Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military
From: pierson@cimnet.dec.com
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Nuclear Powered Planes: Feasibility?
Message-ID: <11201@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 7 Nov 89 02:17:43 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 46
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: pierson@cimnet.dec.com

> 
>Hi folks. While absorbing some concepts in my national security class,
>it was mentioned that back in the 60's the concept of a nuclear powered
>aircraft was on the drawing board. However there seemed to be some problem
>with putting a reactor aboard an aircraft. (Something to do with the weight
>of the reactor?) Can anyone else add to this topic as to why such a 
>development is not possible, or cite any research that has been done with
>Nuclear Powered aircraft?
> 
>Thanks
>Miles

	Running, as usual, from memory...

Both the US and the Soviet Union had extensive programs to develop nuclear
fission powered a/c.  The Soviets (reportedly) actually flew one.  The US
flew and operated a test reactor in a B36(?).  The concerns (US Side) were 
more around safety than reactor weight per se.  When there was a crash, there
would have been extensive release of fission products.  (There are a number
of maxims about flight safety involving planning for WHEN you crash.  not
IF, When....).

There were other problems, providing adequate shielding for crew, surrounding
population (near the base...), and turning the power from the reactor into
useful thrust.  Most systems for THAT seemed to involve multiple conversions of
the energy (and hence, inefficiency).  I have a "fun" book (title escapes 
me...) from the late '50s/early '60s that was a quasi governmental public
relations effort for the program.  A good library, or luck in a used book 
store is recommended.

The "mission" was also unclear, bar just doing the plane for the challenge, 
and because this was the era of the nuclear powered rocking chair (almost).
The ability for a strategic force to be on-the-air "constantly" avoiding being
hit on the ground, and the elimination fuel problems on strategic missions
come to mind.

thanks
dave pierson			|The facts as accurately as i can remember,
Digital Equipment Corporation	|The opinions, my own.
600 Nickerson Rd
Marlboro, Mass
01742				pierson@cimnet.enet.dec.com