AT one of the sections On LiveJournal, an electronics engineer constantly writes about nuclear and thermonuclear machines - reactors, installations, research laboratories, accelerators, as well as about. The new Russian rocket, the testimony during the annual message of the President, aroused the blogger's lively interest. And here's what he found on the subject.
Yes, historically there have been developments of cruise missiles with a ramjet nuclear air engine: this is the SLAM missile in the USA with the TORY-II reactor, the Avro Z-59 concept in the UK, and developments in the USSR.
A modern rendering of the Avro Z-59 rocket concept, weighing about 20 tons.
However, all these works went on in the 60s as R&D of varying degrees of depth (the United States went the farthest, as discussed below) and were not continued in the form of samples in service. They didn’t get it for the same reason as many other Atom Age developments - planes, trains, rockets with nuclear power plants. All these options Vehicle with some pluses that the frantic energy density in nuclear fuel gives, they have very serious disadvantages - high cost, complexity of operation, requirements for constant protection, and finally, unsatisfactory development results, about which little is usually known (by publishing R&D results, it is more profitable for all parties to exhibit achievements and hide failures ).
In particular, it is much easier for cruise missiles to create a carrier (submarine or aircraft) that will "drag" a lot of missiles to the launch site than to fool around with a small fleet (and it is incredibly difficult to master a large fleet) of cruise missiles launched from one's own territory. Versatile, cheap mass medium won in the end small-scale, expensive and with ambiguous pluses. Nuclear cruise missiles did not go beyond ground tests.
This conceptual dead end of the 60s of the KR with nuclear power plants, in my opinion, is still relevant now, so the main question to the shown one is "why ??". But it is made even more convex by the problems that arise in the development, testing and operation of such weapons, which we will talk about further.
So let's start with the reactor. The SLAM and Z-59 concepts were three-machine low-flying rockets of impressive dimensions and mass (20+ tons after the launch boosters were dropped). The terribly expensive low-flying supersonic made it possible to make the most of the presence of a practically unlimited source of energy on board, in addition, an important feature of a nuclear air jet engine is work efficiency improvements (thermodynamic cycle) with increasing speed, i.e. the same idea, but at speeds of 1000 km / h would have a much heavier and overall engine. Finally, 3M at a height of a hundred meters in 1965 meant invulnerability to air defense. It turns out that earlier the concept of a missile launcher with a nuclear power plant was "tied" to high speed, where the advantages of the concept were strong, and competitors with hydrocarbon fuel were weakening. The rocket shown, in my opinion, is transonic or weakly supersonic (unless, of course, you believe that it is she in the video). But at the same time, the size of the reactor decreased significantly compared to TORY II from the SLAM rocket, where it was as much as 2 meters including a graphite radial neutron reflector
Is it even possible to lay a reactor with a diameter of 0.4-0.6 meters?
Let's start with a fundamentally minimal reactor - a blank of Pu239. Good example implementation of such a concept is the Kilopower space reactor, where, however, U235 is used. The diameter of the reactor core is only 11 centimeters! If you switch to plutonium 239, the dimensions of the core will drop by another 1.5-2 times. Now from minimum size we will begin to walk towards a real nuclear air jet engine, remembering the difficulties.
The very first thing to add to the size of the reactor is the size of the reflector - in particular, in Kilopower, BeO triples the size. Secondly, we cannot use a U or Pu blank - they will simply burn out in an air stream in just a minute. A sheath is needed, such as incaloy, which resists instantaneous oxidation up to 1000 C, or other nickel alloys with a possible ceramic coating. The introduction of a large amount of shell material into the core immediately increases the required amount of nuclear fuel by several times - after all, the "unproductive" absorption of neutrons in the core has now increased dramatically!
Moreover, the metallic form of U or Pu is no longer suitable - these materials themselves are not refractory (plutonium generally melts at 634 C), but they also interact with the material of metal shells. We convert the fuel into the classical form of UO2 or PuO2 - we get one more dilution of the material in the core, now with oxygen.
Finally, we recall the purpose of the reactor. We need to pump a lot of air through it, to which we will give off heat. Approximately 2/3 of the space will be occupied by "air tubes".
As a result, the minimum core diameter grows to 40-50 cm (for uranium), and the diameter of the reactor with a 10-cm beryllium reflector up to 60-70 cm. MITEE designed for flights in Jupiter's atmosphere. This completely paper project (for example, the temperature of the core is provided at 3000 K, and the walls are made of beryllium, which can withstand a force of 1200 K) has a diameter of the core calculated from neutronics of 55.4 cm, while cooling with hydrogen makes it possible to slightly reduce the size of the channels through which the coolant is pumped .
In my opinion, an air nuclear jet engine can be pushed into a rocket with a diameter of about a meter, which, however, is still not cardinally larger than the voiced 0.6-0.74 m, but still alarming. One way or another, the nuclear power plant will have a power of ~ several megawatts, powered by ~10^16 disintegrations per second. This means that the reactor itself will create a radiation field of several tens of thousands of roentgens near the surface, and up to a thousand roentgens along the entire rocket. Even the installation of several hundred kg of sector protection will not greatly reduce these levels, because. neutrons and gamma quanta will be reflected from the air and "bypass the protection".
