nuclear propulsion industry and its disclosure

8/14/2019 Nuclear Propulsion Industry and Its Disclosure

1/16

Begging for Disclosure

50 years of the Secret Nuclear Propulsion Industry.

Russia's RD-0410 Nuclear Experimental Engine publicly being listed as having flown in1985. With a thrust to weight ratio of 1.8 with a burn time of 1hr, this was supposedly theonly operational nuclear engine in the USSR.source : http://www.astronautix.com/engines/rd0410.htm

Copyright 2008 Please copy and share freely in a unmodified form.


2/16

You are about to take a nice guided tour down the rabbit hole, everything you are about to read ispublic information. Its how you process this information and what you do with it that really counts. Inorder to be able to make sense and 'put the pieces together' you need to be able to apply behaviormodeling in this respect not against a particular organization or entity but against governmentagencies themselves. By studying how they have behaved in certain fields of study, one can theneasily extrapolate this information to stuff far less known to the public, if known at all. Once you seethe 'behavior patten' present itself, it will suddenly all fit together.

We Need to Restudy the History of the Atomic Bomb First.

The first publicly known atomic weapons were 'Little Boy' and 'Fat Man' which were droppedon Hiroshima, and Nagasaki at the end of WWII.

There are some important things to note about these weapons (In this case Little Boy), lets go over

its statistics:

Weight 4.5 tons, Length 3.2m, Diameter 71cm (It was large) Yield 15 Kilotons

As well this is a photo of The Fat Man Bomb


3/16

It was even larger...

4.6 tons, Length 3.25m, Diameter 1.5m Yield 20 Kilotons

Why Do You Care To Know This?

Because that was in 1946, and we all know very well - how much more research was done in this

project AFTER these bombs were developed. Lets fast forward to the late 1950's and examine the'Davy Crockett' - a tiny dial-a-yield nuclear warhead

The Davey Crockett shown loaded onto its rocket booster. It had a dial-a-yield from a measly 10 tonsall the way up to 0.5 kilotons(2). This photo was taken in 1961, and now Davey Crocketts can befound in the United States Army Ordinace Museum.

There are some important things to note in this.

16 years was all it took for the atomic weapon to go from weighing 4.5 tons all the waydown to 23 kg. This weight ratio is 195:1.

The size and number of people involved in the Manhatten project was huge, eventuallyemploying over 130,000 people at three sites, and costing in todays dollarsapproximately $24 Billion(3).

At one facility it was so secret that State Governor was unaware of its existence. Thefacility known as Oak Ridge was to become the fifth largest city in the state, andconsumed 1/6th of the electrical power produced in the U.S. More than New York City.This shows that large projects CAN be done in complete secrecy and with no publicknowledge.


4/16

Beyond the Davey Crockett.

Many in the alternative and research community do not even want to admit that suitcasenuclear warheads exist. However this is going to 'wax thin' as the National Terror AlertResponse Center identifies them by diagram, and shows you what roughly you should belooking for.(4)

This diagram looks reminiscently similar to the mock up created by Congressional staffer PeterPry, as further information was leaked about the existence of these suitcase nukes in theBurton-Lunev Hearing in 2000 as witnessed by X Soviet GRU Operative Stanislav Lunev. (5)


5/16

In Summary

The Research and Development into the Nuclear Warhead was massive and secret. The size and yield of the devices advanced tremendously, with almost a 200:1

difference in weight between warheads in just 16 years. Research continued long after the first, second and third generation of warheads were

constructed , and more and more of this was done out of the public eye. Small bits of information still pops up in the public, namely the evidence for the

existence of suitcase nukes. If you think that suitcase nukes do not exist, then maybe you have an explanation as to

why such a thing is showcased on a government site. This is as much of an admissionas needed.

Behavior Analysis Of the US Government Around Its Favorite Toy (The NuclearWarhead).

