A very good friend of mine and former neighbor was the nuclear officer in charge of plant #4 when he was on the Enterprise. He is a brilliant guy and so well trained that the amazing detail he can go into about the design and operation of nuclear side of the plant and the ship's electrical system 20 years later is astonishing to me. He graduated 2nd in nuke school and to this day it bothers him that he didn't graduate 1st.
Naval aircraft carrier turning at speed; Really Impressive
- Thread starter billt460
- Start date
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Wow, impressive!
Did he move into civilian plant operation after getting out? I know most guys/gals do.
At age 12 I got to tour of USS Nimitz off coast of Alexandria Egypt with a friend whose mom worked at US consulate. I was amazed at whole thing and in awe.
A) No one ever trusted the Army much with nuclear stuff 
B) Rikover was right. Sodium cooled reactors for the Navy would have been a disaster.
B) Rikover was right. Sodium cooled reactors for the Navy would have been a disaster.
No, he got an EE before going into the Navy (ROTC). Interestingly, when he took an aptitude test after graduating from college, the Navy asked him to volunteer for nuclear propulsion school. When he did his 8 years active duty, he chose the EE route and that's what he does to this day. His specialty is troubleshooting transmission protection (breakers) and he is one of the best. He's the guy they call in when nobody else can figure it out. He says that he's not smarter than many of the people in the field, he's just better at thinking.
If you are into propellors you need to check out the latest submarine -propellor designs. They come with neat features such as boss cap fins, often seven blades, and a scimitar design. Unfortunately, you won't get to see the newest features and designs as they are eyes only.
Another fan made image I appreciate.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2021
- Messages
- 809
try landing on that @Astro14
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2021
- Messages
- 809
wonder if that would be to scale?
I find this fascinating. This stuff supposedly has a half life of 88 years. Then it will still be half as hot. Does anyone know how much of this stuff it takes to run a nuclear carrier for it's 50 year service life?
Was that picture photoshopped? Most boats I see in the water, lean INTO a turn, just like motorcycles. I'm assuming it's turning left.
Was that picture photoshopped? Most boats I see in the water, lean INTO a turn, just like motorcycles. I'm assuming it's turning left.
Nope, that picture is correct.
Think how the rudders at the rear affect the boat. You might be thinking of an outboard equipped boat with no rudders.
Was that picture photoshopped? Most boats I see in the water, lean INTO a turn, just like motorcycles. I'm assuming it's turning left.
So, you took what you have observed 20 foot outboards doing, and applied it to a 95,000 ton aircraft carrier with four fixed screws and large rudders?
And you made this leap in logic after a 30 year Navy Veteran explained when the photo was taken and why the ship was doing that?
So, let me say, again, that the photo is real. That’s how a 95,000 ton warship turns at high speed with full rudder. This is done during sea trials. This ship is being put through its paces after major work.
Last edited:
Takes zero. They run on enriched Uranium. U235.
Some ships have impressive maneuverability. Back in my USCG days we had a gunnery accident on board during a shooting exercise down the Aleutian chain. The crewman was badly injured and needed a evac but our helo was inoperative. Fortunately a Coast Guard 378 was about 1.5 hours away. They lit off their turbines and did 30 knots plus getting to us. When that ship came around the point it was throwing up a rooster tail. Those ships had reversing variable pitch propellers so they came in at flank speed and then stopped in about one ships length right alongside. That was impressive to see.
I’ve had to land on a carrier in a turn before…not easy, but they weren’t maneuvering like this one.
This one, by the way, is USS Dwight D. Eisenhower. CVN-68. I have several landings aboard her.
JHZR2
Staff member
The difference in propulsion load between 25 kts and… faster, is massive. It’s essentially cubic.
There are a lot of folks on those ships. Not all of it is reactor grade though.
Was he vetted by Rickover?
Since we're talking about water, thrust, and such, can someone who knows physics explain this?.... Take a large bucket and start filling it with the nozzle of a hose. Like when you wash your car.
As the bucket fills, and the water line rises, you can feel the "thrust" generated by the water rushing out of the end of the hose nozzle under pressure. Then, if you push the end of the nozzle below the surface of the waterline in the bucket, the "thrust" all but completely disappears.
Raise the nozzle above the waterline, and the "thrust" returns. How is this possible, if for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction? Yet the reaction disappears as soon as you submerge the nozzle in the water.
There was no change in the "action". So why is there with the "reaction"?
As the bucket fills, and the water line rises, you can feel the "thrust" generated by the water rushing out of the end of the hose nozzle under pressure. Then, if you push the end of the nozzle below the surface of the waterline in the bucket, the "thrust" all but completely disappears.
Raise the nozzle above the waterline, and the "thrust" returns. How is this possible, if for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction? Yet the reaction disappears as soon as you submerge the nozzle in the water.
There was no change in the "action". So why is there with the "reaction"?
Straight from Wikipedia, but this is the NCC-1701. Pictured above is the refit NCC-1701A which is slightly longer at the engine nacelles.
