Re: Airplane crash

["Frank "Free Spirit" Borger" <frank@rover.bsd.uchicago.edu>]

> Date:          Tue, 25 Feb 97 10:54:37 -0600
> Reply-to:      radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> From:          Les Fraley <les@lamar.ColoState.EDU>
> To:            Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
> Subject:       Airplane crash

>   I am trying to locate information about the crash of a nuclear powered
> airplane that occurred in the mid '50s and the estimated dose to a person
> that was involved (this is not sci-fi).  Any help you can provide will be
> appreciated.
>   About 1954 (not sure of exact date), a Northrop Wing, powered by what
> was probably a GE reactor designed for a Nautilus class sub, lost power on
> takeoff from what is now Langley Field.  It crashed on the base.  The
> concrete and Pb shielding on the reactor broke loose and crused one of the
> crew. ...
	Something sounds fishy there. I remember reading an article,
	(actually a graduate thesis,) reviewing studies about atomic
	powered aircraft. We only got to the stage of firing up a
	couple of stationary test motors, and found the whole design
	quite impractical, and quite unshieldable, even by 1950's standards.


	Any possible use of a Nautilus-class reactor to produce power
	would never have produced enough energy to get a flying wing
	off the ground. The peak-power versus weight of any reactor
	based system is 1-2 orders of magnitude lower than conventional
	piston or jet engines. Only when you factor in the relative weight
	of 2 years worth of fuel supply do the two propulsion systems
	become relatively even, and even then only for vehicles the size
	of a submarine on up.

Frank R. Borger - Physicist - Center for Radiation Therapy
net: Frank@rover.uchicago.edu   ph: 312-791-8075 fa: 791-3697

What's the difference between having a baby and doing an
RSX11M sysgen? ... Having a baby only takes 9 months!