Russia's new FLOATING Nuclear Reactor

[atlroofman]

Originally Posted by redneckrob

Funny thing, within 5 NM of mile zero of the ICW you can generally find at least 5 FLOATING nuclear reactors!! Often times more. Same thing around mile 689 and 720. Better go get that Geiger counter with the accompanying tin foil hat, stat

Holy crap, Why does anyone build a floating nuclear reactor !

[ArmyDaveNY]

Originally Posted by Cadence

Your right, she was built as a show piece. I don't believe with the atom logo on the stack she would have been granted entry anyplace. We had her here as part of a maritime museum, atomic fuel long gone. I'm not sure she didn't go to the scrap yard. A effort well before the time.

She is currently in the Canton section of Baltimore awaiting funding for the decommissioning and removal of her power plant and refurbishing to make her a museum ship. The US Maritime Administration spent less than a million dollars in 2006 doing some repair and conservation work. She is a National Historic Landmark and is thus protected to an extent.

[ArmyDaveNY]

Originally Posted by atlroofman

Holy crap, Why does anyone build a floating nuclear reactor !

There are a number of reasons to build them as floating reactors. Mobility is a big one. Also, the ones mentioned in the post you commented on are on naval vessels. This makes their purpose propulsion.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by ArmyDaveNY

She is currently in the Canton section of Baltimore awaiting funding for the decommissioning and removal of her power plant and refurbishing to make her a museum ship. The US Maritime Administration spent less than a million dollars in 2006 doing some repair and conservation work. She is a National Historic Landmark and is thus protected to an extent.

Nice to know. When she left here it was because they could not afford to maintain her. She would have made one hell of a yacht.

[Luckyknot]

Originally Posted by ArmyDaveNY

There are a number of reasons to build them as floating reactors. Mobility is a big one. Also, the ones mentioned in the post you commented on are on naval vessels. This makes their purpose propulsion.

More specifically their purpose is to make steam. Among many other things that steam is used for propulsion (Hot rock, make steam, go roundy roundy). It's also used to launch aircraft, heat water, make fresh water, and create electricity.

[Luckyknot]

Originally Posted by ArmyDaveNY

She is currently in the Canton section of Baltimore awaiting funding for the decommissioning and removal of her power plant and refurbishing to make her a museum ship. The US Maritime Administration spent less than a million dollars in 2006 doing some repair and conservation work. She is a National Historic Landmark and is thus protected to an extent.

This is news to me. Very cool! That's just down the street. Though I wonder why in Baltimore? Not a whole lot of money flying around here for a project like that. I wonder if Historic Ships Baltimore is charged in any way with helping in that endeavor.

[GordMay]

“Why Did The NS Savannah Fail? Can She Really be Called a Failure?” ~ By Rod Adams
“... Most people who are aware of the experiment do not understand what the N.S. Savannah was designed to do. Her planned mission was to prove to the world that the United States was committed to the proposition of using atomic power for peace and to show that a nuclear reactor could be used to power a commercial ship. She was never intended to be profitable
... In the second of the news clips in the below video, you will hear the specific statement made that the ship was never intended to be an economic commercial proposition. Even when the ship was being launched, American taxpayers were informed that she was conceived and built to be a pioneer. At that time, people were comfortable with the idea that governments sometimes invest in new ideas and new demonstrations of technology..."
➥ https://atomicinsights.com/cover-sto...savannah-fail/

Video ➥ https://youtu.be/3hBQUisqNQI


See also ➥

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEG3osNkpIw

Meanwhile:
Russia clearing out people near where rocket accident sent radiation levels soaring
➥ https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/russia...tion-1.5245081

[ArmyDaveNY]

Originally Posted by Luckyknot

More specifically their purpose is to make steam. Among many other things that steam is used for propulsion (Hot rock, make steam, go roundy roundy). It's also used to launch aircraft, heat water, make fresh water, and create electricity.

Well said! Thank you for the clarifying my poorly written comment. Yes, steam! Those extra three sentences make a big difference in explaining HOW nuclear propulsion actually provides power to move the vessel, and to do other things.

[ArmyDaveNY]

Originally Posted by Luckyknot

This is news to me. Very cool! That's just down the street. Though I wonder why in Baltimore? Not a whole lot of money flying around here for a project like that. I wonder if Historic Ships Baltimore is charged in any way with helping in that endeavor.

I am not positive why Baltimore, however I recall reading something about a contract being awarded so it is likely that the winning bidder was in Baltimore. It is either that or they figure the locals will strip it clean, making the job of restoring the interior easier as a significant amount of the work will already be done and at no cost!!

[Luckyknot]

Originally Posted by ArmyDaveNY

I am not positive why Baltimore, however I recall reading something about a contract being awarded so it is likely that the winning bidder was in Baltimore. It is either that or they figure the locals will strip it clean, making the job of restoring the interior easier as a significant amount of the work will already be done and at no cost!!

LOL! So true!

[senormechanico]

Originally Posted by Taipe

.I may have heard of a nuclear powered carrier, although not sure if that is a plan or a reality.

The XO of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln personally told me that it has three reactors aboard.

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by anotherT34C

I'm also not impressed that we haven't been told of any nuclear accidents on military vessels.

It's interesting that you say you would argue that military reactors are safer than civilian. Since you don't know how a military reactor works, what fuel it uses, what procedural controls are in place, or what the actual safety record is, on what basis would you argue? Faith in military discipline?

When I got out of the Navy in 1990 after 11 years being a nuclear operator there had been no "nuclear accidents" as any non nuclear civilian would classify as 1. and at the time that would be around 30 years of experience that covers the very beginning of nuclear material as a power source instead of a bomb. The US Navy has more experience with operating nuclear reactors than anyone else in the world!!! The safety of the designs are, and were right from the start, much higher than in the civilian power plant world. They had to be as the mission of the Navy is war, not just sitting around for months making power. When I was an instructor there were days when we would startup and shutdown the reactor and power plant 12 times a day compared to a civilian plant plant that starts and shuts down once every 3+ months.

I know "how a military reactor works, what fuel it uses, what procedural controls are in place, or what the actual safety record is". And I have a great deal of "Faith in military discipline"? I spent 1 year working 12 hours days to become a qualified Navy Nuclear Operator and at the time the student failure rate in the program was 30%.

So in the end who cares if you are "not impressed" because it is you who knows nothing!

[Luckyknot]

Originally Posted by senormechanico

The XO of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln personally told me that it has three reactors aboard.

That can't be true. Nimitz class carriers only have 2. The Enterprise had 4. Different class though.

[senormechanico]

During a VIP tour, he told me that in his office aboard the vessel.

[Luckyknot]

Unless they had some kind of crazy experiment going on, I don't believe there could be three reactors on that ship. I don't doubt that he said it but I do doubt that he was correct in that statement. Sailorboy, you know anything about this?