Chernobyl

[Kapitan]

Chernobyl a place we are likely all familiar with and most of us know the consequences of what happened that day in April 1986.

HBO in partnership with sky have launched a mini series based on the events of the disaster, which to this day remains the worst nuclear accident in history (followed very closely by Fukushima)

So far i am only on episode 2 of 5 but my first impressions are very good they really have done well in the special effects and detail regarding the events so far, i do have some niggling questions which il write down later once i have watched all 5 episodes but for now this is certainly one interesting show.

The location for the filming is a place i have actually been to as well the Ignalina nuclear plant in Lithuania, so both areas are surprisingly familiar to me.

As you guys are aware i have been to Chernobyl myself back in 2017 (i cant find the original post i made ) but here are the pictures i took of my trip into the dead zone. (and yes i want to go back)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/albums/72157679461271885

[Eichhörnchen]

Great post that was too, Kapitan...

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2459963&postcount=1

[Platapus]

We studied that in my Lit class.


Chernobyl Kinsmen by William Shakespeare.

[Jimbuna]

You'll enjoy the series Blair, I certainly did but I'll refrain from adding any spoilers which will become obvioualy apparent as you progress through the series.

[STEED]

Not gone down well in Russia.

https://metro.co.uk/2019/06/07/russia-making-chernobyl-drama-series-blames-disaster-us-9864778/

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-48559289

[Rhodes]

The series is wonderful!

Already saw it all and it is (for me) very well made. Some episodes are quite a punch in the stomach and when it ends, one just want to see next one.



A funny picture that I saw about the this series was that it was HBO atonement for and to the fans of GOT.

[Commander Wallace]

This really is a great series in an eerie kind of way. I remember seeing a documentary of the dome that was produced to cover the destroyed reactor.





Great pictures and writing Blair, as usual. :Kaleun_Thumbs_Up:

[Bilge_Rat]

yes, great show, good writing, acting, production. Currently the no. 1 show of all time on IMDB.

Hard to watch, but impossible to look away. I have already watched it twice and am watching it a third time with my GF. There are so many details, you have to watch it multiple times to catch all of them.

As to how the Russians feel about it, you can google many articles that focus on the niggling little mistake, but I like this article from a Russian ex-pat that says the show really nails what it was like to be a Russian in 1986:

I am always wary of watching Western-made TV and film dramas set in Russia with my Russian husband, but I need not have worried: Harris, Skarsgård, and Watson deliver masterfully nuanced performances that show that, they too have done their homework. “Chernobyl's” production team, led by designer Luke Hall, has faithfully recreated both Chernobyl and Pripyat with astonishing accuracy on 158 sets and on location in Ignalina in Lithuania. Every tiny detail, from the white stenciled letters on the heavy metal plant doors, to Legasov's ill-fitting glasses, and the rickety dish drainer in Lyudmilla Ignatenko's Pripyat kitchen are absolutely true to the period, as are the costumes designed by Odile Dicks-Mireaux, who commented, "I hate polyester, but actually, polyester reigns in this show…” A team of Lithuanian designers researched Russian patterns for work and medical uniforms, and the civilian clothes come from Belarus Film Studios. It is certainly in no small measure thanks to the entire “Chernobyl” team that my Russian husband — and tens of thousands of his compatriots — are currently raving about “Chernobyl.”

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/05/18/the-heroic-bitter-land-of-chernobyl-a65639

[Eichhörnchen]

Is this likely to come out on DVD?

[u crank]

Excellent series. Very well done. Grim story, depressing really but it captures the moment so well. Highly recomended. :up:

[Torvald Von Mansee]

None of you saw this show. You are mistaken.

[Rhodes]

None of you saw this show. You are mistaken.


Ah Kamarade, in Soviet Russia, show watches you! :D

[Jimbuna]

Excellent series. Very well done. Grim story, depressing really but it captures the moment so well. Highly recomended. :up:

Just don't go picking up any pieces of debris :03:

[mapuc]

According to the Danish news here, the series have gone political in Russia.

