Nuclear Powered Vehicles: Cheap, Sustainable, and Potentially Deadly

Cars with nuclear engines sound like an awesome idea... until a minor collision destroys a city block.
Simon's Social Media:
Twitter: / simonwhistler
Instagram: / simonwhistler
MegaProjects: / @megaprojects9649
TodayIFoundOut: / todayifoundout
TopTenz: / toptenznet
Biographics: / @biographics
Highlight History: / @highlighthistory
Geographics: / @geographicstravel
Business Blaze: / @brainblaze6526

[@liam9830]

Side or mega projects idea: The Object 279, the Soviet tank designed to withstand nuclear explosions

[@joeyr7294]

I thought it was object 239, I guess because of plutonium 239. Very cool topic though! 🍻

[@daltonpower3630]

Sponsored by World of Tanks.

[@USSAnimeNCC-]

Or war thunder why not both

[@fubar9629]

Note... The tank was designed to withstand the nuclear blast at a closer range than the crew inside the tank would survive.

[@jaymccormack6875]

Probably not enough info on it. Most of it still classified.

[@seansopata5121]

"Here are the keys to your nuclear powered car. Also, we HIGHLY recommend not getting into an accident"

[@nlg2076]

Cc wм а и иис им иההההה ע היה הבבהההההה הה ה הנה ססד'.צe c vs czzzzszzxx cf cdxxccccccccccc'xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxcffxxssscxdd. Ccccccccccs. C. Z for Czech xcf ככה היה גהג בא ה בה ג הבחירות הנהג סה"כ נ. הcv c c five v vfv. Xxx cdcdccdx vs zcddv wvvc dc cc. F vzcccc v. Cv cc vccv cvvvv:vvvvvv cc xsxc. Ccccxcccccccccccxccccccccccccccccccc"ccf cc cc s v cçsxxxc. C cczq

[@vonfaustien3957]

@Chad Cuckmaker thorium needs a uranium or plutonium catalyst to keep the reaction going

[@vonfaustien3957]

@Chad Cuckmaker the thorium cant melt down but because of relative stability it needs a push from a more unstable element to push its radioactive decay to a usable point.

[@barelyasurvivor1257]

Oh and sign here here and here, Acknowledging that we are not responsible for any nuclear exposure caused by car accidents

[@user-mx1fq6qm6i]

You're gonna need a long and wide car

[@ArakDBlade]

I've played enough Fallout to know where this is going...

[@patrickmcglonejr8163]

I was thinking the EXACT thing! One well placed bullet and you have yourself a mini atomic explosion!

[@Wppk765]

Repent, brethren! The Great Atom will cleanse all!!!

[@okiedynaholic4154]

Walk in the glow

[@Remianen]

Blame Vault-Tec. It's always their fault.

[@Hobbes4ever]

don't shoot the f cking car!

[@crazyobservations3080]

The problem with building a safe nuclear car is that we have never been able to make a truly safe car to begin with

[@someguyfromanotherplanet5284]

😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@peterbuckley3877]

The problem isn’t that we don’t have safe cars we just have unsafe drivers instead.

[@simonm1447]

usually you need highly enriched uranium to power smaller reactors (most military ship reactors use 90 % U-235, because of the small size of the reactor, to stretch the time between refuelings). In nuclear power plants you usually use 3 to 4 % enriched uranium, but only the U-235 is used for the fission, the rest (U-238) is not used and would be dead weight. However, this means it's also weapons grade uranium. As long as it's use in military ships it's in safe hands, but if you give it to civilians they could sell it to foreign countries starting a nuclear weapons program with it.

[@n111254789]

Look at modern f1 cars. Probably the safest vehicles on earth. Nearly impossible to die in.

[@andrewwright.]

100% correct

[@deadfreightwest5956]

Fun fact: The Ford Nucleon concept car had the dangerous bit in the rear. While never built, it did provide a template for the later Pinto. _Allegedly!_

[@richardgreen7225]

Pinto was scapegoat because the name was easy to remember. Cars catching fire after a crash happens in the movies but is very rare in reality. About the Pinto: "When all types of fatalities are considered, the Pinto was approximately even with the AMC Gremlin, Chevrolet Vega, and Datsun 510. It was significantly better than the Datsun 1200/210, Toyota Corolla and VW Beetle. The safety record of the car in terms of fire was average or slightly below average for compacts, and all cars respectively. This was considered respectable for a subcompact car." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto

[@MichaEl-rh1kv]

No, like in any other car the most dangerous bit sits right behind the steering wheel.

