> 65,000 lbs, 80 feet long, with the terrifying code name, SLAM (Supersonic, Low Altitude Missile), or … “project Pluto.” This thing was perilously close to being built. They tested the engines at full scale and full power at Jackass Flats, and the guidance system was good enough they used essentially the same thing in the Tomahawk cruise missile.<p>For those who wish to read more about it:<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto</a><p>And for those who want to see a very interesting kind of doomsday in which this superweapon is used:<p><a href="http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/stories/colderwar.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/stories/colderwar.htm</a><p>A most enjoyable short story.
> Soviet Navy sunk this idea, in part because it only had a range of 25 miles (meaning it was basically a suicide mission), but also, according to Sakharov’s autobiography, some grizzled old Admiral put it “we are Navy; we don’t make war on civilian populations…”<p>If it was for coastal destruction why not drop it to the bottom and then swim away and let it denotate in safety.<p>But in general why even bother, why not launch the 20M warhead as an ICBM and detonate above the target zone. Wouldn't water just dissipate the energy and waste it? This sounds like science fiction more than anything. Kind of like how we trolled Soviet Union with Star Wars.<p>BTW: Nuclear torpedos existed since at least late 50s and almost started WWIII around the Cuban Missile Crisis times. There was even a hero who saved the world related to it: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasili_Arkhipov" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasili_Arkhipov</a>.
Three issues with the physics behind some statements re project pluto's.<p>(1) Doing damage with sonic booms. Not happening. Sonic booms do not cause serious damage. Breaking windows, scaring wildlife, keeping people up. They aren't breaking down doors. Much of our assumptions about sonic booms comes from the anti-Concorde movement that in turn is political. Even at mach3+, this thing is tiny compared to concorde and its wake would not be a weapon. The mythbusters covered this well.<p>(2) Fallout from the exhaust. The russians actually flew a direct cycle nuclear (ramjet-style) engine, the Tu-95LAL. The pilots died painfully, but it didn't contaminate any large area. The americans ran it on theirs on a test stand for five minutes. How is that test area now? To get the equivalent 5-minutes of overflight this thing would have to do tight laps for years and years.<p>(3) Flying at Mach3 at low level. Yes it can be done, but not for years or even days. At that speed/altitude the craft is well into the "thermal thicket" where friction and compression heating of the air warms the aircraft. With no fuel to burn (to dump heat) and nowhere cool to radiate, this missile would need some magic cooling system. That highspeed dash can only be a dash, which also impacts (1) and (2) above.
The first link in the article is quite interesting (the current project is named Status-6)<p><a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/11/12/putins-doomsday-machine-nuclear-weapon-us-russia/" rel="nofollow">https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/11/12/putins-doomsday-machine...</a><p>also Russian wikipedia has a longer article on this beast<p><a href="https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%83%D1%81-6" rel="nofollow">https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%83...</a><p>it says that this contraption is straight out of Dr. Strangelove<p>* once it is on its way then it can't be recalled<p>* also they plan to put Cobalt near the fusion core,
making it a cobalt bomb, just like in Dr. Strangelove ( <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobalt_bomb" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobalt_bomb</a> )<p>* Russian wikipedia says that this outrage is supposed to counter US Anti ballistic missiles. (Again Dr. Strangelove - the doomsday device was supposed to counter a massive ballistic missile buildup - for a fraction of the cost).<p>What worries me is that the worlds elites seem to be a bit less rational than what we had during the cold war ... The Russians seem to be a lot more saber rattling than the Soviet leadership. (I may be wrong here; the defense council is said to have considered the nuking of China during the 1969 border conflict <a href="http://www.scmp.com/article/714064/nixon-intervention-saved-china-soviet-nuclear-attack" rel="nofollow">http://www.scmp.com/article/714064/nixon-intervention-saved-...</a> )
Worth it for this alone:<p>"Yes, I would have worked on project SLAM: as far as I can tell, it was the most epic redneck project ever funded by the US government. Not that we should have built such a thing, but holy radioactive doomsday smoke, Batman, it would have been a fun job for a few years."<p>Reminds me of this old bit of Backwoods Fun: <a href="http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/89q2/origtopfus.366.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/89q2/origtopfus.366.html</a>
The article paints a very harsh criticism of the current US "established experts" on Russia. I wonder why such an important designation is being appropriated by these "fools".
Nuclear torpedos or Project Pluto is not what I'm most afraid of. This one is:<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Hand_(nuclear_war)" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Hand_(nuclear_war)</a>
"An example of fail-deadly deterrence, it can automatically trigger the launch of the Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) if a nuclear strike is detected by seismic, light, radioactivity and overpressure sensors."
The upside of this story is once after this kind of weaponry is fired off anywhere on earth there will be one hell of an economic vacuum and a lot of startup opportunities. Considering, of course, you're one of the lucky few million left alive on this planet :-).