In a few hours, such a reactor will produce ~10^21-10^22 atoms of fission products c with an activity of several (several tens) petabecquerels, which, even after shutdown, will create a background of several thousand roentgens near the reactor.
The rocket design will be activated to about 10^14 Bq, although the isotopes will be primarily beta emitters and are only dangerous by bremsstrahlung. The background from the structure itself can reach tens of x-rays at a distance of 10 meters from the rocket body.
All these "gaiety" give the idea that the development and testing of such a missile is a task on the verge of the possible. It is necessary to create a whole set of radiation-resistant navigation and control equipment, to test it all in a rather complex way (radiation, temperature, vibrations - and all this for statistics). Flight tests with a working reactor at any moment can turn into a radiation catastrophe with a release from hundreds of terrabecquerels to units of petabecquerels. Even without catastrophic situations, the depressurization of individual fuel rods and the release of radionuclides are very likely.
Of course, in Russia there are still Novaya Zemlya polygon on which such tests can be carried out, but this would be contrary to the spirit of the treaty on nuclear test ban in three environments (The ban was introduced to prevent systematic pollution of the atmosphere and the ocean with radionuclides).
Finally, it is interesting who in the Russian Federation could develop such a reactor. Traditionally, the Kurchatov Institute (general design and calculations), the Obninsk FEI (experimental testing and fuel), and the Luch Research Institute in Podolsk (fuel and materials technology) were initially involved in high-temperature reactors. Later, the NIKIET team joined the design of such machines (for example, the IGR and IVG reactors - prototypes of the active zone of the RD-0410 nuclear rocket engine).
Today NIKIET has a team of designers who perform work on the design of reactors ( high-temperature gas-cooled RUGK , fast reactors MBIR, ), while IPPE and Luch continue to deal with related calculations and technologies, respectively. The Kurchatov Institute, in recent decades, has moved more towards the theory of nuclear reactors.
In summary, I would like to say that the creation of a cruise missile with air-jet engines with nuclear power plants is generally a feasible task, but at the same time extremely expensive and complex, requiring significant mobilization of human and financial resources, as it seems to me, to a greater extent than all other voiced projects ("Sarmat", "Dagger", "Status-6", "Vanguard"). It is very strange that this mobilization did not leave the slightest trace. And most importantly, it is not at all clear what is the benefit of obtaining such types of weapons (against the background of existing carriers), and how they can outweigh the numerous disadvantages - issues of radiation security, high cost, incompatibility with strategic arms reduction treaties.
P.S. However, the "sources" are already beginning to soften the situation: "A source close to the military-industrial complex said" Vedomosti ”, that radiation safety during missile testing was ensured. The nuclear installation on board was represented by an electrical layout, the source says.
Skeptics argue that the creation of a nuclear engine is not a significant progress in the field of science and technology, but only a “modernization of a steam boiler”, where uranium acts as a fuel instead of coal and firewood, and hydrogen acts as a working fluid. Is the NRE (nuclear jet engine) so unpromising? Let's try to figure it out.
First rockets
All the merits of mankind in the development of near-Earth space can be safely attributed to chemical jet engines. The operation of such power units is based on the conversion of the energy of a chemical reaction of fuel combustion in an oxidizer into the kinetic energy of a jet stream, and, consequently, a rocket. The fuel used is kerosene, liquid hydrogen, heptane (for liquid-propellant rocket engines (LTE)) and a polymerized mixture of ammonium perchlorate, aluminum and iron oxide (for solid propellant (RDTT)).
It is well known that the first rockets used for fireworks appeared in China as early as the second century BC. They rose into the sky thanks to the energy of powder gases. The theoretical research of the German gunsmith Konrad Haas (1556), the Polish general Kazimir Semenovich (1650), the Russian lieutenant general Alexander Zasyadko made a significant contribution to the development of rocket technology.
A patent for the invention of the first liquid-propellant rocket engine was received by an American scientist Robert Goddard. His apparatus, with a weight of 5 kg and a length of about 3 m, running on gasoline and liquid oxygen, in 1926 for 2.5 s. flew 56 meters.
In pursuit of speed
Serious experimental work on the creation of serial chemical jet engines started in the 30s of the last century. In the Soviet Union, V. P. Glushko and F. A. Zander are considered to be the pioneers of rocket engine building. With their participation, the power units RD-107 and RD-108 were developed, which provided the USSR with primacy in space exploration and laid the foundation for Russia's future leadership in the field of manned cosmonautics.
With the modernization of the liquid-propellant engine, it became clear that the theoretical maximum speed of the jet stream could not exceed 5 km/s. This may be enough to study the near-Earth space, but flights to other planets, and even more stars, will remain an unrealizable dream for mankind. As a result, already in the middle of the last century, projects of alternative (non-chemical) rocket engines began to appear. The most popular and promising were installations that use the energy of nuclear reactions. The first experimental samples of nuclear space engines (NRE) in the Soviet Union and the USA were tested in 1970. However, after the Chernobyl disaster, under pressure from the public, work in this area was suspended (in the USSR in 1988, in the USA - since 1994).
