Coincidentally I was thinking about writing a POD about the Chernobyl disaster happening at one of the other four RBMK plants. Probably not going to make it now, but having it happen at Leningrad is an interesting POD since a disaster at the Leningrad station is the worst possible of the five RBMK stations, at least from the point of view of the population size affected (though a disaster at Ignalina would have possibly even worse long term political consequences). Of course, political consequences would be severe here too, what with the large chances of areas in Finland (possibly even in Sweden, considering their more stringent restrictions) being declared uninhabitable. For a start, I imagine Finland would be as hostile against Russia as most of their other neighbors.
If the Leningrad plant goes, things are much much worse. There will be large numbers of deaths quickly, as the number of folks needing to be evacuated is much larger so more exposure, more panic etc. The radioactive cloud WILL make things unpleasant for Finland and Sweden for sure much more so than OTL, possibly other parts of Western Europe depending on the winds. Making part or even all of Leningrad a closed zone, like the area around Chernobyl will be a disaster for the USSR - housing millions overnight, losing all the industry etc.
Depends of course on the wind direction and even more importantly on where it rains: this is where the worst affected long term areas were in OTL. If the claim that clouds heading from Chernobyl to Moscow were seeded to prevent the capital from being affected, the same could certainly be expected here.
Well, for one thing Finland will be able to see the explosion and the big fire. Helsinki will call Moscow the same day as the incident instead of Sweden Calling two Days after the event. The Finnish president might actually know something is seriously wrong Before the Russian Premier.
I don't think this would be possible: the fire would not be visible from Finland. But it's true that the disaster will be detected immediately, especially if the wind is blowing in Finland's direction:
one of their nuclear plants (which would probably not last long in this scenario) is very close to the Leningrad plant.
Wasn't it mentioned even in the HBO's Chernobyl that the safety test was proposed to the management of the Leningrad
Atleast HBO didn't jump into the train for the insane asylum like the Russians did. I read that the Russian-made Chernobyl series, sponsored by the Russian government will explore the theory that agent(s) of the CIA was present at Chernobyl when the accident happened.After all, there has been complaints how the HBO's Chernobyl is mean, dishonest and full of Russophobia.
I'd say we should wait until such a movie is actually completed. It wouldn't be the first time that some sensational claims about Russia later turns out to h
As for the accusations against the series, they're at least partially correct. The portrayal of the Soviet leadership would fit more in 1936 than in 1986, for example and the portrayal of some key figures is substantially distorted.
The HBO show didn't claim that nuclear reactors can explode like a nuclear bomb. I definitely agree that there are a lot of falsehoods out there, but that is not one that the show repeated.
They claimed that if the molten fuel reached the flooded basement, it would cause a four megaton explosion - more than that of an average thermonuclear bomb. This is not even close to being possible.
AFAIK, Leningrad’s plant and the plant had a more competent personnel than Chernobyl and, IIRC, reactor 4 on Chernobyl had constructive differences from the 1st generation of the RBMK 1000 installed in Leningrad and 2 first blocks of Chernobyl.
Could you elaborate? I've read elsewhere that the design faults applied to all reactors. In fact, the power surge after pressing SCRAM was discovered at Ignalina in 1981