7 ms·

US Navy Nuclear Power School Study Materials

84 points by jonwachob91 10y ago

jeff487 10y ago
these are actually Department of Energy study materials, not the actual Naval Reactors training materials used in Naval Nuclear Power School.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- tbihl 10y ago
  Both of those are true, but it's worth noting that actual training manuals are also DoE. Naval Reactors occupies a unique space, due to a couple things: 1. the Navy is the only service that didn't get their nuclear 'toys' taken away from them for being irresponsible. 2. Rickover was an incredible pain in the ass to everyone who got in his way for the better part of four decades.
metaphor 10y ago
Considering how unsurprisingly shallow the material is, I'm guessing this is enlisted training material...you know, the type that's quickly forgotten shortly after A school.
- CalChris 10y ago
  No. After A school, you will still have to qualify on the boat.
  - labrador 10y ago
    The nuke track is: After A school (Electrician, Electronic, or Mechanical) you go to Naval Nuclear Power School. From there you go to land-based prototype training on an actual reactor. From there you go to a boat to try to qualify.
    - metaphor 10y ago
      I stand corrected: the type that's quickly forgotten after qualifying on a boat.
      - lithos 10y ago
        If you forget it, it'll come back to haunt you. Nukes are constantly being tested and requalifying. The NAVY does an outstanding job of punishing a nuke that does horribly at either of those.
      - brandmeyer 10y ago
        So. You know those whiteboard interviews that software engineers love to gripe about? In software engineering, you only have to take those once before you're hired, and then you can start forgetting them. In the Navy, you take those continuously, and they are somewhat more extensive. You have them at the end of your practical training phase on land, you have them at every individual job you qualify for on the ship, Naval Reactors comes and gives them to the entire crew every year, and so on. In my six year tour, I must have gone through at least 150 oral interviews of one kind or another. On top of the constant interviewing, there's also continuous written exams, and various engineering casualty drills (eg, model that something breaks, and observe the crew respond to the failure). If you're lucky enough to get stationed on a 17-year old boat, then you get to constantly exercise the fundamentals, too. As various pieces of equipment fail in new and novel ways, the troubleshooting process drives you to constantly construct, support, and/or refute hypothesis as to why it broke and just what must be done to fix it.
labrador 10y ago
These are not the materials we studied at Naval Nuclear Power School in the 80's, which were considerably greater in depth (6 mo course)
- jonwachob91 10y ago
  I'm fairly certain this material was designed more as a prep-work for completion prior to A-School.
- ayb 10y ago
  This stuff just scratches the surface. They wouldn't post official training materials that went in depth on how ship specific systems work (even for older systems that may no longer be in use).
analognoise 10y ago
This raises an interesting question - what kinds of textbooks are out there already, produced by the government/military, and available for use? Could they be expanded/adapted, published for free, and put downward pressure on the (ludicrous) price of textbooks in the US?
- xjwm 10y ago
  NASA has an e-book collection on their site: https://www.nasa.gov/connect/ebooks/ https://www.nasa.gov/connect/ebooks/
- Bud 10y ago
  This makes a couple assumptions: 1) There's not much legitimate value in the textbooks we have now. Those who did that work don't really deserve to make money from it, and their labor would be easy to replace. 2) It'd be free or essentially free to "expand and adapt" military documents and make them into textbooks that are accurate, current, and suitable for educating non-military folks.
  - analognoise 10y ago
    1) How did you get from "downward pressure" to "not much legitimate value"? The original statement was nuanced enough to cover this and definitely didn't make that assumption. 2) You're right, no such project has ever existed; I'd imagine it would be like an encyclopedia, full of people who donate their time to edit page about various subjects. Such a project could never stay current, definitely isn't suitable for education, and almost certainly will never surpass the accuracy or magnitude of my Microsoft Encarta CDs. [0] [0] https://www.wikipedia.org/ https://www.wikipedia.org/
- metaphor 10y ago
  Lots of military handbooks out there available to the public...612 records to be exact: do a Document ID search for MIL-HDBK using DLA's dot-mil-official search tool[1]. Roughly half are still active. [1] http://quicksearch.dla.mil/ http://quicksearch.dla.mil/
- cocoablazing 10y ago
JumpCrisscross 10y ago
What are the pre-requisite knowledge requirements?
- labrador 10y ago
  Most nukes I knew were college dropouts with a math/science orientation. The only requirements in the early 80's when I qualified were high scores on Navy science and math aptitude tests. I dropped out of U.C.Berkeley after a year and a half of physics/math - couldn't pass English.
  - normaljoe 10y ago
    Nukes have been and probably will always be the best underachievers you have ever known. Killed a scholarship, check. Didn't get the scholarship check. They tend to be smart and marginally good. The thing is though going through that program tends to right ships and get them in the right place. I have seen this with so many of my friends and with my self. We get back on the right track and get everything else in order. I am now at a 6 figure income and support most of my family. I would never be there without the support of such a program. I can say I pissed away my upbringing, but in reality I learned to be the man I am with that help.
- pooloo1 10y ago
  High ASVAB scores really is about it, and even that is waivable. After they go through boot camp, they will generally get filtered out through attrition at their respective A-School (training school), which is why the requirements can be waived, and they go to a new job.
  - brandmeyer 10y ago
    Very much unlike college admissions (where it's relatively hard to get in, and also hard to flunk out of), it is relatively easy to get into and and also easy to flunk out of the enlisted nuclear program. In my class, the failure rate was about 60% overall, and I think that's pretty typical. They start the failure process pretty early, too, starting with the first round of exams. The Navy is happy to find you another job that isn't quite as demanding. Most of the non-nuclear submariners I worked with were "failed" nukes. In college, it seems like folks are more likely to fail out completely then they are to fail into a less demanding degree that they could still succeed in.
rdtsc 10y ago
In general how much does being in the Navy and working on Nuclear Powered vessels help with getting a job as a civilian Nuclear Engineer say at a power plant? I would imagine a full Engineering degree would be required, or is there some fast tracking option specifically geared for ex-Navy operators?