The functioning of nuclear power plants is based on the same principles as those of thermochemical ones. The only difference is that the heating of the working fluid is carried out by the energy of decay or fusion of nuclear fuel. The energy efficiency of such engines is much higher than chemical ones. For example, the energy that can be released by 1 kg of the best fuel (a mixture of beryllium with oxygen) is 3 × 107 J, while for Po210 polonium isotopes this value is 5 × 1011 J.
The released energy in a nuclear engine can be used in a variety of ways:
heating the working fluid emitted through the nozzles, as in a traditional rocket engine, after being converted into an electric one, ionizing and accelerating the particles of the working fluid, creating an impulse directly by fission or fusion products. Even ordinary water can act as a working fluid, but the use of alcohol will be much more effective, ammonia or liquid hydrogen. Depending on the state of aggregation of the fuel for the reactor, nuclear rocket engines are divided into solid-, liquid- and gas-phase. The most developed NRE with a solid-phase fission reactor, which uses fuel rods (fuel elements) used in nuclear power plants as fuel. The first such engine in the framework of the American project Nerva passed ground test tests in 1966, having worked for about two hours.
Design features
At the heart of any nuclear space engine is a reactor consisting of an active zone and a beryllium reflector placed in a power building. It is in the active zone that the fission of the atoms of the combustible substance occurs, as a rule, uranium U238, enriched with U235 isotopes. To give the process of nuclear decay certain properties, moderators are also located here - refractory tungsten or molybdenum. If the moderator is included in the composition of fuel elements, the reactor is called homogeneous, and if placed separately - heterogeneous. The nuclear engine also includes a working fluid supply unit, controls, shadow radiation protection, and a nozzle. Structural elements and components of the reactor, experiencing high thermal loads, are cooled by the working fluid, which is then injected into the fuel assemblies by a turbopump unit. Here it is heated to almost 3000˚С. Expiring through the nozzle, the working fluid creates jet thrust.
Typical reactor controls are control rods and rotary drums made of a substance that absorbs neutrons (boron or cadmium). The rods are placed directly in the core or in special niches of the reflector, and the rotary drums are placed on the periphery of the reactor. By moving the rods or turning the drums, the number of fissile nuclei per unit of time is changed, adjusting the level of energy release of the reactor, and, consequently, its thermal power.
To reduce the intensity of neutron and gamma radiation, which is dangerous for all living things, elements of the primary reactor protection are placed in the power building.
Improving Efficiency
A liquid-phase nuclear engine is similar in principle and device to solid-phase ones, but the liquid state of the fuel makes it possible to increase the temperature of the reaction, and, consequently, the thrust of the power unit. So if for chemical units (LTE and solid propellant rocket engines) the maximum specific impulse (jet blast velocity) is 5,420 m/s, for solid-phase nuclear and 10,000 m/s it is far from the limit, then the average value of this indicator for gas-phase NRE lies in the range 30,000 - 50,000 m/s.
There are two types of gas-phase nuclear engine projects:
An open cycle, in which a nuclear reaction takes place inside a plasma cloud from a working fluid held by an electromagnetic field and absorbing all the generated heat. The temperature can reach several tens of thousands of degrees. In this case, the active region is surrounded by a heat-resistant substance (for example, quartz) - a nuclear lamp that freely transmits radiated energy. In installations of the second type, the reaction temperature will be limited by the melting temperature of the bulb material. At the same time, the energy efficiency of a nuclear space engine decreases somewhat (specific impulse up to 15,000 m/s), but efficiency and radiation safety increase.
Practical achievements
Formally, the American scientist and physicist Richard Feynman is considered to be the inventor of the atomic power plant. The start of large-scale work on the development and creation of nuclear engines for spacecraft within the framework of the Rover program was given at the Los Alamos Research Center (USA) in 1955. American inventors preferred plants with a homogeneous nuclear reactor. The first experimental sample of "Kiwi-A" was assembled at the plant at the atomic center in Albuquerque (New Mexico, USA) and tested in 1959. The reactor was placed vertically on the stand with the nozzle up. During the tests, a heated jet of spent hydrogen was emitted directly into the atmosphere. And although the rector worked at low power for only about 5 minutes, the success inspired the developers.
In the Soviet Union, a powerful impetus to such research was given by the meeting of the "three great K" held in 1959 at the Institute of Atomic Energy - the creator of the atomic bomb I.V. Kurchatov, the main theorist of Russian cosmonautics M.V. Keldysh and the general designer of Soviet missiles S.P. Queen. Unlike the American model, the Soviet RD-0410 engine, developed at the design bureau of the Khimavtomatika association (Voronezh), had a heterogeneous reactor. Fire tests took place at a training ground near the city of Semipalatinsk in 1978.
It is worth noting that quite a lot of theoretical projects were created, but the matter never came to practical implementation. The reasons for this were the presence of a huge number of problems in materials science, the lack of human and financial resources.
For a note: an important practical achievement was the conduct of flight tests of aircraft with a nuclear engine. In the USSR, the most promising was the experimental strategic bomber Tu-95LAL, in the USA - B-36.
