French nuclear power plants

darwin-t · Oct 30, 2014

This sounds coordinated and I think it would be for surveillance more than anything else.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...each-airspace-above-French-nulcear-sites.html

4wd · Oct 31, 2014

Bernard Cazeneuve, the interior minister, also played down the risks, saying: “a system to neutralise drones is in place”, without explaining how it worked or why it wasn’t used.

I wonder how that works, can you protect from a falling drone by making it fall :lol:
If it was carrying a bomb or something toxic you could blow it up in mid-air maybe - good plan.

If the flight was after dark with no lights and at greater altitude they would have gone unnoticed.
I expect terrorists would never have thought of that. [oops]

smallman28 · Oct 31, 2014

Still seems a bit of an overly elaborate way to blow somewhere or something up if that was the intention.
Exactly how much explosive could a small size quad deliver,less than 1kg (maybe) assuming it gets to it's intended "target"
Drive straight at the place with a vehicle full of explosives would do far more damage surely?
People seem to forget that most of the quads etc available are still just boys toys and NOT a weapons or spying platform.

Buk · Oct 31, 2014

Now a single pilot flying a quadcopter near an airport or a bridge, might be one thing; but a concerted effort of multiple "drones" flying over nuclear plants would raise some real concern in my mind. What is more of a concern for me would be naive comments of the authorities in France. We have a protective system, but a six foot long drone flying over our heads wouldn't trigger a response from the system ? These guys/gals need to turn on a TV and watch some news or even some fictional serial television.

Not sure the concern is drones, whether multi-rotors or airplanes, but rather a failure to perceive a threat and react properly. Thinking no-response was a correct response is a lack of proactive thinking.

Having my neighbor shoot down my quadcopter as a I casually fly over his house a bit excessive, I'm not sure taking the same action when flying over my country's nuclear reactor is not the correct action.

N017RW · Oct 31, 2014

The U.S. reactors are published to withstand Jumbo Jet Liner collision.

Who knows how much above that they can really withstand.

That's a lot of drones unless "they" also have gotten a hold of tactical nukes in which case other targets would likely be selected, Don't ya think?

Buk · Oct 31, 2014

While I agree a small quadcopter won't take out a reactor, I still would wonder why a group of "drones" flew over nuclear plants. Google Earth is going to show you most of what a drone would see. Maybe an fraternity initiation.

ianwood · Oct 31, 2014

While fraternité is a French word, they don't have them like we do Stateside.

Back on topic, this news is odd and the pattern is worth investigating. However, your power plants had better be able to withstand anything a drone can deliver plus a whole lot more. They should be able to withstand 1,000 suicidal, explosive drones without as much as a hiccup.

Again, I think the media attention is because people get all hot and bothered when they hear the word drone.

StrikeTeam · Oct 31, 2014

N017RW said:
The U.S. reactors are published to withstand Jumbo Jet Liner collision.

Who knows how much above that they can really withstand.

That's a lot of drones unless "they" also have gotten a hold of tactical nukes in which case other targets would likely be selected, Don't ya think?

The cooling pools were radioactive fuel is spent are much more vulnerable..
http://books.google.com/books?id=jVl0AA ... ol&f=false

gword256 · Nov 1, 2014

StrikeTeam said:
N017RW said:

The U.S. reactors are published to withstand Jumbo Jet Liner collision.

Who knows how much above that they can really withstand.

That's a lot of drones unless "they" also have gotten a hold of tactical nukes in which case other targets would likely be selected, Don't ya think?

Click to expand...

The cooling pools were radioactive fuel is spent are much more vulnerable..
http://books.google.com/books?id=jVl0AA ... ol&f=false

Yes, the US-NRC made us better protect our Spent Fuel Pools a few years back. But that's from a concentrated terrorist attack. I can't envision where a singe drone could produce any sort of failure of safety systems. If you start throwing multiple drones at a power plant someone is bound to catch on to whats going on before things are out of hand.

As mentioned before the reactor containment can withstand a 747 strike, not to mention that is just one physical barrier, done be damned.

Attached: Because I think it's a cool picture.

Buk · Nov 1, 2014

While it would be prudent that the French power grid has built in redundancy, should that 747 strike a "hardened" power plant, how long would the inspection of even a "non-damaged" vessel take before being put back in service? Days, months, years? While for demonstration purposes a group has adversely affected the French people, without damaging the reactor.

In my mind, a concerted visit to numerous nuclear reactors by numerous drones is suspicious and potentially dangerous.

PsychopathRC · Nov 2, 2014

Another pilot giving us good rep. Not..

gword256 · Nov 2, 2014

Buk said:
While it would be prudent that the French power grid has built in redundancy, should that 747 strike a "hardened" power plant, how long would the inspection of even a "non-damaged" vessel take before being put back in service? Days, months, years?

We can look at Japan for an example. 3+ years after Fukushima and the undamaged reactors in the rest of the country still sit idle. Unfortunately when politics without science is involved things get complicated.