News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel. Parent comment

Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by DuskStar on Saturday December 07, 2019 @03:41AM (#21729196)
And even without pirates, merchant vessels have incidents with disturbing frequency. A lot of these incidents never have a cause firmly attached to them, because the crew's all dead, the ship is somewhere in a 10,000 square kilometer stretch of ocean, and that ocean is 1km+ deep. Not that the wreck being known and (relatively) shallow is a panacea either, as the variety [0] of hypotheses concerning the cause of the Edmund Fitzgerald wreck should demonstrate.

I trust the US Navy to operate reactors at sea - they've done a damn good job of it over the years, with no losses since 1968. And even those losses (USS Thresher, SSN-593 [1] and USS Scorpion, SSN-589 [2]) haven't caused radiation leaks. Merchant shippers? Yeahhhhh.... No.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Edmund_Fitzgerald#Hypothese...

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Thresher_(SSN-593)

2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Scorpion_(SSN-589)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by sterlind on Saturday December 07, 2019 @06:10AM (#21729639)
Maybe you could get the US Navy to crew a few container mega-ships in the national interest of international commerce? Reducing climate change and political concern over the carbon involved is arguably a better use of the Navy's time than fleet exercises, and it wouldn't take that many people.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by simonh on Saturday December 07, 2019 @06:40AM (#21729749)
There are over 9,000 fully cellular container ships operational right now, and container ships are only 13% of global merchant shipping capacity. The roughly 70 ~20k TEU megaships all together are only 10% of total container ship capacity. A few megaships is insignificant in overall economic terms.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by jiofih on Saturday December 07, 2019 @08:05AM (#21730068)
What is the other 87%? How is that possible if 90% of goods are transported by sea?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by maxerickson on Saturday December 07, 2019 @08:53AM (#21730264)
The majority of goods are on bulk carriers and tankers. Grain, coal, oil, etc.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by jiofih on Saturday December 07, 2019 @08:32PM (#21733840)
The parent said “container ships are only 13% of global merchant shipping capacity”. I’m wondering how else goods are being transported...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by maxerickson on Saturday December 07, 2019 @08:32PM (#21733847)
Indeed, bulk carriers and tankers are ships that aren't container ships.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by cc81 on Saturday December 07, 2019 @06:44AM (#21729764)
Sure, but as a whole they have had a few rough years.

https://features.propublica.org/navy-accidents/us-navy-crash...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by DuskStar on Saturday December 07, 2019 @12:28PM (#21731424)
Right, but even those accidents wouldn't have caused a radiation leak if the destroyers in question were nuclear powered.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by ianai on Saturday December 07, 2019 @04:16AM (#21729280)
How often are subs lost? I have no recollection of numerous losses, but I think they’re also only ran by nations. I wonder if they’re inherently more stable.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by DuskStar on Saturday December 07, 2019 @12:32PM (#21731440)
I'm pretty sure submarines are lost more often than surface warships are - the difference between small incident and loss of ship is just so much smaller. And to confirm that I can't think of any surface warships that have been lost by the US or Russian navies out of combat since 1950, but both have lost several submarines in that same time period.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by nradov on Saturday December 07, 2019 @04:55PM (#21732823)
Your general point is correct. But the USS Guardian surface ship was lost when it ran aground in 2013. It didn't quite sink but couldn't be repaired.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by DuskStar on Saturday December 07, 2019 @10:03PM (#21734111)
Other entries would be USS Benevolence [0] in 1950, USS Hobson (DMS 26) [1] in 1952, USNS Mission San Francisco (T-AO-123) [2] in 1957, USNS Mission San Miguel (T-AO-129) [3] in 1957, USS Stickleback (SS-415) [4] in 1958, USS Grouse (AMS-15) [5] in 1963, USS Bache (DD-470) [6] in 1968, USS Frank E Evans (DD 754) [7] in 1969, USNS Sgt. Jack J. Pendleton (T-AKV-5) [8] in 1973 and USS La Moure County (LST-1194) [9] in 2000.

But I think that's the rest of the noncombat, post-1950 losses. Lots of support ships, DDs and a single sub.

And thanks for the mention of the USS Guardian - I had no idea the USN still operated wooden-framed ships!

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Benevolence

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Hobson_(DD-464)

2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USNS_Mission_San_Francisco

3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USNS_Mission_San_Miguel

4: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Stickleback_(SS-415)

5: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Grouse_(AMS-15)

6: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Bache_(DD-470)

7: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Frank_E._Evans

8: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USNS_Sgt._Jack_J._Pendleton_(T...

9: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_La_Moure_County_(LST-1194)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by corrund on Saturday December 07, 2019 @11:20AM (#21731030)
K-431 - 1985 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_K-431

K-219 - 1986 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_K-219

Burevesnik - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyonoksa_radiation_accident

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rolls-Royce Touts Nuclear Reactors as Key to Clean Jet Fuel by DuskStar on Saturday December 07, 2019 @12:27PM (#21731414)
I think the US Navy would be very interested to learn that it supposedly operated Soviet submarines.
[ Parent | on HN ]