Orion Project or Pulse NREs
For flights in space, a pulsed nuclear engine was first proposed to be used in 1945 by an American mathematician of Polish origin, Stanislav Ulam. In the next decade, the idea was developed and refined by T. Taylor and F. Dyson. The bottom line is that the energy of small nuclear charges, detonated at some distance from the pushing platform on the bottom of the rocket, gives it a great acceleration.
In the course of the Orion project, which started in 1958, it was planned to equip a rocket capable of delivering people to the surface of Mars or the orbit of Jupiter with just such an engine. The crew stationed in the forward compartment would be protected from the damaging effects of gigantic accelerations by a damping device. The result of detailed engineering work was march tests of a large-scale model of the ship to study the stability of the flight (conventional explosives were used instead of nuclear charges). Due to the high cost, the project was closed in 1965.
Similar ideas for creating an "explosive" were expressed by the Soviet academician A. Sakharov in July 1961. To put the ship into orbit, the scientist proposed using conventional liquid-propellant engines.
Alternative projects
Great amount projects have not gone beyond theoretical research. Among them were many original and very promising. Confirmation is the idea of a nuclear power plant based on fissile fragments. The design features and arrangement of this engine make it possible to do without a working fluid at all. The jet stream, which provides the necessary propulsion characteristics, is formed from spent nuclear material. The reactor is based on rotating disks with a subcritical nuclear mass (the fission coefficient of atoms is less than one). When rotating in the sector of the disk located in the active zone, a chain reaction is started and decaying high-energy atoms are sent to the engine nozzle, forming a jet stream. The surviving whole atoms will take part in the reaction at the next revolutions of the fuel disk.
Projects of a nuclear engine for ships performing certain tasks in near-Earth space based on RTGs (radioisotope thermoelectric generators) are quite workable, but such installations are not very promising for interplanetary, and even more so interstellar flights.
Nuclear fusion engines have huge potential. Already at the current stage of the development of science and technology, a pulse installation is quite feasible, in which, like the Orion project, thermonuclear charges will be detonated under the bottom of the rocket. However, many experts consider the implementation of controlled nuclear fusion to be a matter of the near future.
Advantages and disadvantages of YARD
The indisputable advantages of using nuclear engines as power units for spacecraft include their high energy efficiency, which provides a high specific impulse and good thrust performance (up to a thousand tons in vacuum), an impressive energy reserve during autonomous operation. Modern level scientific and technological development makes it possible to ensure the comparative compactness of such an installation.
The main drawback of the NRE, which caused the curtailment of design and research work, is a high radiation hazard. This is especially true when conducting ground fire tests, as a result of which radioactive gases, compounds of uranium and its isotopes may enter the atmosphere together with the working fluid, and the destructive effect of penetrating radiation. For the same reasons, the start is unacceptable. spaceship, equipped with a nuclear engine, directly from the surface of the Earth.
Present and future
According to the academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, CEO"Keldysh Center" by Anatoly Koroteev, a fundamentally new type of nuclear engine in Russia will be created in the near future. The essence of the approach is that the energy of the space reactor will be directed not to the direct heating of the working fluid and the formation of a jet stream, but to generate electricity. The role of propulsor in the installation is assigned to the plasma engine, the specific thrust of which is 20 times higher than the thrust of currently existing chemical rocket vehicles. The head enterprise of the project is a subdivision of the state corporation "Rosatom" JSC "NIKIET" (Moscow).
Full-scale mock-up tests were successfully passed back in 2015 on the basis of NPO Mashinostroeniya (Reutov). November of this year has been named as the start date for flight design tests of the nuclear power plant. The most important elements and systems will have to be tested, including on board the ISS.
The operation of the new Russian nuclear engine occurs in a closed cycle, which completely excludes the ingress of radioactive substances into the surrounding space. The mass and overall characteristics of the main elements of the power plant ensure its use with existing domestic Proton and Angara launch vehicles.
The first stage is denial
Robert Schmucker, a German expert in the field of rocket technology, considered V. Putin's statements to be completely implausible. “I can't imagine that the Russians can create a small flying reactor,” the expert said in an interview with Deutsche Welle.
They can, Herr Schmucker. Just imagine.
The first domestic satellite with a nuclear power plant (Kosmos-367) was launched from Baikonur back in 1970. 37 fuel assemblies of the BES-5 Buk small-sized reactor, containing 30 kg of uranium, at a temperature in the primary circuit of 700°C and a heat release of 100 kW provided the electric power of the installation of 3 kW. The mass of the reactor is less than one ton, the estimated operating time is 120-130 days.
Experts will express doubts: this nuclear “battery” has too little power ... But! You look at the date: it was half a century ago.
Low efficiency - a consequence of thermionic conversion. With other forms of energy transfer, the indicators are much higher, for example, for nuclear power plants, the efficiency value is in the range of 32-38%. In this sense, the thermal power of the "space" reactor is of particular interest. 100 kW is a serious bid for victory.
It should be noted that the BES-5 Buk does not belong to the RTG family. Radioisotope thermoelectric generators convert the energy of the natural decay of atoms of radioactive elements and have negligible power. At the same time, the Buk is a real reactor with a controlled chain reaction.
