Chernobyl on HBO

[Valkorado]

Caught the first episode of this docudrama last night.  This is a great show - - the writing, acting, sets, etc. are TOP NOTCH.  Very engrossing and scary as hell.  Highly recommended!   

[Psychotic Bovine]

I am going to get HBO just for this show.  Then cancel after it's over.  I have been fascinated with Chernobyl for years.

[Valkorado]

I am going to get HBO just for this show.  Then cancel after it's over.  I have been fascinated with Chernobyl for years.

Me too.  PM Serk, he may know of other avenues.     No matter how you see it, it's well worth watching.  Supposed to be five episodes in the series, I can't wait for the next one!

[..]

Why do Russkies wear 2 pairs of underpants?

Otherwise - Yernobyl Fallout.

[Jopson]

I watched it,
It was superb.
Anybody else become terrified of nuclear radiation after spending time on google after the show?

[Oss]

I live 10 miles south and a mile east from Indian Point (1,2,3 reactors) about a mile before the evacuation zone ends.

But the prevailing winds usually blow to the northeast in this part of the country
(except when they don't     )

It is due to be decommissioned soon but that doesn't mean there wont be radiation concerns for a few thousand years and it remains a target for loonies.

[DirtyDan]

Chernobyl........

https://www.leafly.com/hybrid/chernobyl

Dan

[..]

Chernobyl........

https://www.leafly.com/hybrid/chernobyl

Dan

Very informative. 

[Psychotic Bovine]

Just watched the first episode On Demand.  For some reason, it was free without a subscription.
Appears to be factually accurate with what I have learned of the accident.
I imagine I am going to have to subscribe to HBO for a bit.
Even after seeing this, I still want to visit Pripyat.  Unfortunately, no one wants to join me.

[..]

Just watched episode 2. 

One of the best produced docudramas I have seen in a loooong time.

[carolinarider09]

I have heard the ads for the series but, in general, I am skeptical of HBO documentaries or docs-dramas.

Having worked in the commercial nuclear field for 40 some years I have found very few movies or documentaries that truly reflect the benefits and supposed hazards associated with commercial nuclear power in the United States. 

As a licensed operator I, along with all station personnel, were briefed on the accident at Chernobyl (I forget how long after the event happened, the Soviet Union is not very forth coming about "notable" events that occurred within its territories) but we were briefed.   

A summary of what happened and why (and this summary is in line with what we were told after the event) can be found here.

https://atomicinsights.com/accident-at-chernobyl-caused-explosion/

I post this because it is important, especially today, that we understand commercial nuclear power and its benefits to our nation.  And understand how different this Soviet design at Chernobyl is/was from the standard commercial nuclear power plants used in the US.

We were also briefed on other industry events because it is important to learn from others mistakes.  For instance I remember the briefing on the Deepwater Horizon explosion.  What most don't know is that the root cause of the event was the blowout preventer failed to close due to poor maintenance activities. This device has two independent systems (known as redundant backups)  One had a bad battery and one had a failed switch.  The battery failure was known but no one thought it was important enough to have it immediately corrected since it had a backup.

Regarding comments about waste from commercial nuclear power plants  (standard PWRs and BWRs) this article describes the waste from commercial nuclear power and is fairly accurate.

https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-wastes/radioactive-waste-management.aspx

[Valkorado]

I have heard the ads for the series but, in general, I am skeptical of HBO documentaries or docs-dramas.

Having worked in the commercial nuclear field for 40 some years I have found very few movies or documentaries that truly reflect the benefits and supposed hazards associated with commercial nuclear power in the United States. 

As a licensed operator I, along with all station personnel, were briefed on the accident at Chernobyl (I forget how long after the event happened, the Soviet Union is not very forth coming about "notable" events that occurred within its territories) but we were briefed.   

A summary of what happened and why (and this summary is in line with what we were told after the event) can be found here.

https://atomicinsights.com/accident-at-chernobyl-caused-explosion/

I post this because it is important, especially today, that we understand commercial nuclear power and its benefits to our nation.  And understand how different this Soviet design at Chernobyl is/was from the standard commercial nuclear power plants used in the US.

We were also briefed on other industry events because it is important to learn from others mistakes.  For instance I remember the briefing on the Deepwater Horizon explosion.  What most don't know is that the root cause of the event was the blowout preventer failed to close due to poor maintenance activities. This device has two independent systems (known as redundant backups)  One had a bad battery and one had a failed switch.  The battery failure was known but no one thought it was important enough to have it immediately corrected since it had a backup.

Regarding comments about waste from commercial nuclear power plants  (standard PWRs and BWRs) this article describes the waste from commercial nuclear power and is fairly accurate.

https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-wastes/radioactive-waste-management.aspx

I'm surprised given your background that you would not be drawn to watch at least the premiere episode and then decide if it is striving for historical accuracy or just a bunch of hype.  It seems the scenarios you linked to are portrayed fairly accurately.  One of the big issues was the Russian government's lack of disclosure to its own people and the international community.  Yes, there is some dramatization but the fact that the event was scary as hell can not be undermined.