The Russian have made some kind of counter-attack

(if I heard correct) they said Russian authorities claimed an agent from the west was behind it.

Markus

[Dowly]

Anatoly Dyatlov's interview:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8__v9EswN4


This channel's got a lot of footage filmed at Chernobyl during various times of the clean up:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCd5ODiYRt4y5G8iscMZtIeQ/featured

[u crank]

Just don't go picking up any pieces of debris :03:

Indeed. It's not 3 Roentgen it is 15000. :o

[Kapitan]

I have just watched the last episode im actually surprised this was a very good series, im impressed about the level of detail and the graphic nature of the costumes and make up.

Im glad they did put footage and description of Legasov at the end, and im glad they noted the Yedemchuk scientist was basically someone who was created in representation of all the scientist that took part.

Stellan Skasgard played a very good role too of course we know him more for Konavalovs captain Tupolev in HFRO.

Over all i am not disappointing in the series.

Do i want to go back and see more ? well all i am going to say is watch this space.

[Subnuts]

:huh: :dead:https://j.gifs.com/P7MQRy.gif

[Skybird]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48580177

[Niume]

Most of the filming sites where actually in Lithuania.

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Ah Kamarade, in Soviet Russia, show watches you! :D

You didn't see pieces of show on the ground, comrade.

*vomits onto desk*

[Kapitan]

It wasn’t all that bad I’ve got three arms now since going to Chernobyl

[ikalugin]

The TV series were entertaining, but sadly they are almost (ie excluding creative flare and invention) are based on the..... Soviet prosecutor office narrative which essentially scapegoated (and demonised) the operators despite witness testimony and evidence (ie computer logs) to the contrary.


For example Dyatlov did not just see graphite blocks during the night, he correctly identified them and cautioned other people about them. As such while I would suggest watching the series for entertainment value I would caution against taking it as a serious historical source, especially considering the maker's political bias and factual errors they made during production.

[Reece]

@Subnuts, what show is that from? I assume it's not the TV series Chernobyl :hmmm:

[Dowly]

@Subnuts, what show is that from? I assume it's not the TV series Chernobyl :hmmm:It is from the HBO show:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3D9BFR7hgw

[Dmitry Markov]

ikalugin, I agree totally and would like to add that there are lot of scenes that show absolutely nonscense: when Scherbina tells Legasov that he can order to drop him out of helicopter (facepalm), when minister of coal industry talks with miners from Tula in company of riflemen (facepalm), when a wife adresses to her husband - "Vasiliy" and he calls her "Ludmila" - didn't consultants tell the staff that Russians and Ukrainians do not act like that in common life? We've got diminutives and they are easier to pronounce for foreigners than full names ;-) Overdose of the word "Tovarisch" - it was very official in fact and is used only by military personnel or party personnel or by people during official events - meetings, conferences,
I'd recommend to watch documentary Angels of Chernobyl ( Ангелы Чернобыля) - this will give a better picture of what those people looked like - much better than pictured in HBO series. Link is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFZFl0mbQzI

Unfortunately It's in Russian only - but you can compare real videos - to HBO series.

[Dowly]

Apart from making Dyatlov the "incompetent bad guy", I really hated how little they concentrated on the roof clearing operation.

[Dmitry Markov]

Dowly, a very thorough article on roof cleaning : https://www.novayagazeta.ru/articles/2019/06/05/80786-chernobylskiy-spetsnaz

It's in Russian but you can use machine translation. I do think roof cleaning operation is underrated by the series - it was very forethought and complex operation and all those who went there did it freewillingly and were and are very brave people both soldiers and officers.

[Dowly]

There is also this short documentary about the operation with footage recorded at the time:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jV45AFCwcUc

[Catfish]

Half-life and half truths..