[@AmberWool]

My sister had an early 70's Pinto. It had a rag hanging out of the bumper like a wick.

[@AmberWool]

@@richardgreen7225 have you ever seen a 4-wheel drive Gremlin? A friend's brothers made one. Funniest thing ever.

[@CrusaderSports250]

@@richardgreen7225 the problem with the Pinto that nearly bankrupted Ford was the propensity for the paint to fall off due to incompatible paints being used, the only cure was to strip the car and repaint, the cost of which is enormous, all done under warranty of coarse, little known and not something Ford wanted to make too much of, catching fire on the other hand didn't have the same cost implications because as you have pointed out it was average for its class but it gave the press something to latch onto.

"The future of the past was so much better than the future of the future"😂😂😂

[@spacealienrissley]

Yes. Theirs was the jetsons ours is the rapture n zombies

[@arnepianocanada]

Well stated. The future looked fab: then came hijacks, nuclear threats, shuttle explosions, Jim Jones, mass shootings...

[@BigDRandy1243]

Not even funny, one of the most poignant quotes I've come across

[@dahlmasen3084]

”Where are all the nuclear powered cars?” Just play Fallout and you’ll know😂

[@KrolKaz]

They all survived the bombs yet blow up when you shoot them 200 years later?

[@maximumroyal7954]

And you can't salvage anything from it...

[@bob_._.]

"Lead and concrete are often extremely heavy" That's what I like about Simon's channels - I always learn something I've never known before

[@jayraz9869]

the sun is hot

[@dont.beknown5622]

@@jayraz9869 water is wet.

[@marc0523]

Not technically a car but one of the rovers on Mars is nuclear-powered, and about the size of a car.

[@boring7823]

More than one. Most long term spacecraft are powered by RTGs because they can provide hundred of watts continuously for a few decades. They are rather robust as they are solid metal and tiny ones have been used in pacemakers where they offer almost no risk to the user. Unfortunately, the user is likely to be quite old and if the power supply is cremated with it's former user this provides an "environmental hazard". 😈

[@lookingbehind6335]

Mars or the uninhabited island in Canada? Since they are an exact match in every way. Even the rocks are shaped and positioned in the exact same way.

[@boring7823]

@Sparky Puddins Zombies, it's zombies. Vampires only come back in (about) three days, zombies can be raised at any time.

[@CrusaderSports250]

@Sparky Puddins how so once you have consumed the body with cleansing fire there is nothing left for the demon host, zombie, or vampire to inhabit, come let the sister's purify with fire!!.

[@RCAvhstape]

The plutonium used in spacecraft RTGs is a byproduct of making nuclear weapons. Because the US quit making new nuclear weapons years ago, NASA is running low on the good plutonium isotope for RTGs. You can use other substances but plutonium 238 has the best power density, reasonable half life and less massive shielding requirements compared to something like strontium 90. The nice thing about RTGs is that they have no moving parts; it's basically just a thermocouple wrapped around an isotope that radiates decay heat. Stick it in a shielded container with some cooling radiator fins and it's basically a battery. The LM Aquarius used by the Apollo 13 astronauts had an RTG aboard for use by lunar surface experiments, but the crew never landed on the moon and used Aquarius as a life boat until just before reentering the atmosphere, so that RTG is at the bottom of the ocean somewhere. The things are nearly indestructible if built right.

[@anonymousrex5207]

"...becoming the latest car accident to claim over 100,000 lives"

[@AlanAlan-pb9vl]

Shipping contributes how much of world's pollution? So repower these ships wit h methonal produced from green hydrogen ( test completed in Cdn from old oil wells ( 40% energy still left underground Co2 stays underground ) green hydrogen 1 403 830 4124

[@simonm1447]

@@AlanAlan-pb9vl Shipping causes relatively much pollution (they use little emission cleaning technology, because of missing legal regulation for cargo ships), but only 2 % of CO² emissions, compared to 20 % caused by land based vehicles. Simon confound this. In future natural gas, or hydrogen may be a power source for ships.