The next generation of Soviet small-sized reactors, which appeared in the late 1980s, was distinguished by even smaller dimensions and greater energy release. This was the unique Topaz: compared to the Buk, the amount of uranium in the reactor was reduced by a factor of three (to 11.5 kg). Thermal power increased by 50% and amounted to 150 kW, the time of continuous operation reached 11 months (a reactor of this type was installed on board the Cosmos-1867 reconnaissance satellite).
Nuclear space reactors are an extraterrestrial form of death. In case of loss of control, the “shooting star” did not fulfill desires, but could release their sins to the “lucky ones”.
In 1992, the two remaining copies of the small Topaz series reactors were sold in the United States for $13 million.
The main question is: is there enough power for such installations to be used as rocket engines? By passing the working fluid (air) through the hot reactor core and obtaining thrust at the output according to the law of conservation of momentum.
Answer: no. Buk and Topaz are compact nuclear power plants. Other means are needed to create a YRD. But the general trend is visible to the naked eye. Compact nuclear power plants have long been created and exist in practice.
What power should a nuclear power plant have to be used as a main engine for a cruise missile similar in size to the Kh-101?
Can't find a job? Multiply time by power!
(Collection of universal tips.)
Finding power is also not difficult. N=F×V.
According to official data, the Xa-101 cruise missiles, as well as the KR of the Caliber family, are equipped with a short-life turbofan engine-50, which develops a thrust of 450 kgf (≈ 4400 N). Cruise missile cruising speed - 0.8 M, or 270 m / s. The ideal design efficiency of a turbojet bypass engine is 30%.
In this case, the required power of the cruise missile engine is only 25 times higher than the thermal power of the Topaz series reactor.
Despite the doubts of the German expert, the creation of a nuclear turbojet (or ramjet) rocket engine is a realistic task that meets the requirements of our time.
Rocket from hell
"It's all a surprise - a nuclear-powered cruise missile," said Douglas Barry, Sr. Researcher International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. “This idea is not new, it was talked about in the 60s, but it faced a lot of obstacles.”
It was not only talked about. During tests in 1964, the Tori-IIC nuclear ramjet engine developed a thrust of 16 tons at a thermal power of the reactor of 513 MW. Simulating supersonic flight, the installation used up 450 tons of compressed air in five minutes. The reactor was designed very "hot" - working temperature in the core reached 1600°C. The design had very narrow tolerances: in a number of areas, the permissible temperature was only 150-200 ° C below the temperature at which the rocket elements melted and collapsed.
Were these indicators sufficient for the use of the YaPVRD as an engine in practice? The answer is obvious.
The nuclear ramjet engine developed more (!) thrust than the turbo-ramjet engine of the “three-wing” reconnaissance aircraft SR-71 “Black Bird”.
"Polygon-401", tests of a nuclear ramjet
The experimental facilities "Tori-IIA" and "-IIC" are prototypes of the nuclear engine of the SLAM cruise missile.
A diabolical invention, capable, according to calculations, to pierce 160,000 km of space by minimum height at a speed of 3M. Literally “mowing down” everyone who met on her mournful path with a shock wave and a thunderous peal of 162 dB (deadly for a person).
The combat aircraft reactor did not have any biological protection. The ruptured eardrums after the SLAM flyby would seem like an insignificant circumstance against the background of radioactive emissions from the rocket nozzle. The flying monster left behind a plume more than a kilometer wide with a radiation dose of 200-300 rad. According to calculations, in one hour of flight, SLAM infected 1,800 square miles with deadly radiation.
According to calculations, the length aircraft could reach 26 meters. Starting weight - 27 tons. Combat load - thermonuclear charges that needed to be successively dropped on several Soviet cities along the missile's flight path. After completing the main task, SLAM was supposed to circle over the territory of the USSR for several more days, infecting everything around with radioactive emissions.
Perhaps the most deadly of all that man tried to create. Fortunately, it did not come to real launches.
The project, codenamed Pluto, was canceled on July 1, 1964. At the same time, according to one of the developers of SLAM, J. Craven, none of the military and political leadership of the United States regretted the decision.
The reason for abandoning the "low-flying nuclear missile" was the development of intercontinental ballistic missiles. Able to cause the necessary damage in less time with incomparable risks for the military themselves. As the authors of the publication in Air & Space magazine rightly noted: ICBMs, at least, did not kill everyone who was near the launcher.
It is still unknown who, where and how planned to test the fiend. And who would be responsible if SLAM strayed off course and flew over Los Angeles. One of the crazy proposals suggested tying the rocket to a cable and driving in circles over deserted areas of the piece. Nevada. However, another question immediately arose: what to do with the rocket when the last remnants of fuel burned out in the reactor? The place where the SLAM will “land” will not be approached for centuries.
Life or death. Final Choice
Unlike the mystical “Pluto” from the 1950s, the project of a modern nuclear missile, voiced by V. Putin, offers the creation of an effective means for breaking through the American missile defense system. The means of mutually assured destruction is the most important criterion for nuclear deterrence.