The entire project could have been conducted outside of the public eye entirely, except the oneproblem is that every time you tested your warheads it usually left craters the size of footballfields and obliterated everything in its path. So it forced the government in this case to shedlots of light on their results. But in reality we have little information about the cities that wereerected during the Manhatten Project , the thousands of people involved in the project andmany other aspects. In fact the secrecy that exists today is far and above that which existedduring WWII - as in those days the moral fortitude of US government was one of being able toopenly share knowledge, and to tell the truth (at least a little). Today they have no problems atall lying and not saying anything, leaving everyone open to much speculation. But if youexamine something long enough you will see a large pattern develop. This is important to noteas we move forward into studying demonstrable evidence of a Black Secret or Ultra Secretproject of Nuclear Propulsion, that in some cases have been hidden in plain site.


6/16

50 YEARS OF NUCLEAR PROPULSION TECHNOLOGY(IN SECRECY)

The NERVA nuclear thruster was conceptualized in the late 1950's, and hints of its implementationare heavily evidenced at the site astronautix.(6)

It's time now to completely examine the possibility that there is a very real and very secret nuclea

propulsion industry - one that shows many signs of a parallel space program as ran by NASA andother various agencies over the past 50 years. A program so shrouded in secrecy that not even thespouses of the active members ever knew what it was that was done. A program begging to berecognized for its amazing achievements, and signs and easter eggs are being left everywheredescriptors written in past tense about Mars missions, programs that keep appearing repeating bualso being labeled as 'cancelled.' The statistics and results of the experiments indicate that not onlywas the nuclear powered thruster a big success, it completely revolutionized the propulsion industry,and signs of its usage are well indicated...


7/16

The Beginnings.

The initial research into nuclear propulsion began ironically 1 year after the end of WWII, in 1946,under the Air Force's Nuclear Energy for the Propulsion of Aircraft (NEPA.) This program was thenreplaced by the Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion (ANP) Program. Majors issues at this early stage odevelopment was naturally nuclear shielding, and making the propulsion systems work.

But the program was publicly deemed a failure, and cancelled after spending nearly $1 Billion dollarsand dragging the program out until 1961(7). But what is not clearly understood or explained was thesecond program for nuclear powered rocket thrusters and missile systems, namely Project Pluto..Since there was much less requirements for a manned vehicle, all that was left was dealing with thepossibly large emissions of nuclear radiation.

The Wikipedia Coverage States:

On May 14, 1961, the world's first nuclear ramjet engine, "Tory-IIA," mounted on arailroad car, roared to life for just a few seconds. Three years later, "Tory-IIC" was runfor five minutes at full power, producing 513 megawatts and the equivalent of over35,000 pounds force (156 kN) thrust. But despite these and other successful tests thePentagon, sponsor of the "Pluto project," had second thoughts; Intercontinental ballisticmissile technology had proved to be more easily developed than previously thought,reducing the need for such highly capable cruise missiles. On July 1, 1964, sevenyears and six months after it was born, "Project Pluto" was cancelled.(8)

Think about what was just stated here:

The device successfully fired, and on a second trial ran for 5 minutes. If you actuallyread up on the Pluto Project it would have given the Pentagon the capability to have aloitering missile, something that would have given then a huge first strike advantagecapability. Why would the Pentagon have any misgivingsabout this technology, it wouldhave been one of the highest priorities for the current US administration, and to simplydeclare the project cancelled is highly unlikely... But lets assume that at the time theproject complexity was too difficult to accomplish.

Illustration 1: Artists Rendition of the WS-125 Pentagons Initial Plans for

a Nuclear Powered Aircraft


8/16

The Parallel Program ROVER

What is very interesting is that the US government ran a parallel program known as Project ROVER,which was started way back in 1956, by the AEC (Atomic Energy Commission). Strangely there aremany references of successful firing after firing with the Kiwi, and NRX prototypes.(9) After severatests of the Kiwi series systems, the much larger and more powerful Phoebus series wereimplemented. The 'B' Model ran successfully generating 1500MW for 30 minutes. NASA would jointhe program and continue with the NERVA series, which would begin test firings that would start inSep 1964 (9)

What is interesting is by 1968, there are public references to over 28 successful firings of the NRXvariant, all generating 1,100 MW fuel, with many tests stopping because the rocket had exhausted allthe hydrogen available to it. Model EX Produced the baseline 75,000 lbf (334 kN) thrust that NERVARequired.


