testtest

Convair NB-36H Nuclear-Powered Bomber

I was aware of this project previously, but there is one thing I've never read, this article doesn't address, and I'm not sure I understand - how exactly was the nuclear reactor supposed to power the plane? In a ship the reactor creates steam, steam drives the turbines for propulsion and power. In a nuclear power plant steam drives turbines that drive generators to make electricity. Neither approach seems feasible in an aircraft. Does anyone know what they were thinking?
 
gdateno said:
I was aware of this project previously, but there is one thing I've never read, this article doesn't address, and I'm not sure I understand - how exactly was the nuclear reactor supposed to power the plane? In a ship the reactor creates steam, steam drives the turbines for propulsion and power. In a nuclear power plant steam drives turbines that drive generators to make electricity. Neither approach seems feasible in an aircraft. Does anyone know what they were thinking?
Click to expand...
Definitely easier in Navy ships. They just used the reactor to replace the boiler. The rest of the plant was the same as before. On submarines the steam turbines replaced the diesel engines, negating the need to surface for air.
 
gdateno said:
I was aware of this project previously, but there is one thing I've never read, this article doesn't address, and I'm not sure I understand - how exactly was the nuclear reactor supposed to power the plane? In a ship the reactor creates steam, steam drives the turbines for propulsion and power. In a nuclear power plant steam drives turbines that drive generators to make electricity. Neither approach seems feasible in an aircraft. Does anyone know what they were thinking?
Click to expand...
Air was brought in to the engine and compressed in the normal manner where it then passed to a heat exchanger instead of a combustion chamber. Hot water from the reactor was to be sent to those heat exchangers in the engines where cold compressed air flowing into the engine would be heated, making it expand and spin the turbine blades to generate thrust. The cooled water from the heat exchanger was returned to the reactor for cooling the core and the process repeated. It is a different way of making heat than burning fuel, but similar to a normal jet engine, its just making hot air to turn the turbine blades that drive the compressor.

All together a stupid idea for an aircraft.
 
gdateno said:
I was aware of this project previously, but there is one thing I've never read, this article doesn't address, and I'm not sure I understand - how exactly was the nuclear reactor supposed to power the plane? In a ship the reactor creates steam, steam drives the turbines for propulsion and power. In a nuclear power plant steam drives turbines that drive generators to make electricity. Neither approach seems feasible in an aircraft. Does anyone know what they were thinking?
Click to expand...
Heat from the reactor(s) expanded air which drove the turbine which pulled in more air. The reactor heat replaced the heat of combustion of jet fuel. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Nuclear_Propulsion
 
Last edited:
To power an airplane was dumb and dangerous. but the mention of Chernobyl and the then-futuristic idea of mini nuclear reactors is comparing apples and oranges. Chernobyl was a catastrophic event because of faulty test procedures and mediocre management. Mini nuclear reactors need to be pursued IMO. Toshiba makes them and the potential to power entire small towns would change the energy picture significantly. And no requirement to take out and reprocess fuel elements on site. The contractor comes in and replaces the entire unit (it's underground) with new fuel elements. We hamstring ourselves because our nuclear and radiation education is woeful in this country.
 
WOW!!! What were they thinking? Essentially a flying atomic dirty bomb. You know, I read a lot about aircraft but this is the first I have read about this particular plane. Thanks for truly interesting article.
 
Sounds like the idea continues to this day with the thorium powered auto engines that provide steam for a steam turbine propulsion system.
 
gdateno said:
I was aware of this project previously, but there is one thing I've never read, this article doesn't address, and I'm not sure I understand - how exactly was the nuclear reactor supposed to power the plane? In a ship the reactor creates steam, steam drives the turbines for propulsion and power. In a nuclear power plant steam drives turbines that drive generators to make electricity. Neither approach seems feasible in an aircraft. Does anyone know what they were thinking?
Click to expand...
I was a senior engineer at the Nevada Test Site in the 80s and 90s. This project was long gone but its facilities were still there abandoned. I remember from a historical briefing that the reactors would heat air, and create thrust out the back of the jet engine. Essentially same way burning fuel heats air and creates thrust out back of conventional jet engine. Turbine at the discharge end drives a compressor at the intact end to keep everything flowing in the right direction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top