avatar_zenrat

Handley Page HP.80N Victomic - Finished Pics Page 19.

Started by zenrat, June 27, 2020, 06:29:09 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

zenrat

In the 1950s nuclear power was going to change the world. It was going to provide long lasting efficient and powerful energy sources for everything from personal massagers to space ships.  Aircraft were obviously not going to be left out.
The Victomic was the result of a joint venture between aircraft manufacturer Handley Page and industrial conglomerate GEC.

Fred

- Can't be bothered to do the proper research and get it right.

Another ill conceived, lazily thought out, crudely executed and badly painted piece of half arsed what-if modelling muppetry from zenrat industries.

zenrat industries:  We're everywhere...for your convenience..

The Wooksta!

More points for getting this guy involved in it:



He was involved in various nuclear powered aircraft projects in the US in the 50s and 60s.
"It's basically a cure -  for not being an axe-wielding homicidal maniac. The potential market's enormous!"

"Visit Scarfolk today. Our number one priority is keeping rabies at bay"
https://scarfolk.blogspot.com/

"An inaccurate parcel of dog turds!"

The Plan:
www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic

jcf

A CFR (Circulating Fuel Reactor) system like the proposed Martin 331-1?

"Conspiracy theory's got to be simple.
Sense doesn't come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated crap
actually is than they ever are about
whatever's supposed to be behind the
conspiracy."
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

zenrat

Stanton Friedman.  Noted.  Might need to add a saucer section though if he is involved.

Not sure on the mechanics of the reactor yet.  Some reading is required.
Fred

- Can't be bothered to do the proper research and get it right.

Another ill conceived, lazily thought out, crudely executed and badly painted piece of half arsed what-if modelling muppetry from zenrat industries.

zenrat industries:  We're everywhere...for your convenience..

McColm

Quote from: joncarrfarrelly on June 27, 2020, 12:32:06 PM
A CFR (Circulating Fuel Reactor) system like the proposed Martin 331-1?


Looks like the Martin SeaMaster with twin engines.

PR19_Kit

Quote from: McColm on June 28, 2020, 04:44:09 AM

Looks like the Martin SeaMaster with twin engines.


That's because it is, but with nuclear engines.
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

NARSES2

Quote from: zenrat on June 27, 2020, 06:02:03 PM

Not sure on the mechanics of the reactor yet.  Some reading is required.

Admittedly I've not really tried, but I've never got my brain to even begin to understand the principals of nuclear powered aircraft. Looking forward to seeing what you do with it.
Decals my @r$e!

zenrat

AFAIUI instead of heating and expanding the air by mixing it with fuel and igniting it you put it in close proximity to nuclear fission.
One could either pump the nuclear fuel through the engine so the air passed over it or, direct the air through a reactor so the air passed over the fissionable material before being directed back to the engine.
Or some in-between version where something else was heated by the reaction and this third substance transferred the heat to the engines where it heated the air.  But this way strikes me as adding unnecessary losses.
The trick would be to make sure the exhaust was not too radioactive.


The Convair NB-36H did not have working nuclear engines but was at test aircraft to prove it was possible to fly around with a working nuclear reactor inside an aircraft.
It was escorted everywhere by a B-50 carrying a squad of Paratroopers whose job it was, if the Atomic Peacemaker went down, to establish an exclusion zone around the crash site.
Fred

- Can't be bothered to do the proper research and get it right.

Another ill conceived, lazily thought out, crudely executed and badly painted piece of half arsed what-if modelling muppetry from zenrat industries.

zenrat industries:  We're everywhere...for your convenience..

PR19_Kit

Quote from: zenrat on June 28, 2020, 06:21:36 AM

AFAIUI instead of heating and expanding the air by mixing it with fuel and igniting it you put it in close proximity to nuclear fission.
One could either pump the nuclear fuel through the engine so the air passed over it or, direct the air through a reactor so the air passed over the fissionable material before being directed back to the engine.
Or some in-between version where something else was heated by the reaction and this third substance transferred the heat to the engines where it heated the air.  But this way strikes me as adding unnecessary losses.
The trick would be to make sure the exhaust was not too radioactive.


One of the 'Secret Projects' books goes into various proposed nuclear engines in some detail, and both the methods you mention were planned. The second version, which may have cost more to do, but was less dangerous, was the preferred option apparently. Sadly I'm 120 miles away from my copy of the book, but I bet someone else on here has one too.
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Weaver

That's pretty much straight up.

