The US had a project of this type during the 50s

^

Exactly

that kind of weapon u could launch dozen of them from diff places on the planet and have them all convevge on a targe

They just deemed that " too dangerous and crazy"

They abandoned it during the early 60s because ICBMs became much more convenient

The words that mean nothing for russian

Denying out right that the US, which is still the most advanced military in the world, isn't doing any military research into this tech is a bit short-sighted imo

There was no need for such a weapon

those are two totally different concepts

"Nuklear roket you say? Too dangerous you say? Hold my vodka!"

The US may or may not be researching such a weapon

But the thing is that they don't need to

ICBMs are a hot commodity for any nuclear triad

imaging having 30 of those things sitting around in a bunker, they lauch them all one right a fter another and the missles just swarm a target

it's completely different from an ICBM

US missiles can reach any target on Earth in less than an hour

They really have nothing to worry about

@Andrew Popa 2.0 it is not about ICBMs any more
You are being way too short-sighted my friend

ICBMs aren't cruise missles

Trump has had an interest in the military industrial complex and he is R&Ding the Space Force so who knows lads
i put my bets on yes he is researching nuclear powered tech

you see an ICBM immediately

heat signature

you don't see a cruise missle

Well it is rather stupid to put so many resources into a weapon of this sorts

With a rocket that can fly for hundreds of years you can mine asssteroids, you can push enemy satellites off the earth orbit, you can spy on everyone without the fear of being caught

The potential is YOOGE

an ICBM can be targeted and destroyed if you can acquire during the ascent stage

but a cruise missle can't be targeted

But hey this is yet another reason why the EU shouldn't federalise nor should it even have a joint military

First of all, why have a single rocket which can carry say 25 megatons when you can have an ICBM with 10 nuckear warheads which can carry 2 to 3 megatons each

do NOT provoke the fuckers developping the nuke powered cruise missiles

This is the reason the US abandoned their project in the first place

a nuclear powered cruise missle makes an ICBM pretty useless

ICBMs are much more convenient

Also another point: a nuclear rocket can lift more into space

yes

cause the cruise missle can just circle almost indeffinately and swarm any ICBM on the ascent stage

Even if it has the same thrust, it can burn for hundreds of years, so it would eventually reach orbit

but @Uksio that's irrelevant as current research is looking into ways of making such things happen in space for better efficiency so as to be more fuel efficient

they would in effect enable a pre-emtive strike