[@guamazolopez6456]

nuclear accidents havent caused that many deaths, your about 99k off

[@anonymousrex5207]

@@guamazolopez6456 congratulations on having absolutely no sense of humor. My condolences

[@guamazolopez6456]

@@anonymousrex5207 i have humor but that is way too high

[@Blakearmin]

"One pound of it could power a nuclear submarine for a long, long, time!" Wow! Bloody amazing factoid today, Simon! hahaha

[@Not-Great-at-Gaming]

Chryslus and Corvega, the kings of nuclear powered cars. BTW, you don't need a fancy automated kitchen, just buy a Mr Handy.

[@dahlmasen3084]

Imagine being outside washing your Corvega while Codsworth comes serving you a cold beer😎🍺👌🏻

[@patrickmcglonejr8163]

Untill the Chinese start hacking them with their Liberators 😆

[@Wppk765]

I prefer my Mr Gutsy!

[@SRW_]

Sir! Youd better come see this!

[@TheCorpsehatch]

"Good morning! Vault-Tec calling!"

[@theonlydenis]

Simon "Studebaker Packard, I never heard of that last one" Everyone from South Bend "Hey we were relevant once, we still kinda have Notre Dame and....."

[@fredericrike5974]

This might help Simon; Packard was the American partner Rolls Royce decided to work with to co produce the Merlin aircraft engine during WW2.

[@chewysaiditfirst]

No way a fellow hoosier what's up

[@kschepelern]

there's a reason studebaker was in 'we didn't start the fire'

[@MaverickBlue42]

@@valleyofiron125 That's right, Fozzie bear drives a Studebaker....

[@CrusaderSports250]

@@fredericrike5974 Something I was about to point out as well.

[@ianjames1179]

I nearly pissed myself !! Nuclear powered, made of plastic, glow in the dark bumpers, could hover over water, and had a force field. More like a glow in the dark driver !! Easily your best video yet Simon.

[@lyleslaton3086]

I just want the flying car from the Jetsons.

[@rdallas81]

"Hey, did you see my friends nuclear powered car? He said it's the bomb😉"

[@lancepharker]

First displayed at an art show, and relies on "forcefields" hmmmm, sounds legit

[@pills-]

...And it even looks like The Emperor's New Car as well!

[@Veikra]

sounds like the claims on kickstarter *coughs* solar roadways

[@dudepool7530]

Now sold by GOOP. They bought the force field tech at the same time they bought the Nasa hologram stuff.

[@alvaradokids]

Maybe they were thinking of magnetic shielding... for the radiation.. don’t know how that would work on a car accident

[@thedarkonestaint6105]

I'm definitely renaming this channel "Side Blaze" in my head

[@dr.eurobeat619]

I won't be surprised if Simon creates another channel with that name.

[@oracleofdelphi4533]

I would guess "Blaze Projects". It would have nothing to do with projects.

[@terryarmbruster7986]

Side blazed right now 😎

[@dschlie6669]

Mini-blaze

[@teecar9868]

Studebaker was a very old company. They built horse-drawn wagons in the 1800's. They built electric cars decades before your parents were born and lasted into the 70's. Packard was a luxury maker, more deluxe than Cadillac for a time. The two merged.

[@Duraltia]

If you think about it then it's actually surprising for Nuclear reactors not to be used in transport ships. I mean you could technically build a standardized size and fully self-contained modular reactor which, in case of a Ship sinking related emergency, could be dumped into the sea followed by automatically refloating back to the surface to safely recover it afterwards ( similar to how Federation Starships dump their ship Cores into Space should it go critical ). Such a modular reactor would also provide the possibility of transplanting it to a new ship should the old have reached its service time.

[@sarahrosen4985]

K19 - we saw how well that turned out...

[@jacobcreech4415]

I like how Simon says powah instead of power. It sounds so much more powahful. Almost as if Gandalf were saying it. Bless the blaze

[@hotcreamyfart]

Similar to this, it would be cool to see Simon and Danny cover the flying Crown Victoria featured in the hit film "Space Cop".

[@facina3390]

A Rich Evans joint

[@rickbarnes766]

Then tied to that, how about an episode about the flying Pinto, aka the AVE Mizar. Except this was actually built and actually flew. It also clearly inspired the flying AMC Matador in "The Man with the Golden Gun"...

[@lowstringc]

“Fingertip steering”. Apparently Simon’s never driven a non-power-steering car..... 😆

[@terryarmbruster7986]

It's those Czech nuclear football suitcase cars he has to drive there or a LADA 😂

[@CAMacKenzie]

I drive a Suzuki Samurai, and when I told a guy it didn't have power steering, he asked, "My Gawd, how can you drive a car without power steering?"

[@CrusaderSports250]

@@CAMacKenzie try a series Land Rover for a good upper body workout every day!☺.

[@CAMacKenzie]

@@CrusaderSports250 The first vehicle I drove (I was 16 and learning to drive) was my dad's 1965 F-250 with a 350 or so cuin V8 and no power steering. I was absolutely unable to turn the wheel at a dead stop. The Suzuki is easy.

[@RCAvhstape]

I used to drive a VW Sirocco with non-power steering. Hard to turn the wheel at a stop but not impossible, but it wasn't a heavy car. It had manual everything, transmission, locks, windows, no A/C, no cruise control, but fun as hell to drive and a kickin' stereo system.

[@RaydeusMX]

🎶 I don't want to set the wooooorld, on fireeeee. I just want to start a flaaame in your heaaaart... 🎶

[@1138Skinner]

War, war never changes.

[@BIGBLOCK5022006]

This is Three Dog at Galaxy News Radio. Bringing you the truth no matter how bad it hurts.

[@dudepool7530]

🤘😆

[@David-lr2vi]

Patrolling the Mojave almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter.

[@MonochromeWench]

Nuclear car designers: we can do this we'll use imaginary technologies that don't exist but we want to exist. Self driving cars using 60s era computers... lol gps didn't even exist yet good luck navigating.

[@YoungEli9]

Imaginations and perspectives is a human’s most powerful weapon

[@kimjongun6746]

I hope that this innovative vehicle could succeed so that I can invest in this☢️🏎️🚀

[@deg6788]

Trim your hair into a mowhawk first

[@merafirewing6591]

And grow a goatee.

[@SA-th8fq]

😵☢️

[@tokresaliali3805]

I wonder if you squeal like a pig or just look like one. .

[@jayraz9869]

invest in it before it succeeds if you want riches.

[@evanulven8249]

Simon: "Where is all the neclear power?!" NIMBY's: *REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE*

[@deadfreightwest5956]

Nook-you-lar powwa cahs, like the famous "Homer"!

[@clifffraser7433]

"For a Long, long, time" Love the precision.

[@ignitionfrn2223]

2:00 - Chapter 1 - Nuclear concept cars 3:50 - Chapter 2 - Ford Nucleon 4:40 - Chapter 3 - Arbel symetric 5:45 - Chapter 4 - Simca fulgur 6:30 - Chapter 5 - Studebaker packard astral 7:25 - Chapter 6 - Ford seattle it XXI 8:20 - Chapter 7 - Nuclear powered ships 9:00 - Chapter 8 - The USS Nautilus 10:20 - Chapter 9 - The NS Savannah 11:25 - Chapter 10 - Advantages & drawbacks

[@SigEpBlue]

I'm suddenly thankful that nuclear-powered autos never caught on, seeing that Ford actually made a couple of prototypes. I lived through the eras of Fords that were notorious for catching fire -- I have friends whose houses burned down, due to Ford's cost-cutting, incompetent engineering -- and I can only wonder how many mini-Chernobyl Zones would exist today if they'd succeeded in this endeavor.

[@Nick_1911]

Well technically we have nuclear powerd cars , just the reactors are in the powerplants and the cars are electric .

[@dudepool7530]

If you're going that technical, might as well say its a steam powered car. Really blow some minds lmao.

[@BenjaminCronce]

Is "finger tip" steering a term used prior to the standardization of "power" steering?

[@Sb129]

Would likely be easier to just have a home reactor and charge your electric car you could have something like an RTG or betavoltaic battery sealed in a car though

[@glennallen496]

"never heard of Studebaker Packard"? Whoa.

[@oldcarnocar]

or EDSEL!

[@bungeechord1]

Packard is well known in the US Simon and was an American luxury automobile marque built by the Packard Motor Car Company of Detroit, Michigan, United States. The first Packard automobiles were produced in 1899, and the last Detroit-built Packard in 1956, when they built the Packard Predictor, their last concept car. Packard bought Studebaker in 1953 and formed the Studebaker-Packard Corporation of South Bend, Indiana. The 1957 and 1958 Packards were actually badge engineered Studebakers, built in South Bend.

[@chesspiece81]

Simon Studebaker and Packard were awesome automotive manufacturers at the turn of the century. You should do a megaprojects on them and some of the automotive manufacturers in America at the turn of the century. We had some incredible and brilliant engineers before WWI and WW2 pushed them out.

