Though the path to this moment was a difficult one, there could be little doubt that the journey would be completed. Three factors were critical in the application of nuclear propulsion to submarines: The submarine was an established component of navies around the world. It had proved its potential for decisive military action during the Second World War, and there was little question of its continuing importance. Nuclear propulsion revolutionized the combat potential of the submarine. Indeed, it is perhaps appropriate to use the term "submarine" only to refer to nuclear-propelled vessels. Non-nuclear boats are more properly considered "submersibles," condemned to spend most of their existence on the ocean's surface, only briefly submerging below the waves. In contrast, atomic submarines are creatures of the deep, roaming the world ocean at will, freed of any connection to the world above. The underwater speed and endurance of the atomic submarine created entirely novel combat capabilities that have proved irresistible to any navy possessing the treasure required to obtain them. This revolution in military capabilities was achieved in the absence of a revolution in technological capabilities. It does not detract from the ingenuity and skill of the technologists who perfected the atomic submarine to note that the reactors on these vessels were a relatively straightforward extension of land-locked reactors developed over the previous decade. Technological evolution produced a military revolution. An Exception that Proves the Rule It is noteworthy that the civil space community has spent nearly three decades attempting to replicate the commercial success of communications satellites. Heroic efforts to place endeavors such as remote sensing and materials processing on the selffinancing basis so rapidly achieved by communications satellites have thus far been in vain. The "voices in the sky" remain the exception that proves the rule that space is a very difficult place to turn a profit. Similarly, atomic submarines remain an exception that proves a rule - nuclear energy has proven remarkably resistant to propulsion applications. Nearly four decades of effort by aerospace technologists have failed to replicate the success of atomic submarines. Nuclear airplanes and nuclear rockets (not to mention atomic-powered helicopters and cruise missiles) remain in the realm of artist's concepts. That this should be the case is not surprising, when the context of nuclear aerospace propulsion is contrasted with conditions that were so conducive to the emergence of atomic submarines: • While atomic submarines, like communications satellites, filled pre-existing needs whose importance and legitimacy was widely appreciated, the potential applications for nuclear aerospace propulsion have frequently been at the margins of national priorities. Temporary enthusiasms for aerospace missions that might utilize nuclear
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==