Slashdot Mirror


US Navy Decommissions the First Nuclear-Powered Aircraft Carrier (engadget.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Engadget: The Navy has decommissioned the USS Enterprise (CVN-65), the world's first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. The vessel launched in 1961 and is mainly known for playing a pivotal role in several major incidents and conflicts, including the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Vietnam War and the 2003 Iraq War. However, it also served as the quintessential showcase for what nuclear ships could do. Its eight reactors let it run for years at a time, all the while making more room for the aircraft and their fuel. As you might guess, the decommissioning process (which started when the Enterprise went inactive in 2012) is considerably trickier than it would be for a conventional warship. It wasn't until December 2016 that crews finished extracting nuclear fuel, and the ship will have to be partly dismantled to remove the reactors. They'll be disposed of relatively safely at Hanford Site, home of the world's first plutonium reactor. Whatever you think of the tech, the ship leaves a long legacy on top of its military accomplishments. It proved the viability of nuclear aircraft carriers, leading the US to build the largest such fleet in the world. Also, this definitely isn't the last (real-world) ship to bear the Enterprise name -- the future CVN-80 will build on its predecessor with both more efficient reactors and systems designed for modern combat, where drones and stealth are as important as fighters and bombers. It won't be ready until 2027, but it should reflect many of the lessons learned over the outgoing Enterprise's 55 years of service.

7 of 203 comments (clear)

  1. That's not a "quote" of Engadget's report... by gweilo8888 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...it's the entire contents of the article, minus the ads and with Slashdot's wrapped around it instead. This is copyright theft, pure and simple, and this summary should be deleted and replaced with a much, MUCH more abbreviated version.

  2. Re:Defueling by FireballX301 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I heard once that if Enterprise had ever operated with all four propulsion plants in dual reactor mode, the ship would easily be the fastest capital ship in the world, and that the Nimitz classes are all much slower than the Enterprise was if taken to flank speed.

  3. Who would sink a nuclear ship? by MadCow42 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You have to admit... what army/navy/etc. would sink a nuclear ship in their own waters during war? You'd have to think twice about that - it could be a good deterrent to being attacked. If sunk, it could be a major issue in your region for generations to come.

    --
    I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
  4. Nuclear desalinization after disasters by nomadicGeek · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My father pointed out to me that the nuclear carriers can be a great help after humanitarian disasters as they can desalinate large quantities of water. I found an article about the Carl Vincent that says that it can desalinate 400,000 gallons of water a day. We stationed it off the coast of Haiti after the earthquakes there.

    http://content.time.com/time/s...

  5. Re:Enterprise by Tokolosh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Navy ships should have proper, bold, majestic, fighting names. Stop naming them after defunct politicians and overambitious military blowhards.

    The Royal Navy knows how to do it.

    --
    Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
  6. Photons? by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Team leader, this is team two. Come in, please.

    I have the coordinates of the reactor.

    Kirk here.

    Admiral, we have found the nuclear wessel.

    Well done, you two!

    And Admiral... it is the *Enterprise*!

  7. Re:Defueling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The limiting factor with nuke powered ships is the propellers; you can only spin them so fast before they start to cavitate (usually somewhere around 100 knots for a big surface ship, somewhat higher for a submarine), The engines can deliver the horsepower.

    Umm, no.

    The limiting factor on the top speed of the Enterprise was the strength of her propeller shafts. IIRC, the #4 propulsion plant's shaft was over 600 feet long.

    Enterprise was originally built with high-speed screws that were removed in her first overhaul (again, IIRC) because the higher torque needed to spin them would have limited the life of the shafts.

    Even without the high-speed screws, she was faster than the Nimitz-class carriers. Enterprise had a hull that was longer and thinner, and she had 320,000 HP compared to the 260,000 or 280,000 for the Nimitz class. I'd venture that Enterprise could top out at over 40 kts even at the end of her life.

    But hey, what do I know. I only ran those propulsion plants for a couple of years.