[@troyclayton]

It should be pointed out that by "nuclear powered" you really mean "steam powered".

[@marthahawkinson-michau9611]

It’s a great point. I kept wondering how a steam powered airplane would work when he was talking about nuclear powered aircraft.

[@Bacopa68]

@@marthahawkinson-michau9611 I've never known how the nuclear plane was supposed to work unless it was something like the SLAM ramjet tested in Project Pluto. The fact that this engine sheds nuclear waste was considered a feature, not a bug. It was pretty much a doomsday device. Russia announced two years ago they were investigating such a thing, but I'm pretty sure it's a bluff.

[@thoughtengine]

@@marthahawkinson-michau9611 There was a book about a bomber powered that way. I still can't imagine how it carries enough water, but the steam was the reason the crew signed up, all steam fans to a one. They never got to take it out, though, as it was only to be used in the event of full nuclear war. When the call finally comes and isn't rescinded, the president is disturbed to realise he's just ordered a nuclear reactor into the air...

[@guardsmanom134]

There were two concept engines developed during the height of the Cold War. One was too heavy to fly, and shifting water-weight made it unstable in flight. The other was discarded after the SLAM, and later Wolfhound Bomber, were scrapped. These engines were considered "invaluable research and test beds for other applications than flight, as proposed." The only reactor to ever be used after the end of the program, was the water-based coolant design, and it was used on submarines. The fellas over at Dark Docs did a video all about it.

[@simonm1447]

@@Bacopa68 There was a test program with the B-36. One aircraft was converted to the NB-36H, it already flew with a working reactor on board, even if it was still powered by the normal piston engines. It would have not used steam, but it would have heated the air, using a sort of jet engine. The B-36 was used, because it was big enough to carry the heavy reactor. It was always escorted by a transport plane with paratroopers which would have parachuted to a crash site warning the population there, if it would have gone down and causing a nuclear inferno. However, the only thing which was shielded was the cockpit section, the reactor was in the bomb bay, and was hoisted down in a shaft in the ground after flights. It had no shielding to other directions, so it would have killed anybody sitting outside the cockpit during flight. It made 47 flights between 1955 and March 1957, with together 215 flight hours, 167 hours with the reactor on board, 89 hours from this with the reactor working.

[@johnniewoodard648]

I was always under the impression that the Savanna was a failure. The weight of the shielding and the cost of a crew trained to operate a nuclear power plant, made it impossible to carry enough cargo to make a profit.

[@jimtaylor294]

More to do with the design of the ship itself, which was a relatively weird half passenger ship and half cargo freighter affair. It's not unlikely that a Nuclear powered Container Ship or OBO Carrier will be revisited in the future; though the crew being armed and trained to repel boarders likely would be a requirement.

[@bsadewitz]

I've been curious about the history of nuclear-powered vehicles for some time, but I hadn't gotten around to digging anything up. And now, lo! Whistler and co. have dug for me!

[@xyrt99]

Simon powers his router via nuclear power in order to support all his channels. Allegedly.

[@sandybarnes887]

Ahh. I thought they were powered by magic spoon cereal and cocaine. Allegedly. Thx

[@mikieswart]

i always thought he’s got danny on a giant hamster wheel 24/7 to power it?

[@sandybarnes887]

Glass reinforced plastic? Oh. You mean fiberglass 😆

[@rickbarnes766]

Actually, glass-filled nylon is actually a real thing and considered different than fiberglass.

[@deadfreightwest5956]

As far as nuclear aircraft go, the atomic bomber the US was working on only created four things: An immense hangar in central Idaho (still in use), a really weird shielded locomotive for use as a tug for the bomber, and two atomic-powered jet engines. The latter three are on display at EBR-1, the first reactor to produce electricity in the world, and the first breeder reactor, and the first metal-cooled reactor. Quite a scoop! I highly recommend a visit. Also, the Craters of the Moon national park is nearby.

[@cynthiasimpson931]

The Studebaker/Packard company was definitely before your time, young man. My aunt had a Studebaker that she drove from the mid 1950s until it became impossible to repair in the mid 1970s. I was never old enough to drive her Studebaker, but I did get to drive the Chrysler she traded it in on in 1976. (My aunt told me about once when her Studebaker died at a stoplight. The person in the car behind her kept honking their horn, so she went back and said to them, "Would you like to go up and try starting my car while I sit back here and honk?" My aunt was a sweet lady, but she was pretty quick on her feet.)