" [...]The reactor had no "design flaws." The reactors of the 60s and 70s were optimized for performance. Safety was not a central issue (as with the Fukushima reactors, also a product of that time). The Russian designers were well aware of the weaknesses of the design, the operating rules considered this accordingly. But this only works with a good safety culture, and the latter was missing completely.
In the Leningrad 1 nuclear power plant 1974, the first year of operation with a "Chernobyl type reactor", several serious problems occurred. Among other things, a partial meltdown occurred with partial destruction of the reactor core. Three employees died. And in 1982 a meltdown also occurred in Block 2 of Chernobyl. In both cases, significant amounts of radioactive substances were released as the reactors had no containment. Lessons were barely learned; on the contrary, everything was kept top secret. [...] "

[Dmitry Markov]

Dowly, the film You've posted a link to is very close to "my" article.

[u crank]

Apart from making Dyatlov the "incompetent bad guy", I really hated how little they concentrated on the roof clearing operation.

I agree. The narrative about the 'biorobots' deserved a lot more attention. It was a significant and very dangerous part of the story. Quite a while ago I watched some pretty compeling documentaries about them. Cannot imagine doing that. On the other hand I thought showing the guys shooting dogs was unnessasary and a waste of time.

As far as Dyatlov being the bad guy....all film makers have to have a bad guy. It's part of their code.

[Catfish]

edit found a better description here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

as a summary, the reactor had bneen held in an in-betwen state for too long (hours, literally), which rendered several security measures impossible. Also some moderators (graphite cylinder bundles to subdue the reaction) had been retracted manually. Maybe this is not a problem but .. why did they do that.

Imho this describes best what lead to the catastrophe (excerpt from above link):

" [...] At 1:23:04 a.m., the test began. Four of the main circulating pumps (MCP) were active (of the eight total, six are normally active under regular operation). The steam to the turbines was shut off, beginning a run-down of the turbine generator. The diesel generators started and sequentially picked up loads; the generators were to have completely picked up the MCPs' power needs by 01:23:43. In the interim, the power for the MCPs was to be supplied by the turbine generator as it coasted down. As the momentum of the turbine generator decreased, so did the power it produced for the pumps. The water flow rate decreased, leading to increased formation of steam voids (bubbles) in the core.

Unlike western light-water reactors, the RBMK had a positive void coefficient of reactivity at low power levels, meaning that when water began to boil and produce voids in the coolant, the nuclear chain reaction increased instead of decreasing. Given this characteristic, the No. 4 RBMK reactor operation was now at risk of spiraling into a positive feedback loop, in which the formation of steam voids would reduce the ability of the liquid water coolant to absorb neutrons, increasing the reactor's power output, causing yet more water to flash into steam, and yielding a further power increase. Throughout most of the experiment the automatic control system successfully counteracted this positive feedback, inserting control rods into the reactor core to limit the power rise. However, this system had control of only 12 rods, as nearly all the others had been manually retracted.
At 1:23:40, as recorded by the SKALA centralized control system, a SCRAM (emergency shutdown) of the reactor was initiated. The SCRAM was started when the EPS-5 button (also known as the AZ-5 button) of the reactor emergency protection system was pressed: this engaged the drive mechanism on all control rods to fully insert them, including the manual control rods that had been withdrawn earlier. The reason why the EPS-5 button was pressed is not known, whether it was done as an emergency measure in response to rising temperatures, or simply as a routine method of shutting down the reactor upon completion of the experiment.

One view is that the SCRAM may have been ordered as a response to the unexpected rapid power increase, although there is no recorded data showing this. Some have suggested that the button was not manually pressed, that the SCRAM signal was automatically produced by the emergency protection system, but the SKALA registered a manual SCRAM signal. Despite this, the question as to when or even whether the EPS-5 button was pressed has been the subject of debate. There have been assertions that the manual SCRAM was initiated due to the initial rapid power acceleration. Others have suggested that the button was not pressed until the reactor began to self-destruct, while others believe that it happened earlier and under calm conditions.[48]:578[49]

