Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012
This is my favourite show of 2019 so far, and as someone who has religiously watch GoT for 9 years I am looking forward to Chernobyl more than the GoT finale next week which says something.

The Terror was amazing and Chernobyl scratches a very similar itch. Is there anything else out there like these? I'm disappointed if we don't get any other stuff like this.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012

nessin posted:

I just caught up on the first two episodes (plus podcast) last night, and there are some really annoying problems behind the show.

1) The show creator/writer has a serious chip on his shoulder. You can see a bit of it in the show itself but largely it comes from his commentary in the podcast. In the first podcast episode they especially talk about parallels with the Trump presidency and the show creator makes the statement that he feels had this happened in the US, such as a bigger Three Mile Island, the US wouldn't have people willing to try and limit exposure, they'd just rope off the necessary area and leave it for all time. Which flies in the face of numerous examples of US government cover ups and plenty examples of people going into dangerous/deadly situations willingly to prevent a greater disaster, even in the field of nuclear problems. But most of it's his stated reasoning for creating the show, a "story of lies". The lies and cover up of the Chernobyl Disaster is the least important part of the story, and the show creator has specifically stated that's the part he's focused on above all else.

2) As an example of #1, one of the changes in the show is that the town evacuation was started and even completed before the radiation was detected in Sweden and the rest of the world was alerted. Instead the show makes a direct explicit statement that the evacuation didn't happen until the world knew and the Soviet Union was forced to act due to that. The helicopter crash, radioactive lava, and secondary explosion risk, are all things which have been sped up.

3) Although the show doesn't hide it if you watch the after credits scene and the podcast is fairly upfront about it, the female nuclear scientist didn't exist. She's a made up character to avoid the problem of showing all the scientists behind the scenes trying to solve the problem. And if you listen to the podcast they get right up to but don't actually say that they decided to go with a single female scientist so they could check off the diversity box. And this also leads back to #1 in that the show is already leaning towards this idea of a small group, literally two going on three people, who are struggling against the might of the Soviet government to do the right thing while willingly sacrificing a lot of people to get it done. Which is about as far from the reality of the situation as you can get without being a complete fabrication.

This dramatised show is clearly not for you. There’s a very good BBC documentary you can catch on YouTube. I like both. In general, I like to be both educated and entertained but I don’t expect everything I watch to completely do both. But any lay person will get 95% of what they need to know from this show.

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012

CainFortea posted:



This poo poo just makes itself some times.

I’m a bit late to this post, but I still don’t get it. Can someone ELI5?

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012
BY a nice coincidence I watched a BBC documentary last night about Sellafield. That was Britain's first nuclear facility, originally constructed to manufacture plutonium for bombs and later expanded to include the world's first commercial reactor. It's now a massive facility for all that and also where all of the UKs (and some foreign countries' I believe) nuclear waste is sent for re-processing as well now so it does everything.

Because they were in a rush to get the bomb in 1950 they didn't know what to do with the variety of nuclear waste they had. So they build giant concrete ponds (open to the air!), filled them with water and dumped it all in the there. There's decades worth of deadly stuff sitting visibly under the water and people are just walking around it. The doc guy was just leaning over the side while talking about it. So yeah, water must be a hell of a good radiation shield.

Edit: I'd highly recommend the doc if you can get it on iPlayer. He also does a good job of explaining a brief history of nuclear physics, the 3 types of radiation, half-life, the life-cycle of nuclear material and the safety procedures/risks. I had no idea Sellafield was so big or the centre of the UK's nuclear industry in such a way. They had an accident in the 60's that could have been as bad as Chernobyl turned out (it was never as risky a situation as Chenobyl initially was obviously). But the guy who designed the chimney had the foresight & stubbornness to insist on filters on the top of it that stopped a load of radioactive stuff being pumped into the air when at the time everyone said it was unecessary.

kaesarsosei fucked around with this message at 10:31 on May 24, 2019

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012
Thanks for the thread-making GBS threads derail.

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012
A related question, about the guy on the roof who tore his shoe. In theory if you got a fuckload of radiation to your foot only, could that kill you? Could it only damage your foot? Could quick amputation prevent it spreading?

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012

Make sure to watch this. It’s actually insane how close it looks like the show.

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012
Pet dogs would be loving useless in the wild and just suffer a lovely death via starvation long before radiation killed them. There were going them a favour, regardless of their potential to spread radiation.

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012
Finished the show. I'm not prepared to jump on the hyperbole bandwagon and say its the best TV show of all time, since it's only 5 episodes compared to 60+ for the likes of Sopranos, Mad Men, Breaking Bad. But I will definately say the quality of the 5 episodes is the highest of all shows. I can't even say what my favourite episode or moment is - there is no drop off at all in any of the episodes.