Understood that US technology is far superior, and I am generally in favor of nuclear power.

[carolinarider09]

Valkorado,

As I said we were briefed on the events and identified causes because its what we do.  I have been disappointed many times by so called documentaries.  In some cases being very factual but with just one little untruth that is powerful. 

So, it is rare that I watch them because they have a history of being politicized.  Thats the reason for my post. 

Treat it as what it is, entertainment. 

[..]

Valkorado,

As I said we were briefed on the events and identified causes because its what we do.  I have been disappointed many times by so called documentaries.  In some cases being very factual but with just one little untruth that is powerful. 

So, it is rare that I watch them because they have a history of being politicized.  Thats the reason for my post. 

Treat it as what it is, entertainment. 

The link you posted could have been used as a primer for the opening episodes.

https://atomicinsights.com/accident-at-chernobyl-caused-explosion/

[hubcapsc]

I am generally in favor of nuclear power.

Me too. Like most people, I only have general knowledge of the industry. There's a kind
of reactor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor) whose failure mode is
to shutdown, rather than run away or blow up or anything. I'd think that standardized
just-alike ones of these could be safely fielded for commercial power, I wonder if the
reasons they are not are political, technical or what...

-Mike

[Savago]

Within the same line (i.e. historical events + russians doing crazy stuff), there is this movie 'K-19: The WidowMaker'.

Link: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0267626/

Tells the story of Russia's first nuclear submarine and how its maiden journey got royally wrong.

Main roles are played by Harrison Ford and Liam Neeson.

The sacrifice the crew had to do to stop a nuclear disaster is pretty insane.

[Valkorado]

I am generally in favor of nuclear power.

Me too. Like most people, I only have general knowledge of the industry. There's a kind
of reactor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor) whose failure mode is
to shutdown, rather than run away or blow up or anything. I'd think that standardized
just-alike ones of these could be safely fielded for commercial power, I wonder if the
reasons they are not are political, technical or what...

-Mike

And hydrogen.   Such promise there,  too.   In the 70s the Billings Corporation ran a fleet of vehicles on hydrogen.   The engines performed flawlessly,  without producing the typical carbon deposits.  Also, technologies were developed that basically nullified the explosive potential, a gel if I remember correctly.  Clean.   Water vapor coming out the exhaust.   Powerful.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_E._Billings

[scooperhsd]

I'm not going to say the US nuclear industry is perfect, but it is lots more perfect than the Saviets / Russian counterpart.

Also consider that at least a significant number of US civilian nuclear engineers are Navy trained - all our aircraft carriers and submarines are nuclear powered. And it's very tough to get into / complete the program. It's one reason why you will find all Naval academy and most NROTC scholarship grads have engineering calculus and physics coursework, and most graduates are in engineering / hard science degrees.

[carolinarider09]

I'm not going to say the US nuclear industry is perfect, but it is lots more perfect than the Saviets / Russian counterpart.

Also consider that at least a significant number of US civilian nuclear engineers are Navy trained - all our aircraft carriers and submarines are nuclear powered. And it's very tough to get into / complete the program. It's one reason why you will find all Naval academy and most NROTC scholarship grads have engineering calculus and physics coursework, and most graduates are in engineering / hard science degrees.

You are correct its not perfect but the safety record of the US commercial nuclear power industry is better than any other similar organization in the US and probably the world.

I don't know about the nuclear engineers but the majority of licensed operators are/were ex navy nuclear enlisted personnel (at least for the 40 years I worked in the industry). 

The personnel that operate the station (shift supervisor, board operators) are all licensed by the NRC.  There are two licenses, a Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) and a Reactor Operator (RO). You can become an Instant SRO (that is you do not have to have the an RO license first) but that is rare and  only done for the first round of licenses while the plant is being built.  The tests are written and oral (use to be seven hour written test and then a multi-hour oral/walk down of the facility).  Licensing is done by the NRC and they conduct the written and oral exams. 

I was a licensed SRO at two facilities.  Here is the interesting part.  The Shift Supervisor (sometimes called the Shift Manager) is the person in charge of the unit.  He is always an SRO.  He makes all decisions regarding plant operations, starting, stopping of maintenance activies ect. 

While he does report to a "manager" while he is on shift/watch he is solely responsible for safe plant operations.   Yes he can be relieved but only by someone who is equally qualified (i.e. qualified SRO with current training).  Otherwise he is the person solely responsible for safe plant operations.  Safety being the key word. 

I would say the civilian nuclear program is comparable to the Navy nuclear power training program.  The major difference being that in the Navy's program, after nuclear power school you go to a "prototype" for training.  Its a real navy nuclear power plant but not at sea.  In the civilian nuclear power program, after classroom training, you get training in a Simulator which has the same controls and layout as the plant you are qualified/being licensed on. 

The simulators are very realistic.  I remember once the Operations Manager was in our simulator observing some training.  He got up and walked around back of the control board to get some coffee from the kitchen.  But there was no kitchen, he forgot he was in the simulator.  We work real hard to make the realistic. 

In the navy, once you complete the classroom and prototype training you get sent to the "fleet" and have to do it over again. 

Just an anecdote:  I was at a book signing with Richard Marcinko (Seal Team Six)  to get one of his books signed.  Most of the time, the Authors just sign the book, maybe they might ask your name but, Marcinko asked what I did for a living.  I told him I worked in commercial nuclear power.  His autograph was as follows "Keep the glow and pass onto others all you know).  That was in 1982 or 83.  I still remember it. 

I apologize for the long post, I am passionate about some things.  But information is important to be passed on. 

[Valkorado]

Still, granted that our nuclear program is what it is,  Chernobyl happened and it sucked in a big way.   That said,  it has been portrayed quite accurately on the show.   For an entertaining docudrama.

[Jess from VA]

I don't have an engineering or nuke background, other than five years in Strategic Air Command.

I got a complete tour of the first operational missile silo.

We were prepared to deliver a good number of nuke packages to the soviets free of charge.

I have to say, sitting down in the launch control facilty below ground with the big blast door was impressive, and unsettling.

[DirtyDan]

I don't have an engineering or nuke background, other than five years in Strategic Air Command.

I got a complete tour of the first operational missile silo.

We were prepared to deliver a good number of nuke packages to the soviets free of charge.

I have to say, sitting down in the launch control facilty below ground with the big blast door was impressive, and unsettling.

Reminds me of a minute man/ command center in South Dakota

Dan

[Jess from VA]

I'm not sure where those are, just copy-paste pics.

They're all pretty similar (or they were).

The one I toured was at Malmstrom AFB MT, and actually they are not on base but spread out all over out in the boonies (see how many in the link).  In the dead of Winter.  They loaned me a big arctic parka as my regular blue duty jacket was not cutting it.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/341st_Missile_Wing_LGM-30_Minuteman_Missile_Launch_Sites

Why not Minot?  Freezin's the reason.

What's the state tree of North Dakota?   Telephone pole.

[carolinarider09]

I don't have an engineering or nuke background, other than five years in Strategic Air Command.

I got a complete tour of the first operational missile silo.

We were prepared to deliver a good number of nuke packages to the soviets free of charge.

I have to say, sitting down in the launch control facilty below ground with the big blast door was impressive, and unsettling.

Just some interesting notes from my time on an FBM (SSBN-599).  

You go forward to the torpedo room and see six torpedo tubes, two with signs.  One says "Warning Warshot Loaded" the other says "Egg shot Loaded".  To keep eggs fresh longer, they were stored in the torpedo tube (surrounded by cooler water).

There is not much to do exercise wise on a sub so we had a rowing machine in the Missile Compartment. When we had enough qualified watch standers we worked 6 on and 12 off (except for field days and drills).  So, after my watch I would change into my shorts and t-shirt and go row surrounded by the missile tubes.  It was just what you did.  Nothing unusual about it.

Some folks would jog around the missile compartment, not many though.  

Before we went to sea, on patrol (FBMs had two crews, blue and gold and they were changed after each deployment) we would have to check out the boat and they go to sea for sort of "sea trials" (at least that's what I remember).  Anyway during these trials we would do lots of drills.  Working six on and 12 off was ok, but I got tired of getting out of my rack and standing around during the drills when I was not directly needed so one time, during what I thought was a drill (they don't really advertise a reactor scram as a drill when they really scram the reactor during the drill) I hear "Flooding in the Machinery Space".  I thought ok, thats a new one.  They I heard "Flooding in the Missile Compartment".  Moving forward I thought, someone thought this one out.  Then I heard water running down the stairs in the crew quarters.  It was at that time I became fully away that the "drill" was not progressing as excepted.  Diesel snorkel valve stuck open (suppose to close when it sense water) and flooded the main ventilation system.  

The battery compartment is located in the lower level of crew's berthing.  One hatch to access.  The salt water is not good when mixed with battery acid.  Even thought the hatch was sealed (closed) you never know.  In about 30 seconds there were at least three or four mattresses over the hatch with some of my shipmates sitting on them for insurance.  

You rarely think, here I am in a 300 foot steel tube 30 feet in diameter with X number of nuclear missiles loaded at X number of feet below the surface.  Its just what you did.  I am glad I got the chance to serve.  

[Valkorado]

Cool story!   And thank you for your service.

[Jess from VA]

You rarely think, here I am in a 300 foot steel tube 30 feet in diameter with X number of nuclear missiles loaded at X number of feet below the surface.  Its just what you did.

I'm not completely claustrophobic, but I really don't like small spaces (that I can't leave).

The LCF missile rooms were small, but I was only in there for about 30 minutes.

The regular crew members did 24hr shifts (then had a few days off).

You Blue and Gold guys did months on end.

I love the water, and boats... that stay on the surface.