When the EPS-5 button was pressed, the insertion of control rods into the reactor core began. The control rod insertion mechanism moved the rods at 0.4 metres per second (1.3 ft/s), so that the rods took 18 to 20 seconds to travel the full height of the core, about 7 metres (23 ft). A bigger problem was the design of the RBMK control rods, each of which had a graphite neutron moderator section attached to its end to boost reactor output by displacing water when the control rod section had been fully withdrawn from the reactor. That is, when a control rod was at maximum extraction, a neutron-moderating graphite extension was centered in the core with 1.25 metres (4.1 ft) columns of water above and below it. Consequently, injecting a control rod downward into the reactor in a SCRAM initially displaced (neutron-absorbing) water in the lower portion of the reactor with (neutron-moderating) graphite. Thus, an emergency SCRAM initially increased the reaction rate in the lower part of the core as the graphite extensions of rods moving down in the reactor displaced water coolant. This behaviour was discovered when the initial insertion of control rods in another RBMK reactor at Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant in 1983 induced a power spike, but as the subsequent SCRAM of that reactor was successful, the subsequently disseminated information had been deemed of little importance. [...]"

We should not forget that those reactors were initially also built for high performance, and to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons.


What i do not undrestand.. in one of the videos posted (from the HBO film) the graphite moderators are popping up and down.. as if there was no electrical control for them? Where are the electric engines to retract or lower the moderators located? I take it there has to be at least one for every bundle of 12 rods?

[ikalugin]

Half-life and half truths..

" [...]The reactor had no "design flaws." The reactors of the 60s and 70s were optimized for performance. Safety was not a central issue (as with the Fukushima reactors, also a product of that time). The Russian designers were well aware of the weaknesses of the design, the operating rules considered this accordingly. But this only works with a good safety culture, and the latter was missing completely.
In the Leningrad 1 nuclear power plant 1974, the first year of operation with a "Chernobyl type reactor", several serious problems occurred. Among other things, a partial meltdown occurred with partial destruction of the reactor core. Three employees died. And in 1982 a meltdown also occurred in Block 2 of Chernobyl. In both cases, significant amounts of radioactive substances were released as the reactors had no containment. Lessons were barely learned; on the contrary, everything was kept top secret. [...] "
Some points:

The 1975 incident in Leningrad was on a powerplant operated by a different agency (not the one that operated other RBMKs), which indeed was very secretive.

During that period of operation several safety measures were introduced, such as the inclusion of bottom insertion rods into the AZ5 command, but those were not yet retrofitted to blocks 3 and 4 (they were on blocks 1 and 2 on Chernobyl for example).

[ikalugin]

edit found a better description here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

as a summary, the reactor had bneen held in an in-betwen state for too long (hours, literally), which rendered several security measures impossible. Also some moderators (graphite cylinder bundles to subdue the reaction) had been retracted manually. Maybe this is not a problem but .. why did they do that.

Imho this describes best what lead to the catastrophe (excerpt from above link):

" [...] At 1:23:04 a.m., the test began. Four of the main circulating pumps (MCP) were active (of the eight total, six are normally active under regular operation). The steam to the turbines was shut off, beginning a run-down of the turbine generator. The diesel generators started and sequentially picked up loads; the generators were to have completely picked up the MCPs' power needs by 01:23:43. In the interim, the power for the MCPs was to be supplied by the turbine generator as it coasted down. As the momentum of the turbine generator decreased, so did the power it produced for the pumps. The water flow rate decreased, leading to increased formation of steam voids (bubbles) in the core.