- labrador 10y ago
  At least in the 80's when I was in, it helped a lot. Many civilian nuke operators trained in the Navy. I have two shipmates (enlisted men) who went into operations at civilian plants. I found I like programming better and thought after 3 mile island that nuclear didn't have a bright future. We may have come full circle with global warming and the need to produce less carbon.
  - normaljoe 10y ago
    As a former operator in the mid to late 90s I was forced to study TMI. I am pretty sure every operator today has done the same study. There are several lessons learned there but in reality it is really a case for how to do things going forward. I seriously doubt those mistakes will happen again.
- jonwachob91 10y ago
  My understanding is not much as an enlistee (unless you put in 20+ years and bust your ass on your own time), but you will be a nuclear engineer at the end of training if you are an officer. But I do think a fair number of nuclear engineers and operators are veterans. The training is too expensive for most organizations to train individuals, and the ones that can train you don't have the resources that the navy has for training. Serve 6 years making shit pay, get your training, transition the civilian world making 6 figures. I had a math professor that spent 20 years as a navy nuclear operator (enlisted). At the end of his career he had 2 masters from MIT, one in Math and one in Nuclear Engineering. My understanding is that is fairly common for the best and brightest in the program.
  - gaius 10y ago
nwatson 10y ago
I considered the nuclear navy program in 1986/1987 as a college junior, looked like an interesting opportunity. There were 3 tracks (not the official terms): + nuclear operator on a ship or submarine + nuclear school instructor + naval nuclear reactor program manager I qualified for the "naval nuclear reactor program manager" and went to San Diego to tour a nuclear submarine, then a few months later flew to DC. The local university recruiter accompanied me both times. Nobody told me much what the "naval nuclear reactor program manager" work involved because they really didn't know and couldn't say. I finally had a chance in DC to talk to someone who actually did the work, and the fit didn't seem quite right at the time -- I'd be traveling a lot to GE, Westinghouse, etc., and reviewing designs, change management, etc., -- not a lot of original work. The few days before the meeting I'd been wavering every hour or so. Had they caught me a few minutes before or after, who knows, I might have decided differently. I felt sorry for the recruiter. Of course, I was naïve at the time -- nobody, especially in nuclear, starts off with original work. I count that as one of the four or five big forks in my own "destiny". edit: the naïve part.
- devoply 10y ago
  How did your life work out in the end?
  - nwatson 10y ago
    Thanks for asking, and I'm not yet at "the end"! I'll say the first big fork was deciding to forego free EE education at Universidade de Brasília and living a Brazilian life in favor of going to my family's US stomping grounds in Arizona. There were many student strikes in Brazil at the time, I didn't want to spend 8 years on a BSE, and was sure all my family would end up in the US eventually anyway. I didn't want to be so far away. The second fork was not entering the navy nuclear program. The next was foundering in grad school with an NSF Fellowship. I'd say social/personal issues got in the way, and though I'd try to blame grad school context, I'd lost my creative drive. My oldest brother had an "in" to early access to the Apple Newton at the time so I headed to Silicon Valley, and we tried to build something on the platform. After several months and seeing the idea/platform wouldn't pan out for our use case, I started working at SV startups. I did the SV startup thing for 19 years, had some good experiences. My wife wanted to move ... so the next big fork was moving to North Carolina. I continued SV work (almost 3 years at one really really really crappy podunk startup), and recently moved on to a former-startup-division-in-a-large-enterprise-security-company. My current team is awesome and I learn something new every day. Those are the big professional forks so far ... as for professional future, I don't know. I've got a couple of ideas I'd like to pursue some time. But then there's time with my daughter, relative ease of a near-SV (?) salary in NC, etc. In all, I can't complain.
callesgg 10y ago
Leads to many of 404 errors.
tzury 10y ago
All the PDF within the page: http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Math/math_assign.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Physics/physics_assign.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Radiation/rf_assign.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Chemistry/chem_assign.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Math/math_quest.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Physics/physics_quest.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Radiation/rf_quest.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Chemistry/chem_quest.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Math/math_sol.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Physics/physics_sol.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Radiation/rf_sol.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Chemistry/chem_sol.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Math/doe_math_v1.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Physics/doe_phys.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Radiation/doe_radiological_training.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Chemistry/doe_chemistry_v1.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Math/doe_math_v2.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Physics/doe_phys_nuc.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Radiation/doe_reactor_theory_v1.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Electrical%20Eng/ee_assign.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Thermo/thermo_assign.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/RD/rd_assign.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Electrical%20Eng/ee_quest.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Thermo/thermo_quest.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/RD/rd_quest.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Electrical%20Eng/ee_sol.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Thermo/thermo_sol.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/RD/rd_sol.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Electrical%20Eng/applied_ee_v1.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Thermo/doe_htff_v1.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/RD/doe_rx_theory_v2.pdf
ChefDenominator 10y ago
This is not the material used in the enlisted program when I went through it. I specifically recall reading about quarks and spin in the physics text book because they were not in the notes or TGOs even though they influence decay. Quarks are not in the linked page pdfs.

