Rather than the Lead Cooled Fast Reactor?
What effects would this have had on the Cold War?
Or on the development of Nuclear Power worldwide?
Some background here, there was funding sufficient for the development of two reactor types. A key requirement was sufficient power density for use on board a submarine. This meant only a "PWR" or either a Lead Cooled or Sodium Cooled liquid metal fast reactor were options. When the options were narrowed down to the PWR & one of the liquid metal fast reactor designs the Lead Cooled design won out due to concerns about the potential for Water-Sodium fires (ooc: our p.o.d).
The U.S.S Nautilus (SSN-571) employed the PWR & suffered a hair-raising incident during trials due to a stuck valve. By contrast the U.S.S Seawolf (SSN-575) employed the Lead Cooled design & was found to have acceptable performance.
What effects would this have had on the Cold War?
Or on the development of Nuclear Power worldwide?
Some background here, there was funding sufficient for the development of two reactor types. A key requirement was sufficient power density for use on board a submarine. This meant only a "PWR" or either a Lead Cooled or Sodium Cooled liquid metal fast reactor were options. When the options were narrowed down to the PWR & one of the liquid metal fast reactor designs the Lead Cooled design won out due to concerns about the potential for Water-Sodium fires (ooc: our p.o.d).
The U.S.S Nautilus (SSN-571) employed the PWR & suffered a hair-raising incident during trials due to a stuck valve. By contrast the U.S.S Seawolf (SSN-575) employed the Lead Cooled design & was found to have acceptable performance.