Primary cycle.
Pass the intake air straight through the core of the reactor.
Upside: lighter and simpler.
Downside: radioactive exhaust (this is basically Project Pluto)

Secondary cycle.
Pass the intake air through heat exchangers that are heated by fluid from the reactor cooling system.
Upside: much less radioactive exhaust (not zero though).
Downside: increased complexity and weight. How much weight depends on what the cooling fluid is:
- water cooling = heavy but well understood
- closed cycle air cooling = lighter but developmental and high volume
"We thank you, but this diversion is not true. Things never happened thus."

"Oh, but it IS true. Things need not have happened to be true. Tales and dreams are
the shadow-truths that will endure when mere facts are dust and ashes, and forgot."

- Sandman: A Midsummer Night's Dream, by Neil Gaiman

sideshowbob9

I don't think the direct cycle would be greenlit post Windscale fire, unless you breeze that away in the backstory of course!

Is liquid sodium any lighter than water-cooled? Asking for a friend. 

This is a great idea and the Victor really lends itself to it. I could well see the Victomic towed over a specialist pit and the modular reactor assembly lowered into it for maintenance before the aircraft is towed away for a washdown on a very isolated pan.

zenrat

Radioactive exhaust?  Pah!  What's a bit of fallout between friends.
This is the period when nuclear weapons be being detonated in the outback and the radioactive dust that drifted over Australian cities wasn't seen as a problem, but as a source of usefull data.

Thanks guys.

I just looked in the Convair Advanced Projects books.  Nothing on nuclear powered aircraft in there.
There is a chapter on the NB-36H in Cold War Peacemaker but it doesn't go into detail about the theories behind powering aircraft, just about the flying reactor carrying testbed.

Fred

- Can't be bothered to do the proper research and get it right.

Another ill conceived, lazily thought out, crudely executed and badly painted piece of half arsed what-if modelling muppetry from zenrat industries.

zenrat industries:  We're everywhere...for your convenience..

sideshowbob9

After a bit of reading around, Magnox reactors in the UK were using carbon dioxide as a heat-transfer medium in the late-50s which sounds like a lightweight option. Helium sounds even better but 50s Britain would probably struggle to get hold of any serious quantity consistently, which is a strategic no-no.

To get out of the whole irradiating your base issue, you could have two conventional Avon/Sapphires for transiting and two nuclear engines once you were "out-to-sea" or even auxiliary engines.

None of this need have any bearing on your model of course Zenrat but the concept and discussion are too much fun not to play with!

zenrat

Alternatively, Pumped Fuel Reactor with molten Thorium salts piped directly from the reactor body through the engines.  Pumps etc powered by the reactor itself.
I have toyed with the idea of a mixed power aircraft.  Mainly because then I could have a reactor jettison hatch on the underside marked with yellow and black stripes (La Forge, prepare to dump the core...).
However, would a bit of radioactive exhaust at ones airfield be considered an issue?  Just tow the aircraft out to the boundary (the time taken could be used to get the reactor warmed up) and have them take off back towards the buildings.
Fred

- Can't be bothered to do the proper research and get it right.

Another ill conceived, lazily thought out, crudely executed and badly painted piece of half arsed what-if modelling muppetry from zenrat industries.

zenrat industries:  We're everywhere...for your convenience..

Weaver

Quote from: zenrat on June 29, 2020, 02:51:10 AM
Alternatively, Pumped Fuel Reactor with molten Thorium salts piped directly from the reactor body through the engines.  Pumps etc powered by the reactor itself.
I have toyed with the idea of a mixed power aircraft.  Mainly because then I could have a reactor jettison hatch on the underside marked with yellow and black stripes (La Forge, prepare to dump the core...).
However, would a bit of radioactive exhaust at ones airfield be considered an issue?  Just tow the aircraft out to the boundary (the time taken could be used to get the reactor warmed up) and have them take off back towards the buildings.

Your reactor warm-up time had better be shorter than four minutes then... :o
"We thank you, but this diversion is not true. Things never happened thus."

"Oh, but it IS true. Things need not have happened to be true. Tales and dreams are
the shadow-truths that will endure when mere facts are dust and ashes, and forgot."

- Sandman: A Midsummer Night's Dream, by Neil Gaiman