Unlike western light-water reactors, the RBMK had a positive void coefficient of reactivity at low power levels, meaning that when water began to boil and produce voids in the coolant, the nuclear chain reaction increased instead of decreasing. Given this characteristic, the No. 4 RBMK reactor operation was now at risk of spiraling into a positive feedback loop, in which the formation of steam voids would reduce the ability of the liquid water coolant to absorb neutrons, increasing the reactor's power output, causing yet more water to flash into steam, and yielding a further power increase. Throughout most of the experiment the automatic control system successfully counteracted this positive feedback, inserting control rods into the reactor core to limit the power rise. However, this system had control of only 12 rods, as nearly all the others had been manually retracted.
At 1:23:40, as recorded by the SKALA centralized control system, a SCRAM (emergency shutdown) of the reactor was initiated. The SCRAM was started when the EPS-5 button (also known as the AZ-5 button) of the reactor emergency protection system was pressed: this engaged the drive mechanism on all control rods to fully insert them, including the manual control rods that had been withdrawn earlier. The reason why the EPS-5 button was pressed is not known, whether it was done as an emergency measure in response to rising temperatures, or simply as a routine method of shutting down the reactor upon completion of the experiment.

One view is that the SCRAM may have been ordered as a response to the unexpected rapid power increase, although there is no recorded data showing this. Some have suggested that the button was not manually pressed, that the SCRAM signal was automatically produced by the emergency protection system, but the SKALA registered a manual SCRAM signal. Despite this, the question as to when or even whether the EPS-5 button was pressed has been the subject of debate. There have been assertions that the manual SCRAM was initiated due to the initial rapid power acceleration. Others have suggested that the button was not pressed until the reactor began to self-destruct, while others believe that it happened earlier and under calm conditions.[48]:578[49]

When the EPS-5 button was pressed, the insertion of control rods into the reactor core began. The control rod insertion mechanism moved the rods at 0.4 metres per second (1.3 ft/s), so that the rods took 18 to 20 seconds to travel the full height of the core, about 7 metres (23 ft). A bigger problem was the design of the RBMK control rods, each of which had a graphite neutron moderator section attached to its end to boost reactor output by displacing water when the control rod section had been fully withdrawn from the reactor. That is, when a control rod was at maximum extraction, a neutron-moderating graphite extension was centered in the core with 1.25 metres (4.1 ft) columns of water above and below it. Consequently, injecting a control rod downward into the reactor in a SCRAM initially displaced (neutron-absorbing) water in the lower portion of the reactor with (neutron-moderating) graphite. Thus, an emergency SCRAM initially increased the reaction rate in the lower part of the core as the graphite extensions of rods moving down in the reactor displaced water coolant. This behaviour was discovered when the initial insertion of control rods in another RBMK reactor at Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant in 1983 induced a power spike, but as the subsequent SCRAM of that reactor was successful, the subsequently disseminated information had been deemed of little importance. [...]"

We should not forget that those reactors were initially also built for high performance, and to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons.


What i do not undrestand.. in one of the videos posted (from the HBO film) the graphite moderators are popping up and down.. as if there was no electrical control for them? Where are the electric engines to retract or lower the moderators located? I take it there has to be at least one for every bundle of 12 rods?
1) citing wiki is a crime in itself.

2) while graphite is indeed a moderator, the moderators job is to (broadly speaking) speed up the reaction, not to slow it down or shut it down.

3) as moderator is the de-facto standard internal filler material of the reactor (the channels for control and fuel rods etc are inside tubes placed inside of the graphite blocks) it is there are all times.

4) majority of channels do not have (moving) control rods and thus have simple covers on top of them.

5) using TV series as a source is a bad idea.

[Catfish]

Right, citing Wikipedia is sometimes a bad idea; the TV always :03:

I just do not understand why it was built that way, but it is stated that it was an "effective" (read: cheap) method to generate a lot of energy while breeding plutonium for weapons of course.

So i have two questions:

1. Why are just of all the upper control rods tipped with nuclear graphite at the lower end, so the reaction is being fuelled just of all when you usually want to decrease the reaction.
The graphite fuels the reaction, and also the displaced water (by lowering the control rods) leads to less water and the remaining rest getting hotter, and fast.

2. I wondered whether the TV flick showed the central hall floor with the upper shield cover correctly (?) when those caps began to 'dance', popping up and down:
(20 seconds into the film)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzQJS5eMWiw
As far as i learned the center area being shown here consists of individual removable steel-graphite plugs, located over the tops of the channels.