[@KewneRain]

and I'm once again down the Simon Whistler rabbit hole. Thank you for producing such interesting videos.

[@gaius_enceladus]

And in "Today I Found Out" tomorrow, we find out about **Simon's** little internal nuclear generator that keeps him able to pump out awesome content to a bazillion channels! He **must** be nuclear-powered, eh Simon............ :)

[@RCAvhstape]

Studebaker and Packard were once big car makers in the US. I went to a car museum in LA once and they had some old Packard roadster type cars from the 30s that were beautiful.

[@Strider1954]

Simon, you should look up the Packard Merlin engine, esp as regards the P-51 fighter. I think you may have heard of that.

[@origionalwinja]

Never heard of Packard?? Simon... where have you been?? Packard was an American luxury car marque built by the Packard Motor car Company of Detroit, Michigan, United States. The first Packard automobiles were produced in 1899, and the last Detroit-built Packard in 1956, when they built the Packard Predictor, their last concept car. With sales dwindling by the 1950s, Packard merged with the much larger Studebaker Corporation in the hope of cutting its production costs. ... Though the company would continue to manufacture cars in South Bend, Indiana, until 1958, the final model produced on June 25, 1956, is considered the last true Packard . During world war 2 they produced the Merlin engine licensed from Rolls-Royce for the P-51 Mustang.

[@WormholeJim]

the untold story of how life in traffic went about in the prewar Fallout universe.

[@allansm555]

Excellent. Liked the subject.

[@elvi5_40theparakeet_gaming9]

Simon: *mentions that Uranium 235 is a extremely potent nuclear* Me, Spiffing Brit, and others in the Energy production fandom: *Deep fry meme mode activated* THORIUM IS THE BESTIUM.

[@peters7196]

Did you do a megaproject on fusion including JET and ITER? Fusion should solve a lot of issues mentioned here,,, if it ever reaches net power.

[@densealloy]

This reminds me of the Chrysler Turbine Car. Whenever a new tech came out it was supposed to "change the world". Jay Leno owns one and there's a vid here on KZbin. It is pretty cool when he starts it up. It is also a gorgeous bronze color.

[@sandybarnes887]

He has an amazing collection, don't pull up behind that car. 😆

[@dongiovanni4331]

I thought it was a Chrysler Turbine

[@densealloy]

@@dongiovanni4331 it was! I will edit my comment. Thanks. Have a great day.

[@DiscoveryBalochistan]

Simon got a buffet of different channels. Never go knowledge hungry.....😎👍✌️

[@Wolfennsteinn]

Never Been so early & Awesome video Simon

[@happilyham6769]

I think a video on the internet and how much content is uploaded to the world wide web every day would be cool. Also, look at just how massive server centres and data storage centres are and how many of them there are and how many we're going to need to build in order to store everything that is being created.

[@kitemanmusic]

I like how the reactor is placed well away from the driver in the Ford car. Is this telling us something? I was hoping for some technical info on small reactor designs. Someone below mentioned the Mars rovers. I thought they ran using solar panels, but imagine the minimal sunlight they get, often dust covered.

[@cheaterman49]

12:10 Whoa that's a fantastic point I never thought about! I guess it's just not cost-effective right now, and maybe never will given advances in battery technologies? Still, a transition tech would be great for cargo ships!

[@danechristmas6570]

I laughed watching Simon trying to hold back laughter and maintain a straight face while narrating

[@izyj.8679]

3:10 oh how I remember when that was under construction. I had to double take and sure enough it's the high 5 mix master, 635 and 75 interchange.

[@kennethross786]

I've been on the NS Savannah. It presently resides at the Patriots Park museum in Charleston, SC. Never heard of Studebaker-Packard? Who do you think built the "Packard-built Rolls-Royce Merlin" that powered the P-51? Studebaker was a "budget" automaker from the 1940s & 50s. The two merged in 1954.

[@sandybarnes887]

Do the recently destroyed Arecibo radio telescope please

[@BA-gn3qb]

Marty Mcfly got Parkinson's from that damn Flux Capacitor.

[@peterfmodel]

IN the end its all about economics, i remember the hype about flying cars back in the 1960's.

