Molten salt reactors and UFO

[clockRadio]

From what I have heard there are several ufo indidents where observers have seen something like molten metal coming out of ufo's.

I was just wondering what the possible connections are to molten salt reactors that have been used in aricraft experiments. Here are some random facts

1) The early Aircraft Reactor Experiment (1954) was primarily motivated by the small size that the design could provide, while the Molten-Salt Reactor Experiment (1965–1969) was a prototype for a thorium fuel cycle breeder reactor nuclear power plant

Molten salt reactor article, wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor

2) On September 5, 1951, the USAF awarded Consolidated-Vultee a contract to fly a nuclear reactor onboard a modified Convair B-36<sup id="cite_ref-4" class="reference">[5]</sup> under the MX-1589 project of the ANP program. The NB-36H Nuclear Test Aircraft (NTA) was to study shielding requirements for an airborne reactor, to determine whether a nuclear aircraft was feasible. This was the only known airborne reactor experiment by the U.S. with an operational nuclear reactor on board. The NTA flew a total of 47 times testing the reactor over West Texas and Southern New Mexico. The reactor, named the Aircraft Shield Test Reactor (ASTR), was operational but did not power the plane, rather the primary purpose of the flight program was shield testing.

Aircraft reactor experiment, wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Reactor_Experimen

3) Even better, Weinberg realized that you could use thorium in an entirely new kind of reactor, one that would have zero risk of meltdown. The design is based on the lab’s finding that thorium dissolves in hot liquid fluoride salts. This fission soup is poured into tubes in the core of the reactor, where the nuclear chain reaction — the billiard balls colliding — happens. The system makes the reactor self-regulating: When the soup gets too hot it expands and flows out of the tubes — slowing fission and eliminating the possibility of another Chernobyl.

Wired magazine, http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/12/ff_new_nukes/

4) The US Aircraft Reactor Experiment (ARE) was a 2.5 MW thermal nuclear reactor experiment designed to attain a high power density for use as an engine in a nuclear powered bomber. It used the molten fluoride salt NaF-ZrF₄-UF₄ (53-41-6 mol%) as fuel, was moderated by beryllium oxide (BeO), used liquid sodium as a secondary coolant and had a peak temperature of 860 °C.
Aircraft reactor experiment, wikipedia

The molten-salt-fueled reactor operates much hotter than LWR reactors, from 650 °C in the tested MSRE (see above) and related designs, to as hot as 950 °C in untested design
Molten salt reactor, wikipedia


An object at some fixed temperature T, like an oven, is observed to glow. The Draper point is the name given to the point at which all solids glow a dim red (about 798 K).<sup id="cite_ref-3" class="reference">[4]</sup><sup id="cite_ref-4" class="reference">[5]</sup> At 1000 K, an oven looks red; at 6000 K, it looks white.


(This image did not come out right but check the wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_body)

Black body, wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_body


Do you think there can be any connections to known ufo incidents?

 

[Stagger]

From what I have heard there are several ufo indidents where observers have seen something like molten metal coming out of ufo's.

Do you think there can be any connections to known ufo incidents?
[/COLOR]

Interesting post and links clockRadio.
With UFO incidents, are you specifically referring to alleged UFO crashes? Specifically, which one(s)?

P.S. If I recall correctly, Stanton Friedman has worked on nuclear airplane projects. This could be a question for his upcoming interview on the paracast. Whether tests on nuclear aircrafts have ever lead to "screwups" that could have been misclassified or even covered up as UFO crashes.

Greetings

 

[AdamI]

Interesting... given the energy density of nuclear fuel, if the problems with putting a reactor in an aircraft could be overcome you could have an aircraft with very interesting capabilities. "Wasteful" modes of operation like hovering on pure downward thrust would not be an issue, since energy conservation just wouldn't be a big concern. You could also stay in the air for a very long time (months to years), which I suspect would be the big area of interest for military types.

A secret program doing this could also explain some of the stories of close encounters with radiation burns, radiation exposure sickness, etc. showing up afterwords.

BTW, the military is still interested in spy planes. The problem with satellite surveillance is that you can see satellites from the ground (and with radar, etc.) and once you know their orbital paths you can estimate when they will be overhead. Spy planes on the other hand can take pictures when you least expect it. They can also still see better, since they're closer to the ground.

 

[1stEarthBattalion]

I would combine a reactor with a huge airship aka spectrums cloud base

 

[Michael Allen]

How would this fit with the 1967 Falcon Lake incident, where a man's chest was burned (he later suffered nausea, vomiting and weight loss...) from a saucer shaped craft that "took off?"
And then there's the Cash-Landrum event -- which indicates a different kind of power source. One would expect residual radiation traces from an MSR gone awry in this incident, however, as Phillip Klass (eagerly) noted, no residual radiation was detected by Schuessler's Geiger counter.

This is certainly interesting, because Klass's observation more or less corroborates the negation of the MSR explanation for at least "some" of these incidents. Also, I doubt seriously the power output of these devices (even in the megawatts) could account for the velocity and acceleration noted by other objects.

But here's where the hard work lies: you might have to look at the reported performance characteristics of the objects that left radiation traces suggestive of this technology, but if you find the performance outclasses the upper bound power output of these devices, then you'll be out of luck.