So is it possible like as shown that they were forced up by expanding water steam, hydrogen and maybe even the helium-nitrogen atmosphere usually contained in the reactor vessel (20 seconds into the film)?

I also wonder where the controls are to lower the control rods, i do not see any motors or linkage :hmmm:

[THE_MASK]

Sounds very similar to Fukishima . Everythings ok , dont panic .

[McBeck]

1) citing wiki is a crime in itself.

2) while graphite is indeed a moderator, the moderators job is to (broadly speaking) speed up the reaction, not to slow it down or shut it down.

3) as moderator is the de-facto standard internal filler material of the reactor (the channels for control and fuel rods etc are inside tubes placed inside of the graphite blocks) it is there are all times.

4) majority of channels do not have (moving) control rods and thus have simple covers on top of them.

5) using TV series as a source is a bad idea.

Point 2) : Yes, you are correct that this is the effect, however the reason is critical here. The reason it speeds up the reaction is because it slows down the neutrons. If the neutrons are not slowed down, they will not cause a fission reaction. The water in this reactor served as absorbing neutrons, thus it remove the trigger for fission reaction and that water was then replaced with something which introduced a trigger for reaction.

[ikalugin]

Point 2) : Yes, you are correct that this is the effect, however the reason is critical here. The reason it speeds up the reaction is because it slows down the neutrons. If the neutrons are not slowed down, they will not cause a fission reaction. The water in this reactor served as absorbing neutrons, thus it remove the trigger for fission reaction and that water was then replaced with something which introduced a trigger for reaction.
Liquid water and steam are also moderators. This is what classical PWR and BWRs use in fact as the moderator.

[ikalugin]

Right, citing Wikipedia is sometimes a bad idea; the TV always :03:
I just do not understand why it was built that way, but it is stated that it was an "effective" (read: cheap) method to generate a lot of energy while breeding plutonium for weapons of course.
So i have two questions:
1. Why are just of all the upper control rods tipped with nuclear graphite at the lower end, so the reaction is being fuelled just of all when you usually want to decrease the reaction.
The graphite fuels the reaction, and also the displaced water (by lowering the control rods) leads to less water and the remaining rest getting hotter, and fast.
2. I wondered whether the TV flick showed the central hall floor with the upper shield cover correctly (?) when those caps began to 'dance', popping up and down:
(20 seconds into the film)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzQJS5eMWiw
As far as i learned the center area being shown here consists of individual removable steel-graphite plugs, located over the tops of the channels.
So is it possible like as shown that they were forced up by expanding water steam, hydrogen and maybe even the helium-nitrogen atmosphere usually contained in the reactor vessel (20 seconds into the film)?
I also wonder where the controls are to lower the control rods, i do not see any motors or linkage :hmmm:
The idea was not to breed Pu for the weapons, the idea was to take the well known Pu creating reactor and use it for civilian purposes because building a low density reactor (low pressure, does not require specially made pressure vessels, you can refuel it during operation etc) reactor using natural uranium (no need to enrich it, they didnt manage to get quite that far) seemed like a good idea.


Hot fuel leads to a slower reaction all other things being the same. Broadly speaking the graphite is used to balance reactivity out with the water it displaces. The problem is the positive void coeff which was critical due to the low ammount of feed water going into the reactor, which meant that it was boiling from the bottom. Neutron fields in various heights of the reactor depending on the position of the control rods:

https://imgprx.livejournal.net/e5e92259d7293f20610c1db0708ab276374bc8fd/52mFeRRtkd26nd9D41GaNm1sDKzqoDafRTJdCIn6PE5Uw4QAgZ qqHDnMheFl_hkW0ZE8UthoZr1vheFEnoGYQA
The issue with the ends effect was fixed by making the graphite tips longer so that they would produce the same effect through the entire height of the reactor.

No idea about the pop up effect, I think the motors are between the upper hull and the floor:
https://s5.postimg.cc/dd7ewapav/2016_05_03_12_31_48.png

[Catfish]

^ Thank you, Ikalugin :up:

So if i understand this right (much simplified):

The big mechanism (gantry crane) in the background is for extracting/exchanging the fuel rods.