9/16

Several problems confronted the NERVA design, and by the end of the program most of theseproblems were solved. However publicly the program was simply labeled a failure.

Think about this for a second...

You have just successfully tested your prototype 28 times, and have committed over 20years of research and effort, and you turn around and cancel the program before everstrapping it to a rocket or utilizing it, in the year 1968? That just doesn't make sense

that is unless of course it leaves a radioactivity trail, therefore there can be no chancethe public might figure this out, therefore the program would have to be done incomplete secrecy, to prevent a massive outcry.

What is very interesting to note is that successful firings from the Phoebus series was beingconducted, and cumulated with the the program cancellation in 1972. Coincidentally this was roughlythe same time that the Moon program was publicly cancelled. Was this just a coincidence, or did the

program continue in secrecy with a new form of propulsion? To have never have tested theirtechnology in flight would be a incredulous thing to believe, and no matter what would be done - thepublic could never know it was done because they would scream bloody murder and political headswould be out at the next election. Anything that would be done would have to be done in completesecrecy, test firing a nuclear rocket publicly would be tantamount to political suicide.


10/16

List of manned Apollo Moon landings

Further information:List of Apollo astronauts

Apollo 11 - July 16, 1969. First manned landing on the Moon, July 20. Apollo 12 - November 14, 1969. First precise manned landing on the Moon, within walking distance of

Surveyor 3. Apollo 14 - January 31, 1971. Commanded by Alan Shepard, the only one of the original Mercury Seven

astronauts to walk (and golf) on the Moon. Apollo 15 - July 26, 1971. First mission with the Lunar Rover vehicle. Apollo 16- April 16, 1972. First landing in the lunar highlands. Apollo 17- December 7, 1972. Final Apollo lunar mission, first night launch, only mission with a

professional geologist.

In total twenty-four American astronauts have traveled to the Moon, with twelve walking on its surface andthree making the trip twice.Apollo 8,Apollo 10 andApollo 13 were lunar-orbit-only missions with no moonlandings.Apollo 7andApollo 9 never left Earth orbit. Apart from the inherent dangers of manned moonexpeditions as seen withApollo 13, one reason for their cessation according to astronaut Alan Bean is the cost it

imposes in government subsidies."[3]

Lets go over what we know we have : NASA successfully fired Pheobus/NERVA modules over and over again. The Apollo project was coincidentally cancelled the same year that the Nuclear

Propulsion research was also cancelled, coinciding with the completely successful firingof the Phoebus/NERVA series rockets...

But there is more...

When one goes to the astronautix website, however there are many references to more

advanced NERVA engines, on which data was collected long after the program was cancelled,and strangely references to actual flights and usages of nuclear propulsion.


11/16

Notice at the end of article First Flight 1980: Is that a typo, or is this encyclopedia leavingeaster eggs to be found?

Evidence of Continued NASA Moon Missions

There is mounting evidence that the missions to the Moon continued in secrecy, this factneeds establishment in order to understand that not only were these programs never

stopped, but Astronautix strangely mentions a Von Braun Mars mission in 'past tense!'

What is going on here this is the astronautix article. Do recall that people involved inthe program would have a security clearance so secret that breaking and talking couldeasily end their lives. And the US government would never admit that they just pollutedthe entire upper atmosphere with radiation in order to get the necessary payload up toattempt the mission. So they would do it for their own ambition, and never even reportthey did it. The possibility does sit there.

The mission profile was as follows:

12 November 1981: Trans-Mars injection. Each spacecraft had a starting mass in low earth orbit of 727metric tons. After the 3.8 m/s maneuver, the two lateral PPM's would separate, leaving the single PPM,PMM, MEM, and probes with a total mass of 614 metric tons.

9 August 1982: Mars orbit insertion. The spacecraft entered an elliptical Mars orbit. This requires adelta-V of only 2.2 km/s, only 1/3 to 1/8 the amount Boeing assumed in their study for obtaining acircular orbit. This was a huge driver in reducing the total expedition mass. Mass before the maneuverwas 295 metric tons, and afterwards around 226 metric tons.