84 points by jonwachob91 10y ago

these are actually Department of Energy study materials, not the actual Naval Reactors training materials used in Naval Nuclear Power School.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
tbihl 10y ago
Both of those are true, but it's worth noting that actual training manuals are also DoE. Naval Reactors occupies a unique space, due to a couple things: 1. the Navy is the only service that didn't get their nuclear 'toys' taken away from them for being irresponsible. 2. Rickover was an incredible pain in the ass to everyone who got in his way for the better part of four decades.

metaphor 10y ago

Considering how unsurprisingly shallow the material is, I'm guessing this is enlisted training material...you know, the type that's quickly forgotten shortly after A school.

CalChris 10y ago
No. After A school, you will still have to qualify on the boat.
- labrador 10y ago
  The nuke track is: After A school (Electrician, Electronic, or Mechanical) you go to Naval Nuclear Power School. From there you go to land-based prototype training on an actual reactor. From there you go to a boat to try to qualify.
  - metaphor 10y ago
    I stand corrected: the type that's quickly forgotten after qualifying on a boat.
    - lithos 10y ago
      If you forget it, it'll come back to haunt you. Nukes are constantly being tested and requalifying. The NAVY does an outstanding job of punishing a nuke that does horribly at either of those.
    - brandmeyer 10y ago
      So. You know those whiteboard interviews that software engineers love to gripe about? In software engineering, you only have to take those once before you're hired, and then you can start forgetting them. In the Navy, you take those continuously, and they are somewhat more extensive. You have them at the end of your practical training phase on land, you have them at every individual job you qualify for on the ship, Naval Reactors comes and gives them to the entire crew every year, and so on. In my six year tour, I must have gone through at least 150 oral interviews of one kind or another. On top of the constant interviewing, there's also continuous written exams, and various engineering casualty drills (eg, model that something breaks, and observe the crew respond to the failure). If you're lucky enough to get stationed on a 17-year old boat, then you get to constantly exercise the fundamentals, too. As various pieces of equipment fail in new and novel ways, the troubleshooting process drives you to constantly construct, support, and/or refute hypothesis as to why it broke and just what must be done to fix it.