Regarding the final episode, I work in IT and have had that sinking feeling when something has gone wrong. To think what was going through those guys heads in that control room when the reactor started going out of control boggles the mind. I probably would have started puking even before the explosion. What was the latest stage in the sequence of events when disaster could have been avoided? I take it as soon as the reactor started spiking power there was no way out given the problem with the graphite on the control rods (ie no actual way to perform the emergency shutdown).


Nuclear power is so interesting. It's a pity the amount of stigma it has, I really do think despite Chernobyl and Fukushima we should have more of it. Not only is it clean, but after the startup costs it seems really cheap to run - there were only 10 people working that night? Or is that per reactor so 40 total at Chernobyl.

What is the key reason why some materials make good nuclear fuel and others don't? I understand the concept of radiation and molecules hitting each other, splitting and releasing energy - is uranium just the best/only material that has the property of those molecules firing away from each other in the first place?

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012
So the next logical question about fusion - it's easier to make a fission bomb than a fission reactor right? So would a fusion bomb be easier than a fusion reactor, and what kinda yield would such a thing have?

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012
Would absolutely love it if we could have a mod probate anyone still going on about Khomyuk. It's a pity the creator hadn't enough money to shoot all of her scenes twice, except the second shot would be a group of about 30 identical looking old men all shuffling around and muttering her lines at random, just to show how loving absurd that would be in a dramatic show. Or even better, just replace her in every scene with a different random man each time who we are never introduced to or have any context towards. Super!

All this, and when the show takes other liberties (and IMO every single one of them is justified given the result), like the fact that Scherbina and Legasov were not even at the trial, and no one bats an eyelid.

This is the highest rated show of all time, but a few goons think they could have done it better.

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012

Gonz posted:

I’d watch a Siege of Stalingrad or Battle of Kursk show.

The Kursk submarine disaster would be a decent subject for another show like this.

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012

spankmeister posted:

I get that we all want more of this, but let's face it. Nothing will ever live up to this. Not the best writer, director, actors, etc. Not the worst most hosed up accident they make a series of. It will never ever live up to the Chernobyl accident, and this series.

100% this. I was around 11 when this happened and I remember the mystery, panic, grainy photos, cancer scares (even here in Ireland there are places where people believe cancer rates got higher in the years after). I've racked my brains and there is nothing else like this in my lifetime.

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012
You mean Bryukhanov, comrade.

Take this man to the infirmary, he’s clearly delusional.

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012
I've read Midnight in Chernobyl. Who's to say which account is more accurate than others, but my take from it is that the TV show's portrayal of Dyatlov was *slightly* harsh but close enough. The book emhasised how respected he was as an expert but also that he was a complete douche day-to-day. I think he main point is that from his POV he was fed up waiting years for this test and absolute worst case scenario to him was pressing AZ-5 which he was still reluctant to do due to the amount of bullshit/explaining he would need to do.

Whereas the book paints Bruykanov in both a more and less sympathetic light. He gets more heat for the actual events of the night than in the TV show, but they mention the amazing amount of pressure and bullshit he was suffering under for literally 15 years before it. He was basically responsible for not only building, manning and maintaining 6 nuclear reactors but also the whole city of Pripyat as well. Fomin hasn't been mentioned much in the book.

Remember, to these guys the idea of pressing AZ-5 causing the reactor to explode would be like someone telling us that if your car was out of control, pressing the brakes would make it go faster.

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012

CommieGIR posted:

Chernobyl's own Hodor, Aleksandr Yuvchenko, the man who held open the door to the reactor core for the doomed interns, survived.He finally passed away in 2008 at 44.

Survived huh

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012
I think this, as has been discussed here and elsewhere, is why the true cost of Chernobyl will never be known and why some people estimate that up to 100k people's lives were shortened by it. I strongly suspect Yuvchenko would have been disappointed at only hitting 44 (although he wouldn't have complained too much when comparing to his colleagues) and I wonder what his health was like the whole time?

The Soviet headline figures of 36 people dieing within a month of ARS is probably correct but of course they wouldn't release the long-term numbers.

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012

Data Graham posted:

I just watched Stranger Things season 3 and holy god it's trading in the same comically evil Soviet stereotypes from the 80s, which I know is the show's schtick, but it was like, even worse than I remembered. Square-jawed wrinkly scarred old Soviet general choking out a guy who dares to give him bad news, holding him up off the ground and strangling him and then telling the next guy "You have one year". Darth Vader eat your heart out.

Torture rooms, truth drugs, trading quips about capitalism and marxism, man it was painful and not in a good way.

I'm not the biggest ST fanboi, but there's a decent chance this is intentional right.

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012

Fly Molo posted:

Yeah, inhaling a bunch of fine radioactive dust means you're gonna be emitting radiation until that dust isn't radioactive.

Which could be a while.

The very simple explanation that makes most of the previous page redundant.

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012
Hard to imagine a better fit for what Mazin should do next.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

kaesarsosei
Nov 7, 2012
Has anyone watched Chernobyl 1986, the new Netflix movie? I’m guessing it doesn’t compare favourably to the HBO series.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply