Jump to content

Navynuke99

Members
  • Content count

    181
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    1352
  • Clan

    [MSPK]

Community Reputation

41 Neutral

About Navynuke99

  • Rank
    Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    NC, USA

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

240 profile views
  1. Electrical power output of battleships

    Precisely. Sorry, but OPSEC takes priority. However, I can say it's kinda like your chart not taking emergency generators into account.
  2. Electrical power output of battleships

    For the record, your numbers for the Nimitz - class are wrong. Just add a point of correction. Also, you might want to look at what voltages each ship was generating and operating at, and maybe also include, if you can find the numbers, AC vs DC loading, since that would give a little better picture for electronics and combat systems. For example, North Carolina has two motor generator sets rated at I think 200 kw (I don't have my spreadsheet in front of me at the moment) for the radars, search lights, fire control systems, etc.
  3. Nuclear propulsion question

    No, you won't. Maybe this is a design change from A2W and D2G, but you won't find this on current ships. I can't say anything more than that though, because OPSEC.
  4. Nuclear Power: An Incomplete Guide

    Hello, fellow nuke! What class were you in? 0006 here.
  5. Nuclear Power: An Incomplete Guide

    Eh... Heavy water reactors are typically used for older civilian power production (see also: CANDU) or weapons production, and have never been used as shipboard propulsion plants. Something about not being able to get deuterium underway if you have to an add to the primary, not to mention the cost of producing it. Most shipboard power plants use water and rely on very high enrichment, or use moderators like sodium or other liquid metals (mostly Russian designs). After we experimented with it in USS Seawolf (SSN-575), it was decided not to pursue that type of reactor for US Navy applications, even though it provided a much higher power density than a PWR.
  6. Nuclear propulsion question

    That's not true. All the hottest women in the military seem to be in the Air Force. When I was stationed in Charleston and Virginia, we used to go work out at the gyms on their bases. It worked out better for two reasons - we got to train with better equipment at the Air Force gyms, and the Air Force girls were very happy to see us when we would show up. More than one told me about how prissy all the men they worked with were.
  7. FFG-500 A proper Frigate for the US Navy

    Actually, when things break, it's not unusual to do maintenance or repairs underway. Also, your idea of "no need to do maintenance underway" is completely and utterly the stuff of fantasy.
  8. USS John F. Kennedy 70% complete

    Yeaaaaaaah, because nothing says "political correctness" like calling out genocide.
  9. Nuclear propulsion question

    That sounds about par for the course. We were on 8 section duty, once, for about a year before there were several pooch screwings in a row, that meant enough people were denuked/ disqualified/ removed from watchstanding that we had to collapse down to 4-section, then eventually 6-section. Reactor on a CVN maintains a separate duty rotation than the rest of the ship anyway, and they were usually on more duty sections than we were. Except in early 2003, when the war broke out. We were on 6-section, as was the ship's company, though they had to collapse down to 3 to cover extra security watches. And because Reactor could never have a better deal than the rest of the ship, we were forced to go to 3-section as well. Until the powers that be in Reactor saw how ridiculous it was (most watches were already 6 on watch/ 18 hours off), and quietly shifted us back to 6 section.
  10. FFG-500 A proper Frigate for the US Navy

    Unless that's a main space or equipment room with equipment vital to propulsion or fighting the ship. Automated systems can't rig casualty power, swing spool pieces, or rig up alternate workarounds to keep things running. Especially since those automated systems themselves could often be prone to breaking down or battle damage.
  11. Out of morbid curiosity, what internet website did you get your degrees in electrical and aerospace engineering from?
  12. FFG-500 A proper Frigate for the US Navy

    No. It's a gas, and harmless to people - we had an accidental initiation or two in the main spaces that used them. http://www.dcfpnavymil.org/Systems/HPF/HPF.html
  13. FFG-500 A proper Frigate for the US Navy

    HFP. Non-toxic and won't suffocate anybody in the space, and non-conductive and non-corrosive for the electrical and electronics.
  14. FFG-500 A proper Frigate for the US Navy

    This thread is pure comedy gold
  15. USS John F. Kennedy 70% complete

    And then another 2-3 years of outfitting, testing, and certifying before sea trials. She still has a long, long way to go.
×