Control rods consist of two sets, one bigger and longer set can be extracted/inserted from the upper side, the other smaller and shorter set from the lower side (control rods are different depending on task)

As you said the mechanisms/engines to move the control rods must be somewhere in or near the area of the upper and lower biological shield.

There are two fuel rods stacked above each other in each one pressure pipe.

So the pairs are connected/linked to each other so they can be axtracted together from above with the ganty crane?

The mechanism/engines for inserting extracting the fuel rods are in the area of the control rod engines? If the pairs are connected then the engines for fuel rod control should only be in the upper part?

:hmmm:

[ikalugin]

Yes, the lower control rods are important, as the graph I showed shows the neutron fields spike at the bottom during the main control rod insertion. Unfortunately block 4 was not yet retrofitted to include bottom rods into the AZ5 command, as were other reactors, for example blocks 1 and 2 were refitted in such a way under the initiative of the operator to improve their safety. The other safety feature would be to use longer graphite tips, so that they remain in the reactor when the control rods are fully elevated.

The fuel rods are pulled up using the refueling machine, what happens is that the machine attaches a tube to the top of the channel, filling it with water and then uses an internal crane to pull the old fuel rod up and then place the new fuel rod down.
https://youtu.be/NPWMZ8wbqkI
You can see the process on this 3d model in some detail.

[ikalugin]

https://youtu.be/hE6ABwFOUe8
This video, allegedly shows removal of radioactive pipes from Chernobyl exclusion zone for sale, protected by the Ukrainian FBI equivalent.
Allegedly (so said in video) the pipes radiate 50 Sv or broadly speaking equivalent to 5000 rem (which does seem pretty high, so maybe they missed the scale of the unit, ie milli or micro sieverts).



(they all talk in Russian btw)

[Catfish]

"The true story of Chernobyl". Report about how things unfolded around Chernobyl after the explosion.
It is in german, and no other subtitles abvailable; if anyone finds an english version ? Will also look for it myself.

Much worse than i expected even now. People in Germany were not informed properly, some rumours, schools closed, scholars sent back home, but no real information. I had no idea that so much people died, already that early.

And Russia? After two days the russian Politbureau was informed by Sweden about the 'incident', because of abnormally high radioacivity readings at the swedish Forsmark reactor, 1200 km from Chernobyl. It seems no one had told the Politbureau, all they heard from the scientists via KGB that the "situation is under control", "reactor will be online again soon". So no official coordinated action for a too long time.

The 'liquidators' shoveling radioactive debris from the roof in the film, were exposed to 10-12,000 Roentgen per hour, and they only managed to bring down the overall radiation by 35 percent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7j8BMnOKYW8

[Dmitry Markov]

Catfish, as for authorities reaction inside USSR - actually destruction of reactor was confirmed by Government and Politbureau by 15-00 on 26th april - same day. Evacuation of Pripyat was nearly instant - next day 27-th april and it was very effective: during less than 24 hrs authorities gathered 1200 buses, 360 trucks, two diesel railway trains, recon of safe routes was made, and columns were moving according to reconned safe routes - by the 16-00 27th april evac was accomplished. So I cannot say it was a slower reaction than say Japanese reaction at Fukusima. What was wrong in my opinoin - a decision not to stop 1'st of May Demonstration in Kiev.

[Catfish]

mm ok i was just wondering why Gorbatchov said that they did not get enough real information from Chernobyl - and by whom does he mean? From scientists, police, some emergency organisation, KGB?

After reading your comment and hearing the vid I take it that they already organised for the worst case, but still did not exactly know what happened, with this message from Chernobyl "the reactor will be online soon again" :hmmm:

The Kiev 1st of may parade :o
And "the bridge of death", why did no one tell them.

