Fire on russian nuke sub., page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 4 times
Topic started on 29-12-2011 @ 12:14 PM by Devern
rt.com...



A fire onboard a strategic nuclear submarine has been brought under control by emergency workers. The blaze started when a fire broke out in a dockyard in northern Russia. Eleven fire crews, a helicopter and a boat managed to put the fire out.
Authorities say that the wooden scaffold around the submarine caught fire, which then spread to the outer skin of the vessel. However they have ruled out the possibility of the fire getting inside the submarine.
Russia’s Emergency Ministry confirmed that the scaffold caught fire as a result of procedural violations during repair works. They also say that radiation levels are normal at the moment and there is no threat of radioactive contamination in the area.
“Ahead of putting the submarine in for scheduled repairs, the reactor was shut down, and right now is in a secure condition,” a spokesperson for Russia’s Ministry of Defense said.
No casualties have been reported. A crew of military prosecutors is working at the scene investigating the cause of the fire.
The nuclear submarine “Yekaterinburg,” built in 1984, was undergoing repairs at a dock in Murmansk Region and was raised from the water in a dry dock at the moment that the fire broke out.


hypothetically, if the fire could reach the reactor, what would the consequences be?


reply posted on 29-12-2011 @ 12:29 PM by kawika
reply to post by Devern


Sounds like the fire was all outside and they are in the yard with the reactor all shut down. I would worry about all the paint being burned off and the hull rusting away to expose the reactor. Otherwise, no problem.



reply posted on 29-12-2011 @ 12:39 PM by fakedirt
reply to post by Devern


there are some serious pressure bulkheads between the reactor room and the adjoining compartments. hulls are around 50mm/75mm thickness so i wouldn't worry too much regarding the spread of flame and damage to reactor/exchanger.
f
edit on 29-12-2011 by fakedirt because: d



reply posted on 29-12-2011 @ 12:53 PM by TDawgRex
reply to post by Devern


Russian subs are coated in a rubber-like substance, Much like any other modern day sub.

Think about it though. Close the hatches and the fire will not get inside...it's not made of wood. It may raise the temp inside, but not to critical levels.

And it is surrounded by water.

But a fire inside a sub is a serious matter.


reply posted on 29-12-2011 @ 01:49 PM by AlphaExray
reply to post by Devern
The materials used on the outer surfaces of these subs are highly flamable. They are used to reduce sonar echos, improve velocity, and reduce corrosion. They are not really intented as a flame retardant. If it had been a serious enough fire to threaten the reactor they would have flooded the dock. Soviets have been known to use sodium based reactor coolants, which means they design with greater operating temperatures in mind than US boats. I doubt the sub was in any danger.

What I would be more concerned about now is why they had a fire at all. Ordenance has a tendancy to go missing when these things happen.

AX
FTNWO


reply posted on 30-12-2011 @ 07:01 PM by arbiture
Originally posted by AlphaExray
reply to post by Devern
The materials used on the outer surfaces of these subs are highly flamable. They are used to reduce sonar echos, improve velocity, and reduce corrosion. They are not really intented as a flame retardant. If it had been a serious enough fire to threaten the reactor they would have flooded the dock. Soviets have been known to use sodium based reactor coolants, which means they design with greater operating temperatures in mind than US boats. I doubt the sub was in any danger.

What I would be more concerned about now is why they had a fire at all. Ordenance has a tendancy to go missing when these things happen.

AX
FTNWO



Liquid sodium reactors were experimented with possibly by the UK, but I know as a fact by the US. One reason, on paper liquid sodium was so interesting is it can operate at much higher temperatures, and higher pressures for a given size as opposed to pressurized water reactors. Hence greater power. One big problem. As with graphite modulated reactors which Chernobyl was by the way, they both have a notorious reputation of a reaction "getting away from you". Much worse liquid sodium like graphite can not be cooled with water as water if it comes in contact with such will react very violently. Pressure would rise exponentially and if thats not enough will usually explode. Not in a nuclear way, just in a conventional sense that can and will usually blow apart the reactor vessel and if in a sub will fracture the hull. If not, though it's almost impossible not to you still will scatter super-radioactive fuel, rods and the very "hot" vessel parts itself one way or the other. Real bad news.

The west due to just common sense abandoned the use of these reactors except for small, land based research reactors. For us, there is no way we would be crazy enough to put one in a ship or sub. The only way to put a fire out in a reactor would be to smother it with sand or something like that. Thats how they tried to fight the fire at Chernobyl, then entombed it in concrete. But it seems the fire was outside the sub, on or in the dock so, never mind...
Pages:     ^^TOP^^