labrador 10y ago

These are not the materials we studied at Naval Nuclear Power School in the 80's, which were considerably greater in depth (6 mo course)

jonwachob91 10y ago
I'm fairly certain this material was designed more as a prep-work for completion prior to A-School.
ayb 10y ago
This stuff just scratches the surface. They wouldn't post official training materials that went in depth on how ship specific systems work (even for older systems that may no longer be in use).

analognoise 10y ago

This raises an interesting question - what kinds of textbooks are out there already, produced by the government/military, and available for use? Could they be expanded/adapted, published for free, and put downward pressure on the (ludicrous) price of textbooks in the US?

xjwm 10y ago
NASA has an e-book collection on their site: https://www.nasa.gov/connect/ebooks/ https://www.nasa.gov/connect/ebooks/
Bud 10y ago
This makes a couple assumptions: 1) There's not much legitimate value in the textbooks we have now. Those who did that work don't really deserve to make money from it, and their labor would be easy to replace. 2) It'd be free or essentially free to "expand and adapt" military documents and make them into textbooks that are accurate, current, and suitable for educating non-military folks.
- analognoise 10y ago
  1) How did you get from "downward pressure" to "not much legitimate value"? The original statement was nuanced enough to cover this and definitely didn't make that assumption. 2) You're right, no such project has ever existed; I'd imagine it would be like an encyclopedia, full of people who donate their time to edit page about various subjects. Such a project could never stay current, definitely isn't suitable for education, and almost certainly will never surpass the accuracy or magnitude of my Microsoft Encarta CDs. [0] [0] https://www.wikipedia.org/ https://www.wikipedia.org/
metaphor 10y ago
Lots of military handbooks out there available to the public...612 records to be exact: do a Document ID search for MIL-HDBK using DLA's dot-mil-official search tool[1]. Roughly half are still active. [1] http://quicksearch.dla.mil/ http://quicksearch.dla.mil/
cocoablazing 10y ago

JumpCrisscross 10y ago

What are the pre-requisite knowledge requirements?

labrador 10y ago
Most nukes I knew were college dropouts with a math/science orientation. The only requirements in the early 80's when I qualified were high scores on Navy science and math aptitude tests. I dropped out of U.C.Berkeley after a year and a half of physics/math - couldn't pass English.
- normaljoe 10y ago
  Nukes have been and probably will always be the best underachievers you have ever known. Killed a scholarship, check. Didn't get the scholarship check. They tend to be smart and marginally good. The thing is though going through that program tends to right ships and get them in the right place. I have seen this with so many of my friends and with my self. We get back on the right track and get everything else in order. I am now at a 6 figure income and support most of my family. I would never be there without the support of such a program. I can say I pissed away my upbringing, but in reality I learned to be the man I am with that help.
pooloo1 10y ago
High ASVAB scores really is about it, and even that is waivable. After they go through boot camp, they will generally get filtered out through attrition at their respective A-School (training school), which is why the requirements can be waived, and they go to a new job.
- brandmeyer 10y ago
  Very much unlike college admissions (where it's relatively hard to get in, and also hard to flunk out of), it is relatively easy to get into and and also easy to flunk out of the enlisted nuclear program. In my class, the failure rate was about 60% overall, and I think that's pretty typical. They start the failure process pretty early, too, starting with the first round of exams. The Navy is happy to find you another job that isn't quite as demanding. Most of the non-nuclear submariners I worked with were "failed" nukes. In college, it seems like folks are more likely to fail out completely then they are to fail into a less demanding degree that they could still succeed in.

rdtsc 10y ago

In general how much does being in the Navy and working on Nuclear Powered vessels help with getting a job as a civilian Nuclear Engineer say at a power plant? I would imagine a full Engineering degree would be required, or is there some fast tracking option specifically geared for ex-Navy operators?

