henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (11/14/89)
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >From: terryr@ogccse.ogc.edu (Terry Rooker) >A related discussion is the cost of operating the ships. Smaller >carriers would not probably be nuclear powered. In a simple >analysis, this results in cheaper operating costs. But after >considering all the support requirements (less time on station >for refueling, more support vessels to carry the extra fuel, more >escorts for the oilers, etc) they may cost much more... Actually, there is no inherent reason why they couldn't be nuclear powered. You do not need something the size of a supercarrier for nuclear power to be practical. Most nuclear submarines are much smaller than even the smallest carriers. This is a political and financial issue, not a technical problem with the small-carrier concept. Remember, too, that not all of the supercarriers are nuclear. Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
terryr@ogccse.ogc.edu (Terry Rooker) (11/15/89)
From: terryr@ogccse.ogc.edu (Terry Rooker) In article <11370@cbnews.ATT.COM> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: > > >From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) > >Actually, there is no inherent reason why they couldn't be nuclear powered. >You do not need something the size of a supercarrier for nuclear power to >be practical. Most nuclear submarines are much smaller than even the >smallest carriers. This is a political and financial issue, not a >technical problem with the small-carrier concept. I agree that small carriers could be nuclear powered. Partly due to the expense of building and maintaining nuclear power plants, and partly due to the difficulty in keeping nuclear trained personnel the navy has shown a reluctance to build small nuclear powered ships. Look at the nuclear powered strike cruiser program that was cancelled and replaced by the aegis conventional powered ships. All of the navy's CGN's are much smaller than the small carrier that's been discused, so there is no iherent limitation. >Remember, too, that not all of the supercarriers are nuclear. No they aren't, but look at the Nimitz class and follow ons. They show that the navy is dedicated to building only nuclear powered supercarriers. -- Terry Rooker terryr@cse.ogc.edu