[@ilearnedsomethingnewtoday6193]

Paccard was the company that made the American-made Merlin engines during WWII. They are the parent company behind Kenworth and Peterbilt

[@gordonlumbert9861]

The US Air Force designed a Nuclear Powered Airplane. The final version was like a miniature SHEILD Helicarrier but none were ever produced.

[@patrickmcglonejr8163]

I think I heard about that one... DARPA was considering it up untill 2016 I think.

[@gordonlumbert9861]

@@patrickmcglonejr8163 I think it was killed in the 1980 or so. I read about it around 1980 in a journal my dad got for work. I think this was the aircraft. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_CL-1201 If there is enough information this may warrant a Side Projects Video.

[@brianfleury1084]

I toured the NS Savannah When it came to Portland, Maine in the early 1960s.

[@56RobertG]

I had a chance to go aboard the Savannah many years ago when it was at the Patriots Point Naval Museum in Charleston, South Carolina. Luxury was its standard. Not as large as normal cargo ships, it was quite a site to behold, almost blinding white. I would have loved to be a passenger sailing on her. she looked out of place beside an aircraft carrier, destroyer and submarine. She was later moved to Baltimore, Maryland.

[@uncleheinzdoes4834]

2:23 I feel you Simon, we all want flying cars and automated kitchens but sadly is not possible at the moment ... :(...something must have happened from the 50s onwards :D

[@TheEvilCommenter]

Good video 👍

[@ronriesinger7755]

The Chevrolet Corvette has been manufactured since the 1950’s and is largely made of fiberglass. Quite a few have been in crashes and many of those have been repaired and returned to the road.

[@CAP198462]

Nuclear powered planes were a thing too. The Soviet Union and the US tested them. They discovered the planes had one slight flaw, they were very efficient spreaders of radioactive contamination.

[@jareds3020]

How about doing a segment on thorium now that you brought it up. I think it needs to happen, and yes maybe in a car.

[@torqued666]

South Bend used to be a totally happening place. Bendix Aerospace in Mishawaka has numerous items in the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum in DC now.

[@mytech6779]

An atomic jet engine was developed. The problem was the air accelerated through it became radioactive. The design did not use steam or the associated heavy equipment. It was essentially a normal turbojet with the combustion chamber replaced with controllable fuel rods.

[@pr0xZen]

"Fingertips steering" = hydraulic or electric servo power steering. Gotta remember the era, power steering was still in its infancy, and driving a car without it can be quite a workout.

[@boeubanks7507]

Simon is wrong about one thing. Thorium is actually a more reactive nuclear fuel. It generates more neutrons per fission than Uranium or Plutonium. It was just discovered too late to make a dent in the western and Soviet nuclear fuel cycles. However, India is actually developing their internal nuclear reactor designs based on Thorium because India is home to some of the largest deposits of this fuel in the world.

[@vipondiu]

Nope. First, Thorium is really not a fuel, but a fertile material from which you can breed U-233 which is a fuel. It gives more neutrons per fission than U-235 (2.5 for U233 and 2.3 for U235 at least in the thermal spectrum) but not more than Pu239 (2.9 neutrons per fission average). I don't understand what he was referring to in 13:43, probably to chemical reactivity, but I think the advantage for safety in a nuclear powered vehicle using the Thorium-Uranium cycle would be far less accumulation of higher actinides like Plutonium, which is very poisonous chemically speaking. Anyway even when I'm the greatest fan and defender of nuclear energy the idea of fitting any type of nuclear reactor in a car and give the keys to the average driver seems to me utterly idiotic. And the Thorium-Uranium cycle was discovered during the manhattan project, at the same time as everything else, but it was discarded since it was not really practical for making weapons even with the good neutron economy of U-233 and the plentyfullness of Thorium. After that, breeders either using the Th-U cycle or the U-Pu cycle never materialized because uranium ore is cheap enough, and we are still trapped in that loop. India is a rare case with unusually low Uranium deposits and unusually large Thorium deposits, so it has always been a priority for them.

[@RCAvhstape]

I don't think car accidents would be the main danger; these power units would likely be nearly indestructible bricks of shielding material with the nuclear parts inside and be built to withstand all manner of collisions and fires. I think the bigger danger would be having hundreds of thousands of these things scatter around the world, in garages and junkyards, unaccounted for, and having grease monkeys and tinkerers cracking them open to play with them, resulting in orphaned radioactive sources popping up in random places causing lots of radiation injuries and deaths. This happens today with old X-ray machines and other hospital gear containing isotopes from time to time, and those are far less numerous and mostly tracked.