The transformation of the classic “nuclear triad” into a diabolical “pentagram” - with the inclusion of a new generation of delivery vehicles (unlimited-range nuclear cruise missiles and status-6 strategic nuclear torpedoes), coupled with the modernization of ICBM warheads (maneuvering Avangard) is reasonable response to new threats. Washington's missile defense policy leaves Moscow no other choice.
“You are developing your anti-missile systems. The range of anti-missiles is increasing, the accuracy is increasing, these weapons are being improved. Therefore, we need to adequately respond to this so that we can overcome the system not only today, but also tomorrow, when you have new weapons.”
V. Putin in an interview with NBC.
The declassified details of the SLAM/Pluto experiments convincingly prove that the creation of a nuclear cruise missile was possible (technically feasible) six decades ago. Modern technologies allows you to take the idea to a new technical level.
The sword rusts with promises
Despite the mass of obvious facts explaining the reasons for the appearance of the “superweapon of the president” and dispelling any doubts about the “impossibility” of creating such systems, in Russia, as well as abroad, there are many skeptics. "All of the listed weapons are just a means of information warfare." And then - a variety of proposals.
Probably, caricature "experts" such as I. Moiseev should not be taken seriously. The head of the Space Policy Institute (?), who told The Insider online edition: “You can’t put a nuclear engine on a cruise missile. Yes, and there are no such engines.
Attempts to "expose" the president's statements are also being made at a more serious analytical level. Such "investigations" immediately gain popularity among the liberal-minded public. Skeptics make the following arguments.
All the systems mentioned above are classified as strategic top-secret weapons, the existence of which cannot be verified or denied. (The message to the Federal Assembly itself showed computer graphics and footage of launches indistinguishable from tests of other types of cruise missiles.) At the same time, no one talks, for example, about creating a heavy strike drone or warship destroyer class. A weapon that would soon have to be demonstrated to the whole world.
According to some "whistleblowers", the purely strategic, "secret" context of the messages may indicate their implausible nature. Well, if this is the main argument, then what is the argument with these people about?
There is also another point of view. Shocking about nuclear missiles and unmanned 100-knot submarines are made against the backdrop of obvious problems of the military-industrial complex encountered in the implementation of more simple projects"traditional" weapons. Claims of missiles that at once surpassed all existing types of weapons stand in sharp contrast against the background of the well-known situation with rocket science. Skeptics cite mass failures during Bulava launches or the creation of the Angara launch vehicle, which has dragged on for two decades, as an example. Itself began in 1995; Speaking in November 2017, Deputy Prime Minister D. Rogozin promised to resume launches of the Angara from the Vostochny Cosmodrome only in ... 2021.
And, by the way, why was Zircon, the main naval sensation of the previous year, left without attention? A hypersonic missile that can cross out all existing concepts of naval combat.
The news about the arrival of laser systems in the troops attracted the attention of manufacturers of laser systems. Existing examples of directed energy weapons were created on an extensive basis of research and development of high-tech equipment for the civilian market. For example, the American AN/SEQ-3 LaWS shipborne installation represents a “package” of six welding lasers with a total power of 33 kW.
The announcement of the creation of a super-powerful combat laser contrasts against the backdrop of a very weak laser industry: Russia is not among the world's largest manufacturers laser equipment(Coherent, IPG Photonics or Chinese Han "Laser Technology). Therefore, the sudden appearance of samples of high-power laser weapons is of genuine interest to specialists.
There are always more questions than answers. The devil is in the details though official sources give an extremely poor idea of the latest weapons. Often it is not even clear whether the system is already ready for adoption, or its development is at a certain stage. The well-known precedents associated with the creation of such weapons in the past indicate that the problems arising from this are not solved at the snap of a finger. Fans of technical innovations are concerned about the choice of a place for testing a spacecraft with a nuclear engine. Or ways to communicate with the Status-6 underwater drone (a fundamental problem: radio communication does not work underwater, submarines are forced to rise to the surface during communication sessions). It would be interesting to hear an explanation about how to use it: compared to traditional ICBMs and SLBMs that can start and end a war within an hour, Status-6 will take several days to reach the US coast. When no one else is there!
The last fight is over.
Is anyone left alive?
In response - only the wind howl ...
Using materials:
Air&Space Magazine (April-May 1990)
The Silent War by John Craven
Beware of many letters.
A flight model of a spacecraft with a nuclear power plant (NPP) in Russia is planned to be created by 2025. The relevant work is included in the draft Federal Space Program for 2016–2025 (FKP-25), which was sent by Roscosmos to the ministries for approval.
Nuclear power systems are considered the main promising sources of energy in space when planning large-scale interplanetary expeditions. In the future, nuclear power plants, which are currently being developed by Rosatom enterprises, will be able to provide megawatt power in space in the future.
All work on the creation of nuclear power plants is proceeding in accordance with the planned deadlines. We can say with a great deal of confidence that the work will be completed within the time frame stipulated by the target program, - says Andrey Ivanov, project manager of the communications department of the state corporation Rosatom.
Recently, the project has completed two milestones: a unique design of the fuel element has been created, which ensures operability at high temperatures, large temperature gradients, and high-dose irradiation. Technological tests of the reactor vessel of the future space power unit have also been successfully completed. As part of these tests, the body was pressurized and 3D measurements were made in the areas of the base metal, girth weld and cone transition.
