Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
October 30, 2025
A Nuclear Delivery Vehicle Is Not A Nuclear War Head

A Truth Social tweet by U.S. President Donald Trump on nuclear weapons has led to some confusion and, as I assume, misinterpretations.

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump – Oct 30, 2025, 1:04 utc

The United States has more Nuclear Weapons than any other country. This was accomplished, including a complete update and renovation of existing weapons, during my First Term in office. Because of the tremendous destructive power, I HATED to do it, but had no choice! Russia is second, and China is a distant third, but will be even within 5 years. Because of other countries testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis. That process will begin immediately. Thank you for your attention to this matter! PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP

The Washington Post interprets it as a test of nuclear warheads:

Trump directs Pentagon to test nuclear weapons for first time since 1992 (archived) – Washington Post
The president said he wanted testing to occur “on an equal basis” with Russia and China. The Kremlin condemned the move, and there was no indication of when tests might take place.

President Donald Trump on Thursday morning said he directed the Pentagon to begin testing nuclear weapons “on an equal basis” with Russia and China, an apparent attempt to flex the United States’ military might ahead of a high-stakes trade meeting here with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping.

Trump’s announcement on Truth Social signaled a reversal of decades of United States nuclear policy that could have far-reaching consequences for relations with U.S. adversaries, though his post included very few details about what the tests would entail. The last nuclear weapon test in the United States was held in 1992, before President George H.W. Bush implemented a moratorium on such exercises at the conclusion of the Cold War.

Trump wrote that the process would begin immediately and was in response to other countries’ testing programs.

The president posted about resuming nuclear weapons testing as his helicopter, Marine One, was in the air on his way to meet Xi at Gimhae Air Base.

The Trump tweet is wrong in that it asserts that the U.S. has more nuclear weapons than any other country. All public sources say that Russia with about 4300 nuclear warheads has slightly more than the United States with about 3,600. China has about 5-600 nuclear warheads and is building up its nuclear weapon arsenal to about 1,000 warheads by 2035.

However Trumps next sentence is not about testing nuclear warheads. It is about testing of carrier systems that can deploy nuclear warheads.

Trump says: “Because of other countries testing programs, …”

No country has recently exploded a nuclear bomb or warhead for testing or other purposes. The last known nuclear test was done by North Korea in 2017.

It is important to distinguish between testing a carrier designed to deliver a nuclear war head and testing, i.e. exploding, the nuclear war head itself. A nuclear carrier can be a bomber, a land based (intercontinental) missile or a submarine based missile or torpedo.

Russia has recently announced a successful test of the Burevestnik cruise missile. This is a potential nuclear warhead carrier driven by a nuclear-powered jet engine:

The Russian president talked about the new unlimited-range nuclear-powered Burevestnik cruise missile. The weapon was successfully tested last week, when the projectile reportedly traveled more than 14,000 km.

Putin revealed details about the missile’s nuclear-powered turbojet engine, stating that its power unit “is comparable in output with the reactor of a nuclear-propelled submarine, but it’s 1,000 times smaller.”

“The key thing is that while a conventional nuclear reactor starts up in hours, days, or even weeks, this nuclear reactor starts up in minutes or seconds. That’s a giant achievement,” the president said.

Burevestnik is, like the U.S. Tomahawk, a turbo fan driven cruise missile designed to fly at low altitude at a speed of less than Mach 1. While the Tomahawk uses a liquid propellant as a source of heat to drive its engine the Burevestnik uses a miniaturized nuclear reactor of an unknown kind. This gives it unmatched endurance. Both missile can carry conventional or nuclear war heads. The nuclear jet engine that drives the Burevestnik is not an explosive device. While it is likely to create radioactive contamination when it crashes it will not explode.

Russia has also tested its long announced Poseidon torpedo:

Russia successfully tested a nuclear-powered underwater Poseidon drone on Tuesday, Putin revealed. The development of the massive torpedo-shaped nuclear-capable drone was first announced in 2018, but had been shrouded in mystery ever since.