[@loupiscanis9449]

Thank you

[@cyborghobo9717]

Fission fragment reactors check out them . 1: invent them . 2: make them smaller. 3:? 4: install into car. 5 : profit.

[@Noah-zj3uu]

Reversing the flow of the Chicago river would be a cool video!

[@jayjones9125]

Simon I love your sarcasm. So cheeky!

[@grugnotice7746]

Moving the reactors around would be incredibly stupid. But having one buried in your backyard, providing electricity for both your home AND your electric vehicles...

[@IlluminatiBG]

The problem is not about moving, but cooling. Uranium source of energy is simply heat and heat is slow. Take for example electric oven, it takes microseconds to turn it off and on, but the heat remains for minutes. A nuclear car would probably accelerate from 0 to 100 in 10+ minutes and the heat produced after you stop the car must be vented out. A large ship is an example for moving reactor - it can take 10+ minutes to accelerate ship to its optimal speed and in case of emergency a ship is always near to a cooling liquid. Backyard reactor would only work if there is a river crossing next to your backyard.

[@grugnotice7746]

@@IlluminatiBG Look into modern reactor designs. Only the outdated tech we have been stuck with for the last 40+ years needs to be next to a river or ocean. Driving/flying vehicles were always going to have gen 4 reactors.

[@jareds3020]

Maybe not back yard, but certainly in a neighbourhood.

[@guardsmanom134]

Too prohibitive in price, even for the Thorium salt reactors. The reactor itself would be what's prohibitive in price, as the materials would be extremely expensive. You need materials which could withstand several thousands of degrees in thermal energy over a long period of time. Also, Thorium salts are costic when liquified. 4th gen reactors are a pipe dream. Time to find a plumber...

[@grugnotice7746]

@@guardsmanom134 Tell it to Kirk Sorenson. I'm not an expert, but he makes an extremely compelling case.

[@DaveFromColorado]

The Ford nucleon was the inspiration for the nuclear powered time machine circuits on the back of the dolorian in the "back to the future" movie series

[@Rangifulla]

With a Thorium molten salt reactor, hydrocarbon based fuels could be synthesised as a direct replacement for oil fuel.

[@4077Disc]

Simon, have you done any videos are the massive, ultra-modern greenhouse complexes in Spain and the Netherlands?

[@4077Disc]

*posted 24hrs before the Mega projects video* :)

[@christopherdurham1999]

Another major issue with nuclear-powered cars: nuclear reactors generally produce their energy as heat, and are not notably tolerant of frequent or repeated power level changes. Turning heat into motion tends to require large, heavy machinery (steam plants), and we've been unable to come up with a practical way to provide such a system for a modern car, notwithstanding early steam automobiles. There is also the matter of minimum critical mass; while one pound of U235 might be able to power a car for years, one pound of U235 cannot be made to fission.

[@randomhuman1965]

really wanted to see details of the reactors and power transfer systems.

[@cwj9202]

USS Enterprise CVN-65 and USS Bainbridge CGN-25 were nuclear powered USA Naval warships launched in 1961, which pre-dated the NS Savannah's launching date.

[@fdmackey3666]

Many Science Fiction writers of the 1950s through about the mid to late 1960s frequently referred to passenger and cargo vehicles, not to mention combat vehicles, as being powered by "micro piles" in their books and short stories....Yeah I'm that old.

[@thecrowcook]

makes a video about nuclear powered cars, still tells you how each car is powered individually

[@sylumgand]

Finger tip steering was a way to advertise the new wonderful invention of power steering. See back in the olden days, you didn't have hydraulic or electric motors to assist in steering.

[@zAlaska]

We had a 1950 Packard when I was a kid. The car that you give to your grandson. They hired somebody from GM to help them gain market share and promptly went bankrupt.

[@Sprocketboy1956]

It is always great to hear Simon mispronounce foreign words but even funnier when he puts the emphasis on the second syllable of Packard--one of the legendary manufacturers of luxury motorcars.

[@justsomepersononyoutube9271]

Sip simon

[@t5ruxlee210]

The opening picture features water cooling towers which are quite a stretch on a nuke topic . Reminds of Daily mail.

[@kevinconrad6156]

You need to do an episode on Studabaker now.

[@johnniewoodard648]

He never heard of Studebaker?

[@boeubanks7507]

Megaprojects idea - The quest for nuclear fusion reactors.