|
Is the steam for US carrier catapults tapped straight off the reactor or generated seperately?
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 10:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 03:28 |
|
|
I believe it's the same steam from the reactor system that is used to drive the turbines and provide motive power. However, I don't think that particular water ever enters the reactor cores -- the reactor coolant goes through a heat exchanger and passes its energy to clean water in a separate circuit. So a bit of both, really.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 10:42
|
|
|
I was at a client to check up network, when i found this: Do I need to mention they are Chinese company?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 10:57
|
|
|
What am I seeing here that should be an issue?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 11:07
|
|
|
is the apple charger genuine?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 11:07
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:California has an area like that. It’s called the Lost Coast. Oh, thanks, I never thought too deeply about why the highway doesn't hug the coast there. The Claptain posted:I was at a client to check up network, when i found this: That's a nice power board. What's the problem, it doesn't have overload protection?  No seriously, I don't know what's wrong with it except maybe there are lots of holes into which you could accidentally put something metal and get electrocuted, it's not my department but I'm curious. Also it looks like maybe it used to be hanging by the cords?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 11:12
|
|
|
There is something weird with the holes. It looks like you can accidentally plug in certain socket types with the reverse polarity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 11:48
|
|
|
Buttcoin purse posted:Oh, thanks, I never thought too deeply about why the highway doesn't hug the coast there. Best guess is 230V expected on the type I/C sockets, 110V expected on any type A plug you may attach to it. China is 230V at the wall (allegedly).
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 11:51
|
|
|
It's one of those universal ones for EU, North American and Australian plugs. Reverse polarity doesn't really matter for most things.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 11:52
|
|
|
Being able to plug in grounded Shuko plugs is a issue. Ungrounded europlug sockets are supposed to have a guard around them so you can put in round plugs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 12:08
|
|
|
Rectus posted:Being able to plug in grounded Shuko plugs is a issue. Ungrounded europlug sockets are supposed to have a guard around them so you can put in round plugs. This is untrue. e: if you mean that you are not supposed to be able to plug a grounded plug in an ungrounded socket. The other way around, it depends.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 12:10
|
|
|
been watching some air accident documentaries and sometimes they're from another country. this one tickled me 
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 12:28
|
|
|
As stated by some, plugging grounded Schuko plugs in ungrounded sockets is the issue.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 12:36
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:This is untrue. Seems like you're right, I would have though there would be a standard for it. I've never seen any unrecessed plugs here though, apart from janky looking travel adapters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 12:39
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:There is something weird with the holes. It looks like you can accidentally plug in certain socket types with the reverse polarity. Alternating Current doesn't have a polarity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 13:52
|
|
|
Humphreys posted:Alternating Current doesn't have a polarity. Only one pin is neutral. Unless your are using split-phase.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 13:59
|
|
|
Humphreys posted:Alternating Current doesn't have a polarity. Perhaps not from a purely functional perspective, but when you're looking at things with safety in mind...
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:Is the steam for US carrier catapults tapped straight off the reactor or generated seperately? The water in the reactor is fed through a heat exchanger, which is in contact with the working steam loop; this water flashes to superheated steam and is used to feed turbines, catapults and what have you So no the steam wafting around in the opening minutes of Top Gun isn't radioactive, it's never been inside the reactor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 14:13
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:The water in the reactor is fed through a heat exchanger, which is in contact with the working steam loop; this water flashes to superheated steam and is used to feed turbines, catapults and what have you Yeah I think he was asking the first part of your answer not if radioactivity spewed out of aircraft carriers. All the power generated on a carrier comes from the reactor, there are probably backup diesel generators but they're not running 99.9% of the time. It's quite impressive really, the ship essentially has a full gas tank for its entire life. But the obvious flaw is obvious, it's a reactor on a warship.. so if one of the ship gets ever gets blown up in an actual war it has the potential to be an ecological disaster. Not even considering engineering accidents that may or may not occur
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
ethanol posted:Yeah I think he was asking the first part of your answer not if radioactivity spewed out of aircraft carriers. All the power generated on a carrier comes from the reactor, there are probably backup diesel generators but they're not running 99.9% of the time. It's quite impressive really, the ship essentially has a full gas tank for its entire life. But the obvious flaw is obvious, it's a reactor on a warship.. so if one of the ship gets ever gets blown up in an actual war it has the potential to be an ecological disaster. Not even considering engineering accidents that may or may not occur If it's any consolation any hostile country than can theoretically penetrate a carrier group to sink the carrier will also probably have strategic nukes which means the sinking would either be taking place in the course of, or as a prelude to, global thermonuclear war, which means a couple of naval reactors leaking into the ocean will probably be the least of anyone's problems 
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 14:54
|
|
|
LUBE UP YOUR BUTT posted:If it's any consolation any hostile country than can theoretically penetrate a carrier group to sink the carrier will also probably have strategic nukes which means the sinking would either be taking place in the course of, or as a prelude to, global thermonuclear war, which means a couple of naval reactors leaking into the ocean will probably be the least of anyone's problems Dude anyone can do it with missiles on speedboats .