“For the first time, we succeeded not only in launching it from a carrier submarine using a booster engine but also in starting its nuclear power unit, which propelled the drone for a certain amount of time,” Putin stated.

The device is unrivaled by any other weapon “anywhere in the world when it comes to speed and depth,” the president stressed, adding that an analogous weapon is unlikely to be fielded by any other nation soon. The power of Poseidon greatly surpasses the characteristics of Russia’s upcoming Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), Putin stated, apparently referring to the yield of its nuclear payload.

The Poseidon torpedo is likely using a nuclear reactor which is in principle similar to the one on the Burevestnik cruise missile. Its most important advantage is again its high endurance. Poseidon is designed to carry a large nuclear warhead. Should that explode near to some harbor it would likely cause a large tsunami.

Trump also said: “I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis. …”

All nuclear warheads the U.S. has are under the control of the Department of Energy. It is the sole agency that can do test explosions of nuclear warheads. The nuclear delivery vehicles which are used to deploy the war heads are under the control of the Department of Defense (or ‘Department of War’ as Trump calls it).

Trump said “Because of other countries testing programs” and “start testing … on an equal basis” both in reference of nuclear delivery vehicle tests of other countries.

Trump thereby likely meant to order the DoD to test its nuclear delivery vehicles, just like Russia has recently done. He did not order the DoE to test nuclear war heads.

The testing of nuclear delivery vehicles, like intercontinental missiles, is a routine that has been done every year since those exist.

It is nothing to panic about.

Trumps language is however as usual imprecise. May be he really has ordered to test a nuclear war head? Russia is not sure about this:

Russia will respond “accordingly” if the US violates a moratorium on testing nuclear weapons, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said.

Responding to Trump’s claims of other countries carrying out nuclear tests, Peskov said “we are so far not aware of this.”

If it is about Burevestnik, then it is not a nuclear test,” he insisted. “All nations are developing their defense systems, but this is not a nuclear test.”

Washington test-fired an unarmed, nuclear-capable Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile in February and launched four Trident II missiles from a submarine in September.

Russia last tested a nuclear weapon during the Soviet period in 1990. The US halted its testing in 1992 under a Congress-mandated moratorium.

To test a nuclear war head Trump would have to ask Congress to lift the moratorium on testing. He would also have to order the Department of Energy to prepare a test site. That process alone is estimated to take three years.

There is thus absolutely no reason for headline panics.

Comments

Posted by: Original Newbie | Oct 31 2025 0:20 utc | 102
If memory serves correctly- the officers of Union Carbide had to face some of the music for Bhopal…
I was doing a lot of business with Union Carbide when Bhopal happened and followed it closely and a current internet search seems to confirm that no Union Carbide officer suffered more that lost sleep over Bhopal! 

Posted by: qparker | Oct 31 2025 1:19 utc | 101

Posted by: Original Newbie | Oct 31 2025 0:20 utc | 102
 
  On the other hand, the salesman that called on me in those days did say that an Indian Doctor in the US who had relatives in Bhopal tried to kill him medically (didn’t say how), so there non judicial events!

Posted by: qparker | Oct 31 2025 1:26 utc | 102

So we will see houses powered by a freezer sized generator? Someday?
Posted by: David G Horsman | Oct 30 2025 17:21 utc | 41
and
Davy @ Oct 30 2025 17:21 utc | 41A few years ago some company came out with a black box that was “sold” as a Total Battery Solution for your home. Alien Tech? Not sure but in about 5-7 years from now ANYONE no matter where they are or how much money they make, will be able to have total energy independence in their backpack…
 
Posted by: bisfab | Oct 30 2025 17:47 utc | 44
 
**************
 
The fundamental laws of physics and materials/engineering have a tendency to compel people – eventually – to recognise reality. 
 