[Dmitry Markov]

Catfish there wasn't any "bridge of death" - it was 1:30 - everybody were sleeping and nobody had the least intention to go and see the fire - this episode is a fiction from TV series. 1'st of May demonstration however took place - my mother-in-law was in Kiev those days, took a walk to see celebration and later that year she suffered problems with thyroid and due to that a hair loss but no more than that - after some medical treatment she was ok and she is relatively ok up to present moment, thanks God and Soviet free medicine. Maybe her health problems weren't connected to Chernobyl but they happened too sudden and she was in one of regions that took most part of initial contamination.

Concerning Gorbachev - look, he was at the very top of power system. And knowing how the bureaucracy works - nobody wants to be the one that brings bad news to superior so every info about such a calamity is checked twice before sending reports up the chain and being in position when one has to send such awful report, I believe the one would want to sweeten the pill a bit. Understanding of the scale of disaster came by 15-00 of 26 th april - and that's only at the level of local authorities and it had to be translated
higher. And the chain of reports was quite long: duty shift - Head of Station - Ministry of Energy and Electrification - Central Committee of Party - Politbureau. USSR was a very very big state so number of reports in all spheres of life every day ( including urgent and top-high-importance) was slightly higher than anywhere I believe. And when something happens at some part of a state it takes time to define the importancy of this happening. So at the highest level the situation was taken as serious since evening of 26th of april, first message in Mass-Media from Council of Ministers was made on 28th of april and understanding of the situation as top-dangerous at the level of Central Committee was only by 01 of May. And Ligachev together with Ryzhkov visited the site on 2nd of May - and that's when Legasov gave them the full picture - that's 7-th and 8-th days of calamity.

[Catfish]

^ ok after rechecking this bridge is on the fiction side of the HBO production for dramatic effect (as if this was necessary..). Thanks!

[Dowly]

^ ok after rechecking this bridge is on the fiction side of the HBO production for dramatic effect (as if this was necessary..). Thanks!
Not just HBO, I've heard about it for years in docus and written accounts.


A Finnish nuclear physicist described the show as 'good drama, but thick with long since debunked myths' or something to effect.

[ikalugin]

Fallout was going north, not south to Kiev. There was no massive threat to people marching in Kiev.

As to the decisionmaking - information had to go through the chain of command so to speak, with the top of said chain being fairly removed from nuclear matters.

[Rockstar]

Might want to recheck those fallout maps again.

[Dmitry Markov]

ikalugin - right what I was talking about the chain of command.

[Dmitry Markov]

Finally, one of most important participants of liquidation - the great Doctor Robert Gale himself expresses all the bsht in "Chernobyl" series : https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/06/11/top-ucla-doctor-denounces-depiction-of-radiation-in-hbos-chernobyl-as-wrong-and-dangerous/#af6f7431e072

He says word-by-word what I've read and heard about the calamity before but I hope that getting acquainted with his view will give our Western colleagues more objective picture of how everything happened in reality.

[McBeck]

Catfish, as for authorities reaction inside USSR - actually destruction of reactor was confirmed by Government and Politbureau by 15-00 on 26th april - same day. Evacuation of Pripyat was nearly instant - next day 27-th april and it was very effective: during less than 24 hrs authorities gathered 1200 buses, 360 trucks, two diesel railway trains, recon of safe routes was made, and columns were moving according to reconned safe routes - by the 16-00 27th april evac was accomplished. So I cannot say it was a slower reaction than say Japanese reaction at Fukusima. What was wrong in my opinoin - a decision not to stop 1'st of May Demonstration in Kiev.
Im not sure the Fukushima and Chernobyl can be compared in regards to evacutation. No doubt that once evacutation started at Chernobyl, it was fast.

[Dmitry Markov]

McBeck, dr Robert Gale in his articles compares - here's the direct link to them ( there are four parts and You'll need to read them all to understand what happened in reality) https://cancerletter.com/articles/chernobyl/. And he gives short- and long- term considerations for evacuation and why it wasn't and couldn't be immediate. He event describes when, how and why was made evac of 30-km zone. I strongly recommend to everyone interested in real story to read his articles.