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 15:38
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:So no the steam wafting around in the opening minutes of Top Gun isn't radioactive
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
Facebook Aunt posted:Are you sure? What if you're just haunting the forums. This is your hell. Nah, they closed GBS. This has to be purgatory at worst.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 16:22
|
|
|
LUBE UP YOUR BUTT posted:If it's any consolation any hostile country than can theoretically penetrate a carrier group to sink the carrier will also probably have strategic nukes which means the sinking would either be taking place in the course of, or as a prelude to, global thermonuclear war, which means a couple of naval reactors leaking into the ocean will probably be the least of anyone's problems Even precluding this, I'd imagine there's enough backup containment to keep the radioactivity to a minimum. If I'm not mistaken, water is one of the best things with which you can shield an exposed source.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
Wasabi the J posted:If I'm not mistaken, water is one of the best things with which you can shield an exposed source. True, if submerged in water it won't be able to hurt anything via direct radiation other than curious fish. But if the core ruptures, the currents will pick up and carry all kinds of dangerous stuff and it'll spread throughout the ecosystem like mercury does.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
haveblue posted:True, if submerged in water it won't be able to hurt anything via direct radiation other than curious fish. But if the core ruptures, the currents will pick up and carry all kinds of dangerous stuff and it'll spread throughout the ecosystem like mercury does. There's a helluva lot of ocean, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 16:44
|
|
|
Turns out there's a lot of extant data on just how locked down those reactors are with respect to degradation sitting at the bottom. No data on what happens if the reactor is specifically blown the gently caress up but its not like its a compartment sitting next to the hull.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
Decrepus posted:Dude anyone can do it with missiles on speedboats . Lol if you think some dudes with missiles can penetrate to the reactor compartment before a CIWS destroys them. Even without that there's no way they could do much to the ship. Look at what happens to those random pirates who fire missiles at US ships now and then. Sure it might end up in a shipyard for a while but the ship will be largely fine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
Jabor posted:There's a helluva lot of ocean, though. The radiation wouldn't be evenly spread out across the world
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
Olothreutes posted:Lol if you think some dudes with missiles can penetrate to the reactor compartment before a CIWS destroys them. Even without that there's no way they could do much to the ship. Look at what happens to those random pirates who fire missiles at US ships now and then. Sure it might end up in a shipyard for a while but the ship will be largely fine. I'm pretty sure Decrepus was making reference to that US Naval wargaming exercise where one of the commanders (admiral? idk) decided to just say gently caress it to the rules and had stuff like instantaneous bike courier messaging and the aforementioned missiles on speedboats.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
Chard posted:I'm pretty sure Decrepus was making reference to that US Naval wargaming exercise where one of the commanders (admiral? idk) decided to just say gently caress it to the rules and had stuff like instantaneous bike courier messaging and the aforementioned missiles on speedboats. IIRC the exploit player's fleet in that wargame was made up entirely of boats with no engines and a single missile and he used couriers to relay messages because they were abstracted to be instant and impossible to intercept or disable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
Improbable Lobster posted:IIRC the exploit player's fleet in that wargame was made up entirely of boats with no engines and a single missile and he used couriers to relay messages because they were abstracted to be instant and impossible to intercept or disable. I'm picturing, like, an outrigger canoe, but one of the pontoons is just a giant fuckoff ICBM
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
I think they had engines, it was just that the weight of the missile they were packing would have swamped the boats the moment they touched water
