We should be looking at nuclear to drive our propulsions systems, similar to aircraft carriers. Naturally it would be on a smaller scale, but thats the way we should be heading. Diesel fuel is very expensive and we are pissing money away.....just my opinion.
Chapwood................
This message has been edited. Last edited by: chapwood,
The Navy had Nuclear Cruisers once but it looks like it didn't work out for them as they are all mothballed in Bremerton.
I'm not sure why. I'm thinking it wasn't cost effective to operate and replace reactors every 10 years or so. I'm sure they might let us have one to play around with if we asked. (Hmmm... Nuclear MKs?)
With as much time it's taking to get a Law Enforcement rate that we actually need, I highly doubt we'd be able to get a nuclear MK rate or get them nuclear qualified after spending (possibly a few hundred million bucks or more) to get our aging fleet retro-fitted with nuclear power... Even if we just wanted to install them on the new deeepwater platforms, I don't think that we'd get the funding for it considering the money pit deepwater has turned out to be...
I was not refering to retro fitting anything, I was talking about our new 420' National Secuity Class cutters specifically. Just wait till diesel is 10 dollars a gallon "its coming" and then lets see just how much patrolling we do. Nuclear Steam propulsion systems would not require to be refueled for at least a decade or more. Now is the time to do it, before they are all completely built. I would drather have five running than 10 at the pier. The proven technology is here. I think we all are guilty of focusing on the forest on not looking at the trees. Just once in my career I wish someone would listen to me, just once.
chapwood........
This message has been edited. Last edited by: chapwood,
If I recall from some articles on this cutter, she was to be a steam turbine plant.
"FUTURE COAST GUARD RESEARCH SHIP: Previewed in this artist's concept of the new 374-ft. U.S. Coast Guard high endurance cutter WHE-701 is the most advanced oceanographic vessel of modern times, completion expected in 1972. It is designed to support the Coast Guard and other national oceanographic programs. . .Among other special features the cutter will be equipped with a unique machinery plant including tunnel type bow thruster and bridge control of main propulsion and steering machinery that will be automated to provide safe operation unattended by engineering watchstanders. It will carry advanced computerized communications and ocean data systems. Its hull reinforced for ice work, the cutter will be the first American research ship specially designed for operating from the fringes of the polar ice packs to the tropics. . ."
Cool. I'm making that my wallpaper. Good to see others looking outside of the box. Some significant differences exist, but Diesel is no longer .99 a gallon.
chapwood...........
This message has been edited. Last edited by: chapwood,
Bunker C has got to be a lot less expensive than the diesel.
The steam turbine was a good system that has stood the seagoing test of time.
May take an engineering shake up again, and a lot more quals for the Machinists Mates / Boilertenders to reappear.
Read somewhere that during WW2, commands on diesel ships were reminded to advance their engineers to the new Motor Machinists Mate rating and not to the Machinists Mate rating. They did not want the lesser trained and lesser skilled MoMMs getting mingled with the more highly trained MMs.
Master Mate --> Nice picture... too bad the artist left off the "U.S." before "Coast Guard..... As you know, the CG made a big deal about this many years ago....
At first the "U. S" was not used. Not sure when it was included on the hull, but I have a picture of the ESCANABA with the slash and "COAST GUARD" on the hull.
Good to see others looking outside of the box. Some significant differences exist, but Diesel is no longer .99 a gallon.
