A nuclear 'occurrence'?
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
A Van, what you write usually makes sense even if some believe you work for Pravda, but why send an AIRCRAFT to detect MARINE pollution? A sniffer aircraft works best with air sampling.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Worse than that Chris they were unmanned and some were swiped for scrap.
Abandoned Russian Polar Nuclear Lighthouses | English Russia
Abandoned Russian Polar Nuclear Lighthouses | English Russia
It's just a thought guys but some long endurance spacecraft have (small) nuclear reactors.
okay Nuclear Generator, thanks Fonsini for putting me straight. I was thinking back to the days when Kosmos 954 came down over Canada scattering nuclear debris over a wide area. There are a lot of fairly heavy satellites orbiting, some of them may well still have nuclear propulsion/generation materiel onboard.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 65
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PN, you wrote
You are right about a/c - I was actually thinking in a more general way, smth like "US probes" on all kinds of platforms (sea, undersea, air). In fact, though water is the main subject to be permanently monitored, things keep happening in Fukishima and surprisingly they are not given attention at all in "non-Asian" media. And during major leaks, it looks like traces could be found not only in the water...
E.g., just 3 weeks ago there was a new incident, which is described in an article as per the following URL:
Highest radiation reading since 3/11 detected at Fukushima No. 1 reactor | The Japan Times
Just a couple of excerpts:
"The radiation level in the containment vessel of reactor 2 at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 power plant has reached a maximum of 530 sieverts per hour, the highest since the triple core meltdown in March 2011, Tokyo Electric Power Co. Holdings Inc. said."
"At 530 sieverts, a person could die from even brief exposure", "Also, given the extraordinary level of radiation, the robot would only be able to operate for less than two hours before it is destroyed."
I can imagine what cry would start if there was anything "bleeding" like this for years in Europe or US. Japanese are just lucky that they can hide everything in the Pacific.
P.S. Let me assure you that I do not work for Pravda :-) Was never subscribed to this crap even during SU times (I wonder if it's still alive?). After retirement from the AF I am in hi-tech biz (IT, modeling & simulation and likes) and never worked for the government.
A Van, what you write usually makes sense even if some believe you work for Pravda, but why send an AIRCRAFT to detect MARINE pollution? A sniffer aircraft works best with air sampling.
E.g., just 3 weeks ago there was a new incident, which is described in an article as per the following URL:
Highest radiation reading since 3/11 detected at Fukushima No. 1 reactor | The Japan Times
Just a couple of excerpts:
"The radiation level in the containment vessel of reactor 2 at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 power plant has reached a maximum of 530 sieverts per hour, the highest since the triple core meltdown in March 2011, Tokyo Electric Power Co. Holdings Inc. said."
"At 530 sieverts, a person could die from even brief exposure", "Also, given the extraordinary level of radiation, the robot would only be able to operate for less than two hours before it is destroyed."
I can imagine what cry would start if there was anything "bleeding" like this for years in Europe or US. Japanese are just lucky that they can hide everything in the Pacific.
P.S. Let me assure you that I do not work for Pravda :-) Was never subscribed to this crap even during SU times (I wonder if it's still alive?). After retirement from the AF I am in hi-tech biz (IT, modeling & simulation and likes) and never worked for the government.
WC-135 noted leaving Mildenhall around midday.
https://theaviationist.com/2017/02/2...e-barents-sea/
https://theaviationist.com/2017/02/2...e-barents-sea/
Can we rule out an RTG, given the half life of Iodine 131 is about 8 days, and would seem pretty pointless to use it for space stuff.
Plutonium is weird stuff. A lump of it will crack and fall apart, because it's so radioactive that parts of it transmute to different elements which then disrupt the crystaline lattice of the metallic plutonium. It's normally used as plutonium oxide powder (or pellets of the same), which is much more mechanically stable.
RTGs are simply a large thermocouple heated by the plutonium. AFAIK the effective limit on their lifetime is a function of the damage (transmitation) caused to the thermocouple by the radiation coming off the plutonium.
In fact, though water is the main subject to be permanently monitored, things keep happening in Fukishima and surprisingly they are not given attention at all in "non-Asian" media. And during major leaks, it looks like traces could be found not only in the water...
E.g., just 3 weeks ago there was a new incident, which is described in an article as per the following URL:
E.g., just 3 weeks ago there was a new incident, which is described in an article as per the following URL:
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Neverland
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The leakage form Fukushima, such as it is, is miniscule when compared to the significant levels of radiation already present in sea water. The figures are something like 0.00000 etc. percent is the contribution from Fukushima.