labrador 10y ago
At least in the 80's when I was in, it helped a lot. Many civilian nuke operators trained in the Navy. I have two shipmates (enlisted men) who went into operations at civilian plants. I found I like programming better and thought after 3 mile island that nuclear didn't have a bright future. We may have come full circle with global warming and the need to produce less carbon.
- normaljoe 10y ago
  As a former operator in the mid to late 90s I was forced to study TMI. I am pretty sure every operator today has done the same study. There are several lessons learned there but in reality it is really a case for how to do things going forward. I seriously doubt those mistakes will happen again.
jonwachob91 10y ago
My understanding is not much as an enlistee (unless you put in 20+ years and bust your ass on your own time), but you will be a nuclear engineer at the end of training if you are an officer. But I do think a fair number of nuclear engineers and operators are veterans. The training is too expensive for most organizations to train individuals, and the ones that can train you don't have the resources that the navy has for training. Serve 6 years making shit pay, get your training, transition the civilian world making 6 figures. I had a math professor that spent 20 years as a navy nuclear operator (enlisted). At the end of his career he had 2 masters from MIT, one in Math and one in Nuclear Engineering. My understanding is that is fairly common for the best and brightest in the program.
- gaius 10y ago

nwatson 10y ago

I considered the nuclear navy program in 1986/1987 as a college junior, looked like an interesting opportunity. There were 3 tracks (not the official terms): + nuclear operator on a ship or submarine + nuclear school instructor + naval nuclear reactor program manager I qualified for the "naval nuclear reactor program manager" and went to San Diego to tour a nuclear submarine, then a few months later flew to DC. The local university recruiter accompanied me both times. Nobody told me much what the "naval nuclear reactor program manager" work involved because they really didn't know and couldn't say. I finally had a chance in DC to talk to someone who actually did the work, and the fit didn't seem quite right at the time -- I'd be traveling a lot to GE, Westinghouse, etc., and reviewing designs, change management, etc., -- not a lot of original work. The few days before the meeting I'd been wavering every hour or so. Had they caught me a few minutes before or after, who knows, I might have decided differently. I felt sorry for the recruiter. Of course, I was naïve at the time -- nobody, especially in nuclear, starts off with original work. I count that as one of the four or five big forks in my own "destiny". edit: the naïve part.

devoply 10y ago
How did your life work out in the end?
- nwatson 10y ago
  Thanks for asking, and I'm not yet at "the end"! I'll say the first big fork was deciding to forego free EE education at Universidade de Brasília and living a Brazilian life in favor of going to my family's US stomping grounds in Arizona. There were many student strikes in Brazil at the time, I didn't want to spend 8 years on a BSE, and was sure all my family would end up in the US eventually anyway. I didn't want to be so far away. The second fork was not entering the navy nuclear program. The next was foundering in grad school with an NSF Fellowship. I'd say social/personal issues got in the way, and though I'd try to blame grad school context, I'd lost my creative drive. My oldest brother had an "in" to early access to the Apple Newton at the time so I headed to Silicon Valley, and we tried to build something on the platform. After several months and seeing the idea/platform wouldn't pan out for our use case, I started working at SV startups. I did the SV startup thing for 19 years, had some good experiences. My wife wanted to move ... so the next big fork was moving to North Carolina. I continued SV work (almost 3 years at one really really really crappy podunk startup), and recently moved on to a former-startup-division-in-a-large-enterprise-security-company. My current team is awesome and I learn something new every day. Those are the big professional forks so far ... as for professional future, I don't know. I've got a couple of ideas I'd like to pursue some time. But then there's time with my daughter, relative ease of a near-SV (?) salary in NC, etc. In all, I can't complain.

callesgg 10y ago

Leads to many of 404 errors.

tzury 10y ago

All the PDF within the page: http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Math/math_assign.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Physics/physics_assign.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Radiation/rf_assign.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Chemistry/chem_assign.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Math/math_quest.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Physics/physics_quest.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Radiation/rf_quest.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Chemistry/chem_quest.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Math/math_sol.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Physics/physics_sol.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Radiation/rf_sol.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Chemistry/chem_sol.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Math/doe_math_v1.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Physics/doe_phys.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Radiation/doe_radiological_training.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Chemistry/doe_chemistry_v1.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Math/doe_math_v2.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Physics/doe_phys_nuc.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Radiation/doe_reactor_theory_v1.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Electrical%20Eng/ee_assign.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Thermo/thermo_assign.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/RD/rd_assign.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Electrical%20Eng/ee_quest.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Thermo/thermo_quest.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/RD/rd_quest.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Electrical%20Eng/ee_sol.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Thermo/thermo_sol.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/RD/rd_sol.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Electrical%20Eng/applied_ee_v1.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/Thermo/doe_htff_v1.pdf http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/NNPTC/RD/doe_rx_theory_v2.pdf

ChefDenominator 10y ago

This is not the material used in the enlisted program when I went through it. I specifically recall reading about quarks and spin in the physics text book because they were not in the notes or TGOs even though they influence decay. Quarks are not in the linked page pdfs.