4 ms·

I think you have to understand nuclear powered ships in the context of WWII history. The critical loss for the Japanese navy was at Leyte Gulf, which was the l

I think you have to understand nuclear powered ships in the context of WWII history. The critical loss for the Japanese navy was at Leyte Gulf, which was the largest naval battle in the Pacific during the war (and possibly the largest naval battle in history). The significance of the battle was that the Americans secured Phillipine Sea against Japanese shipping and this cut the Japanese off from the oil fields in Indonesia in terms of transporting oil back home. it was only after Leyte Gulf that organized kamikaze attacks began, and the Navy was largely put out of the war by that battle. What that means is that Japan lost WWII when they lost access to oil. So the issue with naval ships is diesel or nuclear. About 1/3 of the US navy is nuclear-powered. The rest runs on diesel. Thats enough our navy (but not our air force, army etc) can continue to run if oil is not available for a time. Our military is still very dependent on oil but not like the Japanese were.

dredmorbius 13y ago
I'm well aware of this history, as well as the earlier transitions of the US fleet from wind to coal (under Admiral Perry) and the British fleet from coal to oil immediately prior to WWI under Churchill. Naval energy needs have driven several fuel transitions, and there's a considerable amount of interesting work that continues to come from the US and other navies. If you'll read further into Rickover's remarks, he makes clear that he pursued nukes because he felt it was essential to national security. But if there had been an alternative he'd have avoided it. Possibly not even, given the benefit of hindsight. Your 1/3 of the US naval fleet being nuclear powered doesn't jibe with stats I can find. Nuclear propulsion is presently limited to aircraft carriers (10) and submarines (82 total), or 21%. A number of cruiser and destroyer nuclear ships were commissioned but all have been decommissioned to the best of my knowledge. Wikipedia cites a total of 80 nuclear powered ships operated by the US navy, since 1954, and 430 ships presently active, on reserve, or under construction. If you limit your concern to commissioned ships, then you'd have 33% nuclear propulsion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_ships_of_the_United_States_Navy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_ships_of_the_U... As for oil: with most effective naval power being projected via aircraft, the reliance on oil remains rather high. Yes, the US would be able to launch nukes or float a flattop off someones shores (given them opportunity for target practice), but if you want to launch aircraft ... somewhere other than into the drink ... you've got to top them off every so often.

dredmorbius 13y ago

I'm well aware of this history, as well as the earlier transitions of the US fleet from wind to coal (under Admiral Perry) and the British fleet from coal to oil immediately prior to WWI under Churchill. Naval energy needs have driven several fuel transitions, and there's a considerable amount of interesting work that continues to come from the US and other navies. If you'll read further into Rickover's remarks, he makes clear that he pursued nukes because he felt it was essential to national security. But if there had been an alternative he'd have avoided it. Possibly not even, given the benefit of hindsight. Your 1/3 of the US naval fleet being nuclear powered doesn't jibe with stats I can find. Nuclear propulsion is presently limited to aircraft carriers (10) and submarines (82 total), or 21%. A number of cruiser and destroyer nuclear ships were commissioned but all have been decommissioned to the best of my knowledge. Wikipedia cites a total of 80 nuclear powered ships operated by the US navy, since 1954, and 430 ships presently active, on reserve, or under construction. If you limit your concern to commissioned ships, then you'd have 33% nuclear propulsion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_ships_of_the_United_States_Navy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_ships_of_the_U... As for oil: with most effective naval power being projected via aircraft, the reliance on oil remains rather high. Yes, the US would be able to launch nukes or float a flattop off someones shores (given them opportunity for target practice), but if you want to launch aircraft ... somewhere other than into the drink ... you've got to top them off every so often.