4 ms·
That makes no sense-a nuclear powered carrier that doesn't require underway replenishment, would be much more capable if its escorts also didn't require convent
by ZanyProgrammer 12y ago
That makes no sense-a nuclear powered carrier that doesn't require underway replenishment, would be much more capable if its escorts also didn't require conventional oil fueling.
If the US had continued to build nuclear powered surface ships through the end of the cold war, then it probably wouldn't be so expensive-economies of scale, plus you'd still have the infrastructure and training pipeline there.
- 30thElement 12y agoCarrier attack groups have a refueling ship along with all the cruisers/attack ships. It probably makes sense, just going by the size differences the carrier would use more conventional fuel than all of its escorts combined, so having the carrier be nuclear powered doubles your range.
- vonmoltke 12y ago> That makes no sense-a nuclear powered carrier that doesn't require underway replenishment, would be much more capable if its escorts also didn't require conventional oil fueling. The battle group still needs underway replenishment for food, ammunition, avgas, maintenance materials, and all the other various and sundry items required to keep ships functioning. Fuel isn't that big a deal when combined with all of these other items. Also, nuclear reactors were replaced with gas turbines in surface ships. Nuclear is attractive versus the older oil-fired boilers. Large gas turbines changed the calculus. The steaming range of cruisers and destroyers with gas turbine power plants is excellent, hence the reason fuel is not a big deal to add to all the other stuff that needs to be provided for the battle group.
- forgotketchup 12y agoLack of qualified operators is real operational problem. Majoring in physics pretty much guaranteed you a NROTC scholarship, if you wanted one, back when I was in undergrad. Around a third of my cohort (and the ones graduating immediately before and after mine) were in NROTC, and every last one of them was earmarked for the nuclear program when they finished school. I'd speculate that the Navy simply doesn't have enough personnel to put a nuclear drive-train on every cruiser, much less the entire fleet. Edit: grammar Edit2: Also, keep in mind that aircraft don't run on uranium. A carrier group needs tanker replenishment anyway, so switching to nuclear ship propulsion doesn't save you from needing to worry about the logistics of transporting large volumes of flammable liquid to the group.
- cobrausn 12y agoWhat I was always told when I worked as a nuclear power operator in the Navy is that it's not so much that the people could not be found and trained, it was that on anything smaller than a carrier the engine room crew ended up being half the crew of the ship. The larger engine room crew size necessitated designing the entire ship around a larger ship crew, which introduces a whole lot of other logistical and practical concerns.
- cicero 12y agoIf I remember correctly, nuclear power also gives an aircraft carrier the speed to create more wind over the flight deck to help in aircraft operations.