Operating principle. History of creation.
There are no fundamental difficulties with a nuclear reactor for space use. In the period from 1962 to 1993, a rich experience in the production of similar installations was accumulated in our country. Similar work was carried out in the USA. Since the beginning of the 1960s, several types of electric jet engines have been developed in the world: ion, stationary plasma, an anode layer engine, pulsed plasma engine, magnetoplasma, magnetoplasmodynamic.
Work on the creation of nuclear engines for spacecraft was actively carried out in the USSR and the USA in the last century: the Americans closed the project in 1994, the USSR - in 1988. The closure of work was largely facilitated by the Chernobyl disaster, which negatively set public opinion regarding the use of nuclear energy. In addition, tests of nuclear installations in space did not always take place regularly: in 1978, the Soviet satellite Kosmos-954 entered the atmosphere and fell apart, scattering thousands of radioactive fragments over an area of 100 thousand square meters. km in northwestern Canada. The Soviet Union paid Canada monetary compensation over $10 million.
In May 1988, two organizations - the Federation of American Scientists and the Committee of Soviet Scientists for Peace Against the Nuclear Threat - made a joint proposal to ban the use of nuclear energy in space. That proposal did not receive formal consequences, but since then no country has launched spacecraft with nuclear power plants on board.
The great advantages of the project are practically important performance characteristics - a long service life (10 years of operation), a significant overhaul interval and a long time of operation on one switch.
In 2010, technical proposals for the project were formulated. Design began this year.
The nuclear power plant contains three main devices: 1) a reactor plant with a working fluid and auxiliary devices (a heat exchanger-recuperator and a turbogenerator-compressor); 2) electric rocket propulsion system; 3) refrigerator-emitter.
Reactor.
From a physical point of view, this is a compact gas-cooled fast neutron reactor.
The fuel used is a compound (dioxide or carbonitride) of uranium, but because the design must be very compact, uranium has a higher enrichment in the 235 isotope than in fuel rods in conventional (civilian) nuclear power plants, perhaps over 20%. And their shell is a monocrystalline alloy of refractory metals based on molybdenum.
This fuel will have to work at very high temperatures. Therefore, it was necessary to choose materials that would be able to restrain the negative factors associated with temperature, and at the same time allow the fuel to perform its main function - to heat the gas coolant, which will be used to produce electricity.
Fridge.
Gas cooling during the operation of a nuclear installation is absolutely necessary. How to dump heat in outer space? The only possibility is radiation cooling. The heated surface in the void is cooled by emitting electromagnetic waves in a wide range, including visible light. The uniqueness of the project is in the use of a special coolant - helium-xenon mixture. The installation provides a high efficiency.
Engine.
The principle of operation of the ion engine is as follows. A rarefied plasma is created in the gas-discharge chamber with the help of anodes and a cathode block located in a magnetic field. Ions of the working fluid (xenon or other substance) are "drawn" from it by the emission electrode and accelerated in the gap between it and the accelerating electrode.
For the implementation of the plan, 17 billion rubles were promised in the period from 2010 to 2018. Of these funds, 7.245 billion rubles were earmarked for the state corporation Rosatom to build the reactor itself. Other 3.955 billion - FSUE "Center of Keldysh" for the creation of a nuclear - power propulsion plant. Another 5.8 billion rubles will go to RSC Energia, where the working image of the entire transport and energy module will have to be formed within the same time frame.
According to plans, by the end of 2017, a nuclear power plant will be prepared to complete the transport and energy module (interplanetary flight module). By the end of 2018, the nuclear power plant will be ready for flight design tests. The project is financed from the federal budget.
It is no secret that work on the creation of nuclear rocket engines was started in the USA and in the USSR back in the 60s of the last century. How far have they come? And what challenges did you encounter along the way?
Anatoly Koroteev: Indeed, work on the use of nuclear energy in space began and was actively carried out in our country and in the United States in the 1960s and 70s.
Initially, the task was to create rocket engines, which, instead of the chemical energy of combustion of fuel and oxidizer, would use the heating of hydrogen to a temperature of about 3000 degrees. But it turned out that such a direct path is still inefficient. We get high thrust for a short time, but at the same time we throw out a jet, which, in the event of abnormal operation of the reactor, may turn out to be radioactively contaminated.
Some experience was gained, but neither we nor the Americans were able to create reliable engines then. They worked, but not enough, because heating hydrogen to 3000 degrees in a nuclear reactor is a serious task. And besides, there were environmental problems during ground tests of such engines, since radioactive jets were emitted into the atmosphere. It is no longer a secret that such work was carried out at the Semipalatinsk test site specially prepared for nuclear testing, which remained in Kazakhstan.
That is, two parameters turned out to be critical - prohibitive temperature and radiation emissions?
Anatoly Koroteev: In general, yes. For these and some other reasons, work in our country and in the United States was terminated or suspended - it can be assessed in different ways. And it seemed to us unreasonable to resume them in such a way, I would say, in a frontal way, in order to make a nuclear engine with all the shortcomings already mentioned. We have proposed a completely different approach. It differs from the old one in the same way that a hybrid car differs from a conventional one. In a conventional car, the engine turns the wheels, while in hybrid cars, electricity is generated from the engine, and this electricity turns the wheels. That is, a certain intermediate power plant is being created.