Almost 40 years ago Bruce DePalma visited the university I was at. His “N-Machine” promised limitless free power.
 
http://www.free-energy.ws/pdf/sunburst_n_machine.pdf
 
Just a little unit under your kitchen sink merrily chugging away, with a homopolar motor/generator pair – some of the electricity from the generator was used to drive the motor which then drove the generator which produced electricity to drive the generator… with an efficiency greater than unity. The excess power was drained off to power your house. He had ‘working prototypes’ and ‘demonstration units’ and reams of scientific gobble-de-gook and snake oil to fool the unwary – but he just needed a bit more time to ‘perfect’ the unit. Oh – and he also needed a bit more money to support his expensive work. ‘Please see the staff member at the door to contribute to this salvation of mankind…’
 
Bruce has now gone to the happy hunting ground in the sky where he has unlimited resources and all eternity to perfect his machine. It may be useful to check on him in one or two million years to see whether he has made any progress in altering the laws of physics. If he has the ear of the Big Man there it could happen – he was a very persuasive talker.
 
Bruce had a large support-team of true believers. Anyone expressing doubt was pounced on (making the MoA anti-vaxxers, climate-change denialists, fluoride phobics seem like kindergarten trainees … Oh Dear, WTF am I saying?? Please don’t hurt me!!) with a frightening vengeance. Of course, I asked a couple of ‘innocent’ questions (didn’t I?), but managed to survive the response.
 
The N-machine is (still) almost ready to blitz the market. Putting on my “Nostradamus Hat” I predict the patents and rights will be bought up by Big Oil, the inventors will fall out of windows before they can die in unusual car accidents, and we will have to wait another 100 years for a perpetual motion machine to be invented…
 
 

Posted by: General Factotum | Oct 31 2025 5:09 utc | 103

MoA commentariat is overall rather strong on anti-vaccine hysteria.
Posted by: steven t johnson | Oct 30 2025 18:05 utc | 48
 
Seems you weren’t here during covid, the flow of dialogue here mirrored that of the most rampant MSM sycophant. Speaking of vaccines, more “buried” studies are being unearthed almost every day now, they are unequivocally proved dangerous, however if you feel the need, go and get jabbed. My cousin that dropped dead two days after his, thought it a great idea too. Guess how many unvaccinated kids are in US Cancer Hospitals? At the time of that study…zero.
 
With nuclear powered flight, one wonders if that will eventually turn up in manned flight as well, be it civilian or military.
 

Posted by: Organic | Oct 31 2025 5:33 utc | 104

In respect for the insightful question

With nuclear powered flight, one wonders if that will eventually turn up in manned flight as well, be it civilian or military. 
Posted by: Organic | Oct 31 2025 5:33 utc | 123

Yes, it seems like lots of potential for such energy source

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 31 2025 5:58 utc | 105

With nuclear powered flight, one wonders if that will eventually turn up in manned flight as well
 
Posted by: Organic | Oct 31 2025 5:33 utc | 123
 

 
Seems like a better power source for a train to be honest.
 

Posted by: too scents | Oct 31 2025 6:08 utc | 106

Doing some crude calculations I have a hard time to understand how burevestnik manages to dissipate the power. Of course the air flow will provide cooling but how can that be enough?
Putins info was ‘power like a nuclear submarine but 1000 times smaller’ and anuclear submarine may have
a power between 165 and 250 MW
If like some speculate it is isnt Uranium or Plutonium or other heavy fissile substance the construction would still have to be Tritium in some solid state form and that form would melt just like U and Pu etc
Jean Pierre Petit 6 years ago in a video seems to know how such nuclear rockets may operate. He shows a solid body with multiple flanges allowing air to pass
My thinking from the outset was that the trick the engineers would have to solve was to regulate the margin to meltdown in a very relible manner.
I dont see how Tritium would make the cooling less of a problem. It may allow higher energy density to be produced but would remain difficult to cool.
 