The MEM's separate and headed for the surface. Meanwhile, the three crew left aboard each PMM dropthe 12 sample-return probes and survey the Martian surface and moons from orbit.

28 October 1982: Trans-Earth Injection. Having shed the MEM and probes, the mass at the start of themaneuver was 172 metric tons.

28 February 1983: Venus swingby. This reduces the velocity at the return to earth, and provided anadditional science opportunity. Four probes were dropped into the atmosphere of Venus.

14 August 1983: Earth Orbit Insertion. The PPM fired one last time to brake the spacecraft into lowearth orbit. It docked with the earth orbiting space station and the crews and their samples were placed inquarantine. Final mass of each ship was 72.6 metric tons. Von Braun preferred this approach to a directreturn to earth in an Apollo Command Module. His mission profile made the propellant available for it,and the risk of contamination of the earth by Martian organisms was eliminated.

If you actually read this, most of the document is past tense. Realistically the onlymethod that could accomplish a Mars mission would be a nuclear propellant system.The research all suggests that NASA was successful with NERVA Nuclear propulsion to

this day. 1981 could easily have been enough time to have attempted such a thing. Butwhy all the secrecy? Firstly again this would require 100's of launches to get thenecessary payload up into orbit.


12/16


13/16

Pentagon Reveals Secret Nuclear-Powered Rocket

The Pentagon revealed last week that it is working on a rocket engine powered by ay nuclearreactor. It has spent $130 million on the secret project since 1987.

Critics accused the Pentagon of trying to avoid public scrutiny. 'This programme reeks ofdeception,' says Steve Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists. According toAftergood, the Pentagon has revealed only part of its research on nuclear propulsion: a

separate programme, with the code name LT, is still classified.

The Pentagon refused to disclose the results of studies on the environmental effects of testingthe engine. Tests on the reactor fuel are proposed to begin this year at the Nevada nuclear testsite. Ground tests of the engine will present its greatest environmental hazard, says Aftergood.The coolant for the reactor is its liquid hydrogen propellant. If the reactor fuel failed during atest, radioactive particles would be spewed with the hydrogen gas into the atmosphere.

The Pentagon also provided only vague information on why it needs such arocket. NASA abandoned its attempt to build a nuclear-powered rocket in 1973after spending $1.5 billion on it.

Now add it all together:

NEPA, ANP, Project Pluto, Project Rover, Project Nerva, Timberwind producedaccording to Astronix dozens of prototypes and possibly hundreds of test firings. Doyou honestly thing that at some point they would not actually attempt some form oflaunch? I find that pretty incredible that project after project after project would bedismissed or cancelled, and that they would simply reattempt the project over again 10years later? 60 years of failure, or 40 years of secrecy surrounded by success whatdo you honestly think?

After hours of research, finally evidence was found that yes, indeed super-secret testswere conducted as far back as 1965. Naturally this experiment was a disaster, and theyquickly moved to hush this up as much as possible. What do you think they arecapable of today?

Enclosed are two very pertinent articles showing a attempts over a 30 year span to testtheir then read nuclear powered rockets.

http://www-tech.mit.edu/V114/N30/nuke.30w.html


14/16

http://www-tech.mit.edu/V114/N30/nuke.30w.html


15/16

MISSILE EXISTS, NOW LOOKING FOR PLACE TO TEST IT.


16/16

(2) Davey Crockett (Nuclear Device) Wikipedia Entry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device )(3) Manhatten Project (Wikipedia Entry). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Project(4) The National Terror Alert Response Center Website http://www.nationalterroralert.com/suitcasenuke/(5) Alexander Lebed and Suitcase Nukes. http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/News/Lebedbomb.html(6) Nerva Nuclear Powered Thruster http://www.astronautix.com/engines/nerva.htm(7) Nuclear Powered Aircraft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_powered_aircraft(8) Project Pluto Wikipedia Article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto

(9) Nuclear Thermal Rocket http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_thermal_rocket

nuclear propulsion industry and its disclosure

Documents