Military Projects Cancelled by the End of the Cold War

Yep. The reactor has to stay up and running at all times; if it stops even a split second, the metal cools and game over. New reactor please. Pretty sure it's one of the reasons why the crew was entirely made of officers.

True, but their combination of high speed, high hull strength, high manouverability and dive depth forced NATO to rush a new generation of ASW torpedoes, cause there was a real fear of the current ones not being able to kill an Alfa...
Huh I thought the cook was enlisted and there were a few warrants. May have varied based on time

The Alfa was supposed to be the first of a new gen of fast submarines, there was a bigger variant with 650mm Torpedo Tubes planned, as well as an SSBN variant that could defend itself against SSN's and thus not need bastions, though I'm fairly sure they were cancelled well before the end of the cold war
 

SsgtC

Banned
True, but their combination of high speed, high hull strength, high manouverability and dive depth forced NATO to rush a new generation of ASW torpedoes, cause there was a real fear of the current ones not being able to kill an Alfa...

Agreed. The Alfas led directly to the Mk48 ADCAP.
 
Yep. The reactor has to stay up and running at all times; if it stops even a split second, the metal cools and game over. New reactor please. Pretty sure it's one of the reasons why the crew was entirely made of officers.
That's a bit of an exaggeration; it's going to take some time for the lead to cool just because of the heat of transition. But it does make it more...troublesome than good old PWRs in that regard, yes.
 
Yep. The reactor has to stay up and running at all times; if it stops even a split second, the metal cools and game over. New reactor please. Pretty sure it's one of the reasons why the crew was entirely made of officers.
That's not strictly true; the designated home port for the 705s was equipped with shore steam generating plant that the boats could be plugged into when alongside to keep the coolant liquid. The problem was that, with the USSR being the USSR, it wasn't very reliable, so the reactor plant normally had to be kept critical. That in turn hurt the boat's reliability.

As an aside, the 705s were fast, but not especially deep diving - only 350 metres, similar to other contemporary submarines. They made a similar tradeoff to the LOS ANGELES class: lightening the hull allowed them to carry a bigger, more powerful reactor and therefore go faster.
 
Bumping this cuz I like this thread.

I remember reading up that the US planned to make some tank that's like the T-14 yet has a lower profile yet it wasn't able to by the time the USSR collapsed.
 
There was also a proposal to develop a reusable variant of Energia. The main rocket and the booster rockets would each be fitted with wings and landing gear so they could fly back to Earth and land on a runway.

[SNIP]
Makes me wonder if something like that in operation might not have prompted someone in the West to have attempted similar like the ESA's Liquid Fly-Back Booster (LFBB) or their later Adeline reusable rocket first-stage proposals. Potentially saves you money on the launch costs at the expense of reduced payload but I'd be interested to see what something like that could do.


If the Cold War do not end, Energiya could have payloads aplenty (albeit cost would be sky hight, pun intended)

http://www.astronautix.com/e/energia.html

[SNIP]
Oh that is nice. :)
 
I remember reading up that the US planned to make some tank that's like the T-14 yet has a lower profile yet it wasn't able to by the time the USSR collapsed.

You might be thinking of the M1 Tank Test Bed. It was an Abrams with an unmanned turret; the 3-man crew (commander, gunner, driver) sat in an armored capsule inside of the tank's hull. It used the same M256 gun as the regular Abrams, but with an autoloader for the munitions. In a continued Cold War, an Abrams variant with an unmanned turret could have entered service in the early 2000s. Other NATO countries may have followed suit with similar designs for the replacements for the Challenger 2, Leopard 2, Leclerc, etc.
 
As far as I can tell, the Common Heavy Platform designed by the new KMW-Nexter conglomerate (to replace both the Leopard 2 and Leclerc) has an unmanned turret with an autoloader. So, in a way, that's where they're heading.
 
More survival for the crew, smaller, today sensors turn it realistic - a thing that the 80's and 90's can't get well. Bonus, can go for bigger gun easier. Yep, T-14 is the first of the new generation.
 
You might be thinking of the M1 Tank Test Bed. It was an Abrams with an unmanned turret; the 3-man crew (commander, gunner, driver) sat in an armored capsule inside of the tank's hull. It used the same M256 gun as the regular Abrams, but with an autoloader for the munitions. In a continued Cold War, an Abrams variant with an unmanned turret could have entered service in the early 2000s. Other NATO countries may have followed suit with similar designs for the replacements for the Challenger 2, Leopard 2, Leclerc, etc.
Yep, that's the one I was talking about earlier, though I didn't remember the name at the time but I knew it existed at one point before the end of the Cold War.
 
Top