For what sort of missile would a radioisotype battery be needed for to generate electricity, other than one based in outer space or the ocean depths?

Sitting in the launch tube of a SSBN for 20 years. Which ist like sitting in the ocean depths. Even less need for maintenance then with previous missiles.

Hole wrote:Sitting in the launch tube of a SSBN for 20 years. Which ist like sitting in the ocean depths. Even less need for maintenance then with previous missiles.

SLBMs don't need an independent long-life power source - they have the submarines power grid to draw upon. Most likely this RTG-like device (if thats in fact what it is) would intended for containerised missiles installed to seabed without any connections to energy infrastructure.

Russian nuclear missile with ‘unlimited’ range to be ready by 2025, US intelligence says

The same US intel that thought Hilary would win the election and in a tantrum hounded Trump with false accusations of collusion with Russia, not to mention monumental failures regarding 11/9 and WMDs in Iraq.

I mean when attacked by Saudi and Pakistani nationals during 11/9, the US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, and eventually got their man... in Pakistan.

Wouldn't believe US Intel if they said up was up and down was down.

GarryB wrote:

Russian nuclear missile with ‘unlimited’ range to be ready by 2025, US intelligence says

The same US intel that thought Hilary would win the election and in a tantrum hounded Trump with false accusations of collusion with Russia, not to mention monumental failures regarding 11/9 and WMDs in Iraq.

I mean when attacked by Saudi and Pakistani nationals during 11/9, the US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, and eventually got their man... in Pakistan.

Wouldn't believe US Intel if they said up was up and down was down.

That's why the Amanda's Alert

I think in 9/11 the Americans and Israelis intel worked very well extra hours in their own way.

Since the Burevestnik is using a nuclear reactor can that nuclear reactor be used to power a plasma generator?



This project they could have not drawn enough power for the plasma density to absorb the firecontrol frequencies like S-band in other words not enough electrons. While Russians have said it draws out too much power

https://iz.ru/news/651212

“Specially creating a plasma screen in front of a cruise missile today is no longer as relevant as it was in the 80s of the last century, when the Meteorite was developed,” professor of the Academy of Military Sciences Vadim Kozyulin told Izvestia. - The car was made under the then conditions of a missile defense breakthrough, when the enemy could notice it only in the opposite direction. Today, radar is irradiated from above, from below, from the side. Therefore, the only way to go unnoticed is to fly at a hypersonic speed of six or more Machs. At such speeds, a plasma cloud is formed around the apparatus itself. And here it is important that in Russia they already know how to use it both as a radar absorbing protective shield and as an antenna with which it is possible to transmit combat control signals”

Why the Russians have chosen speed over plasma generators is this. http://www.aerospaceweb.org/design/scripts/atmosphere/

Put the temperature, speed of mach 9 and 30-40km altitude in the calculator above



So if the Zircon is at mach 10 than its plasma density is thick enough to deal with higher firecontrol frequencies. tests results of plasmas for re-entry targets https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19670020821.pdf For their radar cross section.

I believe this is the reason why they chose the 30-40km altitude for Zircon.



Which means higher temperatures and more electrons for Zircon and this is how they will solve the communications problems for Zircon. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/422292/russian-physicists-solve-radio-black-out-problem-for-re-entering-spacecraft/

They are still teaching their students about plasma generators so can plasma generators be re-introduced later with smaller compact nuclear power sources? The Russians got insulted the most by the west for nuclear propulsion missiles and plasma stealth. So can the Burevestnik be a double F%&ck you missile or single F&ck you while the Zircon gives the other f%ck you?

Looking back at the failed test, could it have been a revival of Ajax?

"The fuel feed system of the Ayaks engine is also novel. At supersonic speeds, air brutally recompress downstream the stagnation point of a shock wave, producing heat. At hypersonic speeds, the heat flux from shock waves and air friction on the body of an aircraft, especially at the nose and leading edges, becomes considerable, as the temperature is proportional to the square of the Mach number. That is why hypersonic speeds are problematic with respect to the strength of materials and are often referred to as the heat barrier.[23]

Ayaks uses thermochemical reactors (TCRs): the heating energy from air friction is used to increase the heat capacity of the fuel, by cracking the fuel with a catalytic chemical reaction. The aircraft has double shielding between which water and ordinary, cheap kerosene circulates in hot parts of the airframe. The energy of surface heating is absorbed through heat exchangers to trigger a series of chemical reactions in presence of a nickel catalyzer, called hydrocarbon steam reforming. Kerosene and water spits into a new fuel reformate: methane (70–80% in volume) and carbon"

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

magnumcromagnon wrote:Looking back at the failed test, could it have been a revival of Ajax?

"The fuel feed system of the Ayaks engine is also novel. At supersonic speeds, air brutally recompress downstream the stagnation point of a shock wave, producing heat. At hypersonic speeds, the heat flux from shock waves and air friction on the body of an aircraft, especially at the nose and leading edges, becomes considerable, as the temperature is proportional to the square of the Mach number. That is why hypersonic speeds are problematic with respect to the strength of materials and are often referred to as the heat barrier.[23]

Ayaks uses thermochemical reactors (TCRs): the heating energy from air friction is used to increase the heat capacity of the fuel, by cracking the fuel with a catalytic chemical reaction. The aircraft has double shielding between which water and ordinary, cheap kerosene circulates in hot parts of the airframe. The energy of surface heating is absorbed through heat exchangers to trigger a series of chemical reactions in presence of a nickel catalyzer, called hydrocarbon steam reforming. Kerosene and water spits into a new fuel reformate: methane (70–80% in volume) and carbon"

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

Ajax appears to not have any nuclear elements. It would have to be a new approach using nuclear devices.

At this stage there is no useful information about what the Burevestnik design is like. But the accident indicates
that it is not a nuclear battery driving an electrical propulsion system. Nuclear batteries do not explode. So
either the nuclear energy generator or a combustible fluid was responsible for the explosion.

kvs wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:......
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayaks

Ajax appears to not have any nuclear elements.   It would have to be a new approach using nuclear devices.

At this stage there is no useful information about what the Burevestnik design is like.   ...

Ajax is forefather of Avangard and Zircon

Buravestnik is completely unrelated to it

PapaDragon wrote:

kvs wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:......
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayaks

Ajax appears to not have any nuclear elements.   It would have to be a new approach using nuclear devices.

At this stage there is no useful information about what the Burevestnik design is like.   ...

Ajax is forefather of Avangard and Zircon

Buravestnik is completely unrelated to it

I would argue Yu-71 is the forefather of Avantegard, Ajax seem's to be more akin to a reusable (unmanned) space plane with both civilian and military applications, the forefather being Buran.

I believe this is the reason why they chose the 30-40km altitude for Zircon.

Do we know what altitude Zircon operates at?

Kh-32 operates at 40km altitude, but I have not heard about the Zircon yet.

Makes more sense S-500 than Burevestnik...to close to the border.

Some sort of test expected at Nenoksa....possibly Burevestnik


Villagers advised by military to evacuate Nenoksa ahead of missile test
https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/security/2020/07/nenoksa-village-gets-evacuation-order-ahead-missile-launch

Cyberspec wrote:Some sort of test expected at Nenoksa....possibly Burevestnik


Villagers advised by military to evacuate Nenoksa ahead of missile test
https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/security/2020/07/nenoksa-village-gets-evacuation-order-ahead-missile-launch

Is there a shortage of space in Russia? Can't they do this somewhere else?

Not only are they fucking around with people for no good reason but they are also screwing up OPSEC