Posted by: petergrfstrm | Oct 31 2025 8:02 utc | 107

@Organic | Oct 31 2025 5:33 utc | 123
It would be a huge environmental problem poisoning the athmosphere with radioactivity.
Only for emergencies might it make sense.
Rockets for braking the fall speed of an airliner after some machine failure. But the inclusion of emergency remedies would be seen as negative for the marketing of air flight as safe. But it would be possible to design airliners in two pieces where the middle would be a separate safe raft and it would separate from the rest and go down with a parashute.
That however isnt how they are constructed and a brake rocket based on radioactivity is much less likely.

Posted by: petergrfstrm | Oct 31 2025 8:15 utc | 108

My cousin that dropped dead two days after his, thought it a great idea too. Guess how many unvaccinated kids are in US Cancer Hospitals? At the time of that study…zero.
 
Posted by: Organic | Oct 31 2025 5:33 utc | 104
 
*******************
 
That is truly fascinating. Over the last 100+ years, the US built and staffed an extensive (and expensive) hospital system to treat children with cancer. The wards were full of children being treated for cancer. Then, seemingly miraculously, a study is done on the effects of Covid vaccination and “At the time of that study… [there were ] zero [children in the US Cancer Hospitals]”. I guess that immediately after the study, numbers of children being treated for cancer in US Cancer Hospitals shot back up to normal numbers again.
 
Why not organise a perpetual study into the absolutely dangerous effects of Covid vaccination to ensure that zero kids are in US Cancer Hospitals. Anything less would be criminally irresponsible, no??
 
And why not ensure that the US Government tells the truth, instead of spreading this nonsense about kids in cancer wards. The National Cancer Institute at the National Institute of Health: 
 
https://www.cancer.gov/types/childhood-cancers/child-adolescent-cancers-fact-sheet
 
“Although cancer in children and adolescents is rare, it is the leading cause of death by disease after infancy among children in the United States. It is estimated that, in 2024, a total of 14,910 children and adolescents ages 0 to 19 will be diagnosed with cancer and 1,590 will die of the disease in the United States. Among children (ages 0 to 14 years), it is estimated that 9,620 will be diagnosed with cancer and 1040 will die of the disease. And among adolescents (ages 15 to 19 years), it is estimated that 5,290 will be diagnosed with cancer and 550 will die of the disease.
 
“In the United States, the most common types of cancer diagnosed in 2016–2020 among children and adolescents were leukemias, malignant brain and other central nervous system (CNS) tumors, lymphomas, epithelial neoplasms and melanomas,  soft tissue tumors, malignant germ cell tumors, and bone tumors.
 
“The most common types of cancer among children and adolescents differed by age group. For example, leukemias were more common in those ages 1 to 4 than in other age groups and lymphomas were more common in those ages 15 to 19 than in other age groups.
 
“Rates of the most common types of childhood and adolescent cancer also differ by race/ethnicity. For example, in 2017–2021, the incidence rate of leukemia was about twice as high in Hispanic and American Indian/Alaska Native children and adolescents as in Black children and adolescents. During the same time period, the rates of brain and other nervous system tumors were higher in White and American Indian/Alaska Native children and adolescents than in those of all other racial and ethnic groups.
 
“As of January 1, 2020 (the most recent date for which data exist), approximately 495,739 survivors of childhood and adolescent cancer (diagnosed at ages 0 to 19 years) were estimated to be alive in the United States.”
 
Question for Mr. Organic: Where did the 495,739 SURVIVORS of childhood cancer treatment come from if childhood cancer ONLY appeared after the Covid vaccine was administered?

Posted by: General Factotum | Oct 31 2025 8:22 utc | 109

In response to General Factotum@111,
 
The exact statement was “zero unvaccinated children in US Cancer Hospitals” which is actually saying something else than what you seem to be inferring, namely that kids that are hospitalized on a near-permanent basis and thus placed under the constant care of medical professionals are… gasp… overwhelmingly likely to get their prescribed vaccine shots. Even then, I’m still surprised at the supposedly total lack of medical exceptions for vaccination in what is bound to be a group with very diverse needs, with the potential for there to exist individuals with such extreme immune system deficiencies that survival is only guaranteed via complete isolation — i.e bubble kids — thus making vaccines a superfluous and needless risk. So, I doubt that it’s an accurate statement. But, do I think it’s plausible for sick kids in hospitals to get jabbed? Yes, of course, so the overall sentiment expressed strikes me as valid.

