4 ms·
Maybe a non-event for safety but what about getting the plant operating again?
by thinkcontext 2mo ago
Maybe a non-event for safety but what about getting the plant operating again?
- roughly 2mo agoAlmost certainly a better problem to have.
- CoryOndrejka 2mo agoI don't know this plant. In navy submarine reactors like the S5W, you have 440V/3-phase power holding the clamp. If you dropped a rod due to a power or clamp malfunction, usually you'd simply shut down the reactor, drop all the rods and mechanically re-engage the clamp. It could take a few hours which isn't fun because no power which probably means submarine/snorkel depth to run the incredibly noisy diesel, but no step was particularly hard or dangerous.
- mlsu 2mo agoNow I’m curious. What if it occurs when you’re like under the enemy and you can’t surface? Do you have to just chill at depth until you can get the reactor running again?
- 486sx33 2mo ago[dead]
- johnecheck 2mo agoI'd imagine the operational capabilities of nuclear submarines are somewhat confidential.
- wat10000 2mo agoWarships have a “battle short” on some critical equipment, which will bypass safety equipment like fuses. If your gun turret traversal motors pull too much current in the middle of a battle, you’d rather risk damage or fire to have them keep working rather than disable themselves to protect from a fault. Total speculation here, but it would make sense for military reactors to have something similar, to put them in a mode where the threat of a reactor accident due to a malfunction is less than the threat from the enemy if it goes down. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battleshort https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battleshort
- sitharus 2mo agoLikewise commercial aircraft have bypasses on the fuel and oil filters in case they get clogged in flight. The engine will need a thorough inspection if this happens but it's better to damage the engine if it gets you to the nearest airfield.
- rogerrogerr 2mo agoI’ve never been in the Navy or on a submarine, but my impression is that SUBSAFE is about never ever having a reactor accident, at least partially for PR reasons. It wouldn’t surprise me if there simply are not procedures to deliberately put the reactor in a dangerous state. The Navy may have done the math and determined the loss of a boat to the enemy is a less bad thing than the loss of a boat to a “nuclear accident”. I desperately hope for and welcome anyone with experience in the space to correct me.
- pmontra 2mo agoWouldn't a nuclear powered ship sunk by enemy fire be a nuclear accident on its own? There would be a nuclear reactor on the seafloor, possibly a turned on one, surrounded by failed systems. I don't think it ever happened at war, but while I was looking for [1] I found a number of other incidents. I list them below [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kursk_submarine_disaster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kursk_submarine_disaster [2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0029549321003927 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00295... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_K-19 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_K-19 [4] https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/soviet-nuclear-submarine-sinks-atlantic https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/soviet-nucle... [5] https://gizmodo.com/sunken-soviet-submarine-is-quietly-leaking-radiation-decades-later-study-finds-2000737006 https://gizmodo.com/sunken-soviet-submarine-is-quietly-leaki... [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_incident_off_Kildin_Island https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_incident_off_Kildin_... [7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_incident_off_Kola_Peninsula_(1993) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_incident_off_Kola_Pe...
- 2mo ago
- msisk6 2mo agoThe ship can operate for a bit on decay heat. And they have battery banks to run major systems until conditions allow running at snorkel depth on the diesel engine. And rumor has it some of the nuclear subs may work with a Stirling engine which can operate systems on heat alone.
- cucumber3732842 2mo agoThe small sub world is going toward AIP. I wouldn't be surprised if the big ones have AIP for emergency power.
- lazide 2mo agoAIP?
- preisschild 2mo agoAIP range is still limited though, especially at fast speeds. Thats why even the newest 212CDs still have have snorkels for their diesel and diesels are loud. SSNs are much better for global power projection.
- cucumber3732842 2mo agoFine for running electric power for a time though. Which is probably what you'd use it for on a nuclear sub. Assuming you can spare the space/weight in your design.
- preisschild 2mo agoAn S5W scram probably has contributed to USS Tresher sinking because they couldn't get it running fast enough again https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Thresher_(SSN-593)#Cause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Thresher_(SSN-593)#Cause
- Angostura 2mo agoThe final paragraph of the article > According to NextEra Energy, Unit 1 at St. Lucie is back online at 100% power after operators safely resolved an equipment issue. I wish the article had said where on earth St Lucie is. Never heard of it
- eastbound 2mo agoSt Lucie: Island in the South of the Caribbean. Source: lunch games https://worldlegame.io https://worldlegame.io https://flagle.org https://flagle.org
- 486sx33 2mo ago[dead]
- billygoat 2mo agoThis St. Lucie is in Florida USA, on the Atlantic coast north of Palm Beach and south of Orlando.
- mhurron 2mo agoIt's a local TV station, the target audience already knows where so the information is superfluous. And the breadcrumbs at the top of the page give you enough information to find out if you're not in the target audience.
- wat10000 2mo agoYou can look it up.
- throwaway2037 2mo agoI also didn't know "St. Lucie". I Googled for "St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant" to find it.