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:I think they had engines, it was just that the weight of the missile they were packing would have swamped the boats the moment they touched water Either way he was taking advantage of abstractions to make an absurd and unbeatable fleet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
Chard posted:I'm pretty sure Decrepus was making reference to that US Naval wargaming exercise where one of the commanders (admiral? idk) decided to just say gently caress it to the rules and had stuff like instantaneous bike courier messaging and the aforementioned missiles on speedboats. That was one aspect of it, another was "launch all your cruise missiles at them at once since they can't shoot them all down." Which is actually a legitimate strategy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
Improbable Lobster posted:The radiation wouldn't be evenly spread out across the world It'd be pretty evenly spread across most of Europe, Asia, and North America, to be fair.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
SealHammer posted:That was one aspect of it, another was "launch all your cruise missiles at them at once since they can't shoot them all down." Which is actually a legitimate strategy. The war game was Millennium Challenge 2002. Most of the stories describing it as "the US military scripted everything so they'd win and prove themselves right" were told from the perspective of General Van Riper, the guy who went off the rails. The exercise had certain time and capability constraints, as it was meant to test a specific scenario. Van Riper violated the capability restraints to simulate a fleet of commercial aircraft, speedboats, and hidden ballistic missile launchers launching kamikaze attacks that wiped out an entire naval battle group in 10 minutes. The problem is that the projected forces they were testing against didn't have these capabilities. And he did do the things like instant motorcycle couriers (so they could have communication lines that couldn't be intercepted) and foreknowledge of the enemy capabilities (like knowing they were sending in V-22s when the real aircraft wouldn't be fielded for another 5 years and thus knowing their weaknesses) which effectively "cheated". And true to the terms of the test, the battleground we were facing in 2007 (the projected date they were testing) was nothing like the fiction Van Riper concocted. chitoryu12 fucked around with this message at 19:59 on Feb 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
SealHammer posted:That was one aspect of it, another was "launch all your cruise missiles at them at once since they can't shoot them all down." Which is actually a legitimate strategy. He also abstracted the initial guidance for the missiles. Normally you'd need to light up a RADAR on your boat to provide the missile with target data prior to launch. But he wanted to give no warning of the launches, so gently caress just don't do that poo poo I guess??? So you had fleets of boats and planes too small to carry large missiles fitted with said large missiles in complete secrecy just to blindfire them in a mass attack coordinated by teleporting motorcycle messengers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
Yea, so much hype was around the dude winning with "unconventional" tactics but really he's just that guy that makes you wanna flip tables at Magic tournaments.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 03:28 |
|
|
ethanol posted:Yeah I think he was asking the first part of your answer not if radioactivity spewed out of aircraft carriers. All the power generated on a carrier comes from the reactor, there are probably backup diesel generators but they're not running 99.9% of the time. It's quite impressive really, the ship essentially has a full gas tank for its entire life. But the obvious flaw is obvious, it's a reactor on a warship.. so if one of the ship gets ever gets blown up in an actual war it has the potential to be an ecological disaster. Not even considering engineering accidents that may or may not occur This part isn't true. American nuclear carriers are refuelled as part of their refit/overhaul process, usually about every ten years. Nuclear submarines are also refuelled during their service lifetime. This is one of the reasons america has so many carriers, they need to force project in multiple locations simultaneously, have some down for general stores replenishment and crew rotation, some available for training, some undergoing refit, and some on rapid response. Carrier groups are the backbone of american soft power, each one is a piece of american territory that can be parked right next to a country. There are really good reasons nobody ever questions to dollar costs, because those are outweighed by everything else they do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:55
|
|