Posted by: Skiffer | Oct 31 2025 8:44 utc | 110

Poseidon.
 
One way that “cooling” could happen and at the same time help in the overall performance of the torpedo; This idea came partly from a diagram that Peter AU mentioned.
 
IF the designed cooling area runs literally along the interior of the shell, (in 3d => all around the central Nuke motor, not “in other tubes” etc), then heat could be propagated to the external boundary layer of the Torpedo. This might form an “air-layer”, from the boiling of the immediate water in contact. This boundary layer separation could then be used as an aid to the propulsion. Something I think has already been experimented with to overcome drag due to water.
 
Would the heat be easily observable by “external” forces that might be watching? (Satellites? Ships, seagulls?). Not necessarily, as the operationg depth of Poseidon is said to be 1 kilometre (1000 metres), the amount of air formed would be minimal, and as the speeed of Poseidon (Supposeded to be 118 – 180 Miles or KM per hour – as reported by people who are only guessing anyway), would mean the volume of “noticiable” indicators created would be very small.  The real speed could easily be in excess of the guesstimates. The period a boundary layer of air would be visible would be small and the volume even smaller, and the heat of the boiling water easily dissipated at 1000 metres down in the cold. (Water pressure at 101 ATM)
 
I am not confusing the “boundary layer” with hyper-cavitation, which is something else.
 
Only an idea.

Posted by: Stonebird | Oct 31 2025 9:10 utc | 111

petergrfstrm | Oct 31 2025 8:15 utc | 110

“But it would be possible to design airliners in two pieces where the middle would be a separate safe raft and it would separate from the rest and go down with a parashute.”

You know how Concord was supposed to be evacuated in the event of an emergency in th air? All of the passengers, still ON their seata were to be rolled/slid backwards and out of the stern in one go. (The accident that did happen was  near ground level)

Posted by: Stonebird | Oct 31 2025 9:35 utc | 112

I’ve been under the impression that they can be landed, refueled, and relaunched. I don’t see the benefit to anyone of crash-landing a nuclear-powered missile anywhere.
Posted by: malenkov | Oct 30 2025 23:52 utc | 96

 
Agreed, and the Russians are very rigorous and careful about nuclear polution problems after their catastrophic Chernobyl “experience”. 
 
As per Andrei Martyanov, both Burevestnik and Poseidon are retrieveable, which makes them a novelty, i.e a disruptive technology that doesn’t fit into the current catalogisation of missile systems and which drastically changes the course and understanding of military-strategic planning. 

Posted by: ThirdWorldDude | Oct 31 2025 9:55 utc | 113

Posted by: Stonebird | Oct 31 2025 9:10 utc | 113
 
Brilliant idea Stonebird! You are probably right.

Posted by: BM | Oct 31 2025 11:02 utc | 114

General Factotum @103 re: N-machine:
 
I want one of those magnets that you put on your car’s fuel line that allows it to run on water. Save money and the environment at the same time! 

Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 31 2025 11:03 utc | 115

Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 31 2025 11:03 utc | 118
 
I have car like that. They are very common around these parts. Usually built of bricks and/or concrete. 
 
Normally the driving speed is very slow, but during an earthquake it speeds up, very briefly. 

Posted by: BM | Oct 31 2025 11:09 utc | 116

Guess how many unvaccinated kids are in US Cancer Hospitals? At the time of that study…zero.  
Posted by: Organic | Oct 31 2025 5:33 utc | 104
 
_____
 
That would be strange. St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, established by actor Danny Thomas decades ago and thus long before Covid vaccinations, has never lacked for preadolescent cancer patients. It would therefore seem obvious that if the mRNA vaccines caused cancer in children, they would not be the unique cause.