So we proposed a scheme in which the space reactor does not heat the jet ejected from it, but generates electricity. The hot gas from the reactor turns the turbine, the turbine turns the electric generator and the compressor, which circulates the working fluid through closed loop. The generator, on the other hand, generates electricity for a plasma engine with a specific thrust 20 times higher than that of chemical counterparts.
Smart scheme. In essence, this is a mini-nuclear power plant in space. And what are its advantages over a ramjet nuclear engine?
Anatoly Koroteev: The main thing is that the jet coming out of the new engine will not be radioactive, since a completely different working fluid passes through the reactor, which is contained in a closed circuit.
In addition, we do not need to heat hydrogen to extreme values with this scheme: an inert working fluid circulates in the reactor, which heats up to 1500 degrees. We seriously simplify our task. And as a result, we will raise the specific thrust not twice, but 20 times compared to chemical engines.
Another thing is also important: there is no need for complex full-scale tests, which require the infrastructure of the former Semipalatinsk test site, in particular, the bench base that remained in the city of Kurchatov.
In our case, all the necessary tests can be carried out on the territory of Russia, without getting involved in long international negotiations on the use of nuclear energy outside of our state.
Are similar works being carried out in other countries?
Anatoly Koroteev: I had a meeting with the deputy head of NASA, we discussed issues related to the return to work on nuclear energy in space, and he said that the Americans are showing great interest in this.
It is quite possible that China can also respond with active actions on its part, so it is necessary to work quickly. And not just for the sake of getting ahead of someone by half a step.
We must work quickly, first of all, so that in the emerging international cooperation, and de facto it is being formed, we look worthy.
I do not rule out that in the near future an international program for a nuclear space power plant, similar to the program for controlled thermonuclear fusion being implemented now, may be initiated.
Addressed with a message to the Federal Assembly. That part of his speech, which touched upon questions of defense, became the subject of a lively discussion. The head of state presented new weapons.
We are talking about placing a small-sized heavy-duty nuclear power plant in the body of the Kh-101 air-to-ground cruise missile.
militaryrussia.ru The X-101 cruise missile Since such a missile, carrying a nuclear warhead, has no flight range limitation, and its trajectory cannot be predicted, it negates the effectiveness of any missile defense and air defense, and therefore has the potential to cause irreparable damage any country in the world. According to the president, at the end of 2017, this weapon was successfully tested. And there is nothing like it anywhere else in the world.
Some Western media were skeptical about the information that Putin voiced. So a certain American official who knows the state of the Russian military-industrial complex, in a conversation with CNN, doubted that the described weapon exists. The interlocutor of the agency said that the United States observed a small number of Russian tests of a nuclear cruise missile and saw all the accidents that accompanied them. "In any case, if Russia ever attacks the US, it will be met with overwhelming force," the official concluded.
Experts in Russia did not stand aside either. So, The Insider took a comment from the head of the Institute of Space Problems Ivan Moiseev, who considered that a cruise missile could not have a nuclear engine.
“Such things are impossible, and not needed, in general. It is impossible to put a nuclear engine on a cruise missile. Yes, and there are no such engines. There is one such megawatt-class engine in development, but it is space and, of course, no tests could be carried out in 2017, ”Moiseev told the publication.
"There were some similar developments in the Soviet Union, but all ideas to put nuclear engines on air rather than space vehicles - airplanes, cruise missiles - were discarded in the 50s of the last century," he added.
The USSR did have nuclear power plants for missiles. Work on their creation started in 1947. America did not lag behind the USSR. In 1961, John F. Kennedy named the nuclear rocket program one of four priority areas in the conquest of space. But since funding was focused on the Lunar program, there was not enough money to develop a nuclear engine, and the program was closed.
Unlike the United States, the Soviet Union continued to work on nuclear engines. They were developed by scientists such as Mstislav Keldysh, Igor Kurchatov and Sergei Korolev, who, unlike an expert from the Institute of Space Problems, estimated the possibilities of creating rockets with nuclear energy sources quite highly.
In 1978, the first 11B91 nuclear rocket engine was launched, followed by two more series of tests - the second and third 11B91-IR-100 vehicles.
In a word, the USSR had satellites with nuclear power sources. On January 24, 1978, a huge international scandal erupted. Cosmos-954, a Soviet space reconnaissance satellite with nuclear power, crashed into Canada. power plant on board. Part of the territories was recognized as radioactively contaminated. There were no casualties among the population. It turned out that the satellite was closely monitored by American intelligence, which knew that the device had a nuclear power source.
Because of the scandal, the USSR had to abandon the launch of such satellites for almost three years and seriously improve the radiation safety system.
On August 30, 1982, another spy satellite with a nuclear engine, Kosmos-1402, was launched from Baikonur. After completing the task, the device was destroyed by the reactor's radiation safety system, which was previously absent.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, all developments were abandoned. But, obviously, some time ago they were resumed.