Iran Plans Nuclear-Powered Sub

page: 1
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Iran said it has begun preparations to produce a nuclear-powered submarine, providing an argument for producing weapons-grade fuel, ahead of its next round of international nuclear negotiations.

The U.S., Israel and the United Nations nuclear agency have long worried that Iran would seek such a justification to enrich uranium above the weapons-grade level of 90% purity. Officials have pointed to Iran's deliberations about beginning research and development for nuclear-fueled submarines.

On Tuesday, a senior Iranian naval official told state media that his country had already begun the process.


Iran Plans Nuclear-Powered Sub

edit on 6/12/2012 by SUICIDEHK45 because: stuff again




posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Well...here it is, the moment you have all been waiting for. Iran is now saying that they are working on a Nuclear-Powered Submarine.

This is more propaganda put forth by the MSM to justify a war in Iran.


Israel has been raising concerns for more than six months that Iran might cite submarine work as a justification for producing highly enriched uranium. On Tuesday, Israel's Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon again stressed his government's position that Iran not be allowed to maintain any enrichment capabilities on its soil.


edit on 6/12/2012 by SUICIDEHK45 because: words



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by SUICIDEHK45
 


Why would nuclear powered subs need higher enrichment than a nuclear power plant?
I admit I know nothing about nuclear subs, but shouldn't they work the same way?


EDIT:

I see now.

Source

The fuel in a seagoing reactor is typically more highly enriched (i.e., contains a higher concentration of U235 vs. U238) than that used in a land-based nuclear power plant. Some marine reactors run on relatively low-enriched uranium (requiring frequent refueling). Others run on highly enriched uranium, varying from from 20% U235, to the over 96% U235 found in U.S. submarines,[3] in which the resulting smaller core is quieter in operation (a big advantage to a submarine).[4] Using more-highly enriched fuel also increases the reactor's power density and extends the usable life of the nuclear fuel load, but is more expensive and a greater risk to nuclear proliferation than less-highly enriched fuel.[5]
edit on 6/12/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)
edit on 6/12/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by SUICIDEHK45
Well...here it is, the moment you have all been waiting for. Iran is now saying that they are working on a Nuclear-Powered Submarine.

This is more propaganda put forth by the MSM to justify a war in Iran.


Israel has been raising concerns for more than six months that Iran might cite submarine work as a justification for producing highly enriched uranium. On Tuesday, Israel's Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon again stressed his government's position that Iran not be allowed to maintain any enrichment capabilities on its soil.


edit on 6/12/2012 by SUICIDEHK45 because: words


Why is it propaganda if it's true? People will decide on their own if it's a good thing or bad.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Dustytoad
 



U.S. Naval reactors are pressurized water reactors, which differ from commercial reactors producing electricity in that:
they have a high power density in a small volume and run either on low-enriched uranium (as do some French and Chinese submarines) or on highly enriched uranium (>20% U-235, current U.S. submarines use fuel enriched to at least 93%,[3] compared to between 21–45% in current Russian models, although Russian nuclear-powered icebreaker reactors are enriched up to 90%),[citation needed]
the fuel is not UO2 but a metal-zirconium alloy (c.15% U with 93% enrichment, or more U with lower enrichment),[citation needed]
they have long core lives, so that refueling is needed only after 10 or more years, and new cores are designed to last 25 years in carriers and 10-33 years in submarines,
the design enables a compact pressure vessel while maintaining safety.


WIKI



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


It does seem to be true, but I don't think it should matter. How long will it take them to work out the issues getting a nuclear sub built? Years...? Why should we even care. The U.S. shouldn't be the World Police, and that is most likely why this story is in the MSM, to justify a war with Iran.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by SUICIDEHK45
 


How are they gonna do that after Israel bombs all their Nuclear stockpiles?

They can't even make enough gasoline for their people, they really ought to be researching Crude-powered submarines. Their nuke ambitions are never gonna come to fruition.

BTW, I'm not condoning the bombing, I think we need to let them grow their economy just like everyone else, but I'm a realist, and it just ain't gonna happen.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


I think they just got 4 new diesel subs in 2010 or 2011?. There was a thread on ATS when they did it.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   
LOOK WHAT OBAMA HAS STARTED....



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   
So most nuclear sub run on slightly over 20% enrichment of uranium, and some on 96%, Iran have enrich to 20% at this moment in time in fact they have 25% for "medical purposes"

Right OK!




Let me guess... is Iran by any chance going for a sub that runs on enriched uranium over 90%?

Right i'm off down the bookies to put a large hefty sum of money on them going for a sub that runs on 96% enriched uranium... i'll have the news papers and press round asking me why i was so sure and bet my house & entire family on it... Sir was you nervous at all about losing everything you had? ...erm no not really



What ever, just let them build the dam thing and bomb the factory where they're making the nuclear Warheads instead, if they have a problem with that then just show the rest of the world pictures of thos supposed Nuclear Sub that turned out to be a warhead
edit on 12-6-2012 by TritonTaranis because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by SUICIDEHK45
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


I think they just got 4 new diesel subs in 2010 or 2011?


Wont hear those coming, nope..



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by SUICIDEHK45
 


SWEET!

This might be the latest addition to Israel’s target list…that is if it’s not all talk like most things that come out of Tehran.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Are you seriously telling them not to advance their technologies? Why don't you go ride a horse to work.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   
Nuclear subs put out high equipment sound levels when submerged.
Iran will not have 60 years of research on how to quite them so they will make fine targets for US Mk-48 Mod 6,ADCAP torpedoes.
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 



Are you seriously telling them not to advance their technologies? Why don't you go ride a horse to work.


Horses (or in Iran’s case..Camels) aren’t justification for nuclear enrichment!

Come on now…you know the game they’re playing!



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ANNED
 


What if the Russians give them supercavitating torpedoes? Plus Iran has home base advantage. Just one sunk Iranian sub won't win the war dude...



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Are you a nuclear energy expert? Have you ever taken classes on nuclear physics?

Even if they enrich beyond what is required for energy so what? It is their right to do whatever they want



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 



What if the Russians give them supercavitating torpedoes? Plus Iran has home base advantage. Just one sunk Iranian sub won't win the war dude...


Iran poses no threat in conflict with US.

Their capability is overblown…mostly by people like you who think they know the score.



edit on 12-6-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by SUICIDEHK45
Well...here it is, the moment you have all been waiting for. Iran is now saying that they are working on a Nuclear-Powered Submarine.

This is more propaganda put forth by the MSM to justify a war in Iran.


Israel has been raising concerns for more than six months that Iran might cite submarine work as a justification for producing highly enriched uranium. On Tuesday, Israel's Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon again stressed his government's position that Iran not be allowed to maintain any enrichment capabilities on its soil.


edit on 6/12/2012 by SUICIDEHK45 because: words



Exactly "here it is"

I seem to remember all you guys saying they would never enrich uranium beyond 20% because its just "propaganda" to start a war, you'll be standing there when they have 90% saying the same thing

In fact you'll be standing there saying Iran would never Nuke Israel when you see a blinding flash

Similar people said the same thing in Europe in the 1940s

I think personally all you guys should write your names down on a list that you're in favour of Iran having nuclear warheads in a region that has been on the boil for over 2.000yrs, just so we know who to blame for this idiocy, and perhaps even a public shooting to eradicate the stupid gene from the pool altogether, with 100% of the human race having common sense we might actually get somewhere



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ANNED
 


Plus you obviously missed this thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

and this one:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Just because we have superior technology doesn't mean we will win the war. Look at Afghanistan right now. We won in Iraq,but not afghanistan.





top topics
 
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join