Posted by: malenkov | Oct 31 2025 11:35 utc | 117

S Brennan @ 92
The Zion plant never went online, never provided grid power. At your starting date it would have been on the drawing board if that. You do not know what you are talking about.
You ask what is my point. My point is perfectly clear. You just don’t want to hear it.

Posted by: oldhippie | Oct 31 2025 12:00 utc | 118

S Brennan @ 92
The drunk operating engineer story received wide mainstream media coverage at the time and can still be found with a few clicks. I’m not doing your research for you. You seem to be a blind man locked in a closet with strong opinions about the outside world.

Posted by: oldhippie | Oct 31 2025 12:09 utc | 119

 General Factotum | Oct 31 2025 5:09 utc | 103
 
I ran onto a bloke like that just the last few days. He came around the other day and we sat on the veranda talking. He knew his medicinal herbs. But he had some whacky ideas about other things. Building a ‘free’ energy machine. Believed he could draw energy from a perpetual motion device.
 
There is a few purveyors of snake oil about, like the one you run onto. He has studied their spiel and is utterly convinced energy can be drawn from a perpetual motion machine.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Oct 31 2025 12:24 utc | 120

S Brennan
 
Last time I looked, as in physically being there and opening my eyes. the Zion plant was an open field with an acreage for sale sign.
 
I suppose they dismantled and removed a billion dollar investment because of nothing at all or the green meanies.

Posted by: oldhippie | Oct 31 2025 12:41 utc | 121

If Burevestnik and Poseidon are reusable, I’d hate to be the guy who has to do the maintenance on them. How much shielding can there be on a pocket-sized reactor with the power output of a SSBN power plant? The whole vehicle will be fairly radioactive from neutron activation. 
 
Now, the test articles might have landing skids. You’ll want to take them apart after flying for a while to see what needs to be beefed up and what can be whittled down. I am skeptical that production models will be reusable, though. 
 
By the way, the reactor design I was previously referencing that is similar to pebble-bed reactors is called a prismatic-core High-Temperature Gas-cooled Reactor (HTGR). While I still think this would be the cheapest, simplest, and most reliable option for powering a missile, another possibility is the gas core reactor, which has much higher power density and even faster startup times. The power output regulation of the reactor isn’t as simple as the Doppler broadening of a prismatic-core high-temperature gas-cooled reactor, but it is much simpler than for other reactor designs as the fission rate can be controlled by varying the pressure of the gaseous fuel… contain the gas in a cylinder with a piston at one end? Have to be a pretty tough piston and cylinder, though.
 
 
On the positive side, the outside of the cylinder can directly radiate the necessary heat to the air in the turbine heat engine. The downside is that the power regulation isn’t by natural negative feedback like in prismatic-core reactors, so runaway reactions are possible. 

Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 31 2025 12:43 utc | 122

Stonebird | Oct 31 2025 9:10 utc | 113
 
It likely has something to reduce drag, but the shear power of its propulsion unit would drive it through the water at a good pace. The diagram I saw showed what looked to be a shrouded propeller the same diameter as the torpedo. showed its diameter in relation to a man so approx two meters diameter.
 
The speed I have seen from official Russia is 200 kt – around 360 kilometers and hour.
 
I did not realise a bit of talk had started here on the torpedo and put something in the open thread but will repost here. A copy paste of my comment at the open thread
 
I was just thinking about the Russian doomsday torpedo. The submarine is a one of a kind rather than first of a fleet as far as I know. It carries a number of torpedoes. I diagram I saw showed three but someone else has read six, so between three and six.  If doomsday ever comes it will be very fast, so I can’t imagine that submarine sailing around the ocean taking pot shots here and there. However many it carries, I think they would be fired in a salvo so they fan out and detonate along a line. That would raise a massive wall of water to wash over a very large area target.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Oct 31 2025 12:45 utc | 123

Posted by: Naive | Oct 30 2025 18:30 utc | 55
“Milei? Mileikovsky? Macron? Merz? Starmer? Rutte?”
Trump has repeatedly said that his father was born in Germany, when he was actually born in the US. I think all the leaders yo0u mention at least know which country their dad was was born in.  Still, Trump must be super-intelligent as he can recognise a picture of an elephant!

Posted by: Dave G | Oct 31 2025 13:14 utc | 124

Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 31 2025 12:43 utc | 125

 
Let’s just say that neither you nor me know jackshit about the risks and the applied solutions to potential radiation leakage problems. It’s an established fact that people who tend to think of Russia as a “gas station with nukes” are making the basic mistake of disregarding Russian scientific achievements. 
 
As Mike Mihajlovic pointed out in his analysis Burevestnik – Part I, there is a high probability that the nuclear reactor is based on a closed-loop low-emission propulsion architecture, in order to reduce the missile’s radioactive (and heat) signature.
 
I believe that’s exactly how Russian engineers have solved the problem, which eventually kills two birds with one stone, since it simultaneously creates the right conditions to place the missile’s nuclear reactor in a special shielding case, so that radiation doesn’t quickly degrade other sensitive parts of the system. 

Posted by: ThirdWorldDude | Oct 31 2025 14:08 utc | 125

@ james | Oct 31 2025 9:25 utc | 114
 
fake james…  listen – get another user name if you are going to stick around moa.. thanks.. 

Posted by: james | Oct 31 2025 14:47 utc | 126

Within Black Mountain’s analysis is the phrase;
”The nuclear reactor powers an electric motor which drives a turbine”
Beta radiation consists of electrons, (if I remember my physics) and I seem to remember that  beta sources have been used in some satellites to provide electric power.
Is the reactor a modulated high power beta emitter?

Posted by: CitizenSmith | Oct 31 2025 14:47 utc | 127

The Meredith effect might have some relevance.

Posted by: ChatNPC | Oct 31 2025 15:39 utc | 128

William Gruff 125,
 
I thought these things could do more than deliver a warhead once?  I say that because Russian sources mentioned their use as a replacement for communication/navigation/ISR satellites brought down in hostilities.  It’d be a pretty expensive to expend that kind of effort on an item that lasts only weeks? Perhaps the “reactor/turbo” section could be replaced.  I’m less convinced of your pebble idea if that makes the whole thing a single use “disposable”.

Posted by: S Brennan | Oct 31 2025 15:41 utc | 129

Oldhippie 124,”Last time I checked” you’re wrong on your dates, you entirely fabricated story and the supposition that the plant never opened for commercial operation, a trifecta of deceit in a single post.  I have zero respect for you.

Posted by: S Brennan | Oct 31 2025 15:52 utc | 130

Oldhippie 122,I researched before asking you for evidence, you are a liar.  Again, I have zero respect for you.

Posted by: S Brennan | Oct 31 2025 15:54 utc | 131

Posted by: Organic | Oct 31 2025 5:33 utc | 104  Re your cousin who dropped dead? Did his wife like him?
It’s true that it’s amazingly hard to generalize the tenor of exchanges without elaborate record-keeping requiring difficult classification. 

Posted by: steven t johnson | Oct 31 2025 18:32 utc | 132

There is no reason to continue to Call the Department of WAR the DOD. It was DOW from 1789 to 1947. It has never been about defense only offense since 1947. Let’s stop the useless propaganda. It is The Department of WAR. Truth in naming. As for testing. The proxy war the US created in Ukraine, and the Genocide the US supports in Gaza could and should be ended by The US defending them. The Petrodollar died June 2024. As the US hegemony implodes Resorting to mutually assured destruction is MAD. Insanity defined. 

Posted by: Just Sayn | Oct 31 2025 18:58 utc | 133

S Brennan
 
You are talking a subject I lived, knowing g more than a few who worked on the project. To include the chief safety engineer for some years, who was my father, Robert Arthur Wilson. You are so far out in left field there is no point talking to you.
 
You call me a liar? You wouldn’t recognize a lie. You can’t tell a lie from the truth.

Posted by: oldhippie | Oct 31 2025 21:18 utc | 134