It got raised to 7 after a month of radiation discharges brought the total on par with Chernobyl's one time discharge which demonstrates the flaw of the INES scale. The INES scale is based on total quantity rather than dosages which is what matters with radiation.
Also note that the Level 7 covers 6 reactors and a spent fuel pond, none of which have an individual incident rating higher than 5.
Further note that there are no anticipated long term effects due to two factors. The first being iodine tablets being distributed and consumed early on to saturate the thyroid and the second being that this level of discharged occurred over a long period of time.
Hell. Ask the Germans and the Tirpitz. The fucking Tirpitz while sitting in harbors had portions of the British navy tied up just to deal with her if she was to sortie.
Regarding dead angels I have no idea, but looking at a modern ship I doubt you are right. How should it be possible with e.g. a gun in front of the boat to have a 360 degrees angel? Somewhere is the tower of your ship... oki, if you have very well placed gun nests. Then perhaps you get 300 degrees, or a bit more.
The citadel is the largest problem for anti-air guns. This is why there are two anti-air guns. 40mm bofors may not be able to cover right next to the ship, but that's not what they're designed to cover. Depending on how far from the citadel a bofor is placed, it could have about 340-350 degrees coverage on the horizontal, but 360 coverage once it clears the citadel. The same would apply for both the bow and stern gun. The guns would have double coverage most of the sky with a very limited single coverage corridor from the bow or the stern. This is fine since you're better off attacking the port or starboard than trying to attack a ship from the bow or stern.
The 16" guns on the Iowa classes had a 300 degree angle of fire which let them fire over the beam. The issue they had with gaining more rotation was barrel length running into another turret or superstructure of the ship.
That's just it. The goal is to recreate myths to see if it's possible. Why should they do anything more than eyeball the death ray? When it's operated by hundreds of soldiers do you expect each and every one to do precise calculations or eyeball where they're supposed to hold the mirror.
The only issue with that is that it's only viable to be done with the topmost cargo containers. Remember these containers are stacked vertically. If the valuable stuff is at the bottom, you can't crack it open, loot it, and dump the container overboard without first dumping the containers above it to make it look like an accident.
Thus, you pay off someone to load the most valuable stuff on top.
It's the fuel rods -> Reactor Vessel -> Steel Pressure Vessel -> Concrete Containment -> Containment building
The hydrogen explosions occurred in the containment building which is kept at a pressure level lower than atmosphere to control air leaks. It's also nothing more than steel girders and sheet metal. The hydrogen explosions blew that last bit apart, which really isn't a major part of radiation containment in the event of an accident. I believe it's mostly designed to keep radiation in from the cooling ponds.
I've found that most people that hate South Park probably have only viewed episodes from the first couple seasons, where it was strictly toilet humor. They likely haven't watched the newer episodes.
Remember, the plant weathered the quake just fine and its backup systems were running UNTIL the tsunami came along. This is really the bit that makes me facepalm over all the moratoriums on nuclear plants that are going on.
Yes, Germany, tsunami's are a huge problem for you.
Yes. That is how current designs function. They use an electromagnetic to hold the control rods up. When the power for the electromagnet is severed the control rods fall into place. Fukushima reactor designed featured control rods that were lifted into the reactor.
That said, control rods weren't the problem at Fukushima.
How about throwing the numbers around about the water consumption of thermoelectric plants compared to hydroelectric plants?
If I remember the numbers from the USGS it was around half a gallon of water consumed for ever kWh from thermoelectric plants (all types) and around 15 gallons consumed for every kWh from hydroelectric. Consumed water means water lost to evaporation.
"When I want my men to remember something important, to really make it stick, I give it to them double dirty. It may not sound nice to some bunch of little old ladies at an afternoon tea party, but it helps my soldiers to remember. You can't run an army without profanity; and it has to be eloquent profanity. An army without profanity couldn't fight it's way out of a piss-soaked paper bag."
The earthquake didn't cause the problems. The backup generators and coolant pump systems were functioning perfectly fine after the quake hit. I say that's rather robust. It wasn't until the tsunami came along and took out the backup generators that the shit started to hit the fan.
And to pre-empt any argument that they should have planned for such a large earthquake causing a tsunami. Tsunami size and earthquake magnitude are not directly linked. A smaller magnitude quake could have caused just as bad a tsunami and the same magnitude quake could cause a lesser tsunami.
Slashdot Mirror
It got raised to 7 after a month of radiation discharges brought the total on par with Chernobyl's one time discharge which demonstrates the flaw of the INES scale. The INES scale is based on total quantity rather than dosages which is what matters with radiation.
Also note that the Level 7 covers 6 reactors and a spent fuel pond, none of which have an individual incident rating higher than 5.
Further note that there are no anticipated long term effects due to two factors. The first being iodine tablets being distributed and consumed early on to saturate the thyroid and the second being that this level of discharged occurred over a long period of time.
It also ignores, that while the tsunami is an act of nature/God, the nuclear accident is completely man-made and avoidable.
Only in the sense of we built it and the only way to avoid it was to not build it.
Hell. Ask the Germans and the Tirpitz. The fucking Tirpitz while sitting in harbors had portions of the British navy tied up just to deal with her if she was to sortie.
Regarding dead angels I have no idea, but looking at a modern ship I doubt you are right. How should it be possible with e.g. a gun in front of the boat to have a 360 degrees angel? Somewhere is the tower of your ship ... oki, if you have very well placed gun nests. Then perhaps you get 300 degrees, or a bit more.
The citadel is the largest problem for anti-air guns. This is why there are two anti-air guns. 40mm bofors may not be able to cover right next to the ship, but that's not what they're designed to cover. Depending on how far from the citadel a bofor is placed, it could have about 340-350 degrees coverage on the horizontal, but 360 coverage once it clears the citadel. The same would apply for both the bow and stern gun. The guns would have double coverage most of the sky with a very limited single coverage corridor from the bow or the stern. This is fine since you're better off attacking the port or starboard than trying to attack a ship from the bow or stern.
The 16" guns on the Iowa classes had a 300 degree angle of fire which let them fire over the beam. The issue they had with gaining more rotation was barrel length running into another turret or superstructure of the ship.
That's just it. The goal is to recreate myths to see if it's possible. Why should they do anything more than eyeball the death ray? When it's operated by hundreds of soldiers do you expect each and every one to do precise calculations or eyeball where they're supposed to hold the mirror.
So the Vatican gets the difference between hacker and cracker before the general populace...
We have entered the beginning of the end.
The only issue with that is that it's only viable to be done with the topmost cargo containers. Remember these containers are stacked vertically. If the valuable stuff is at the bottom, you can't crack it open, loot it, and dump the container overboard without first dumping the containers above it to make it look like an accident.
Thus, you pay off someone to load the most valuable stuff on top.
Google P****
This could be an awesome magazine....
It's the fuel rods -> Reactor Vessel -> Steel Pressure Vessel -> Concrete Containment -> Containment building
The hydrogen explosions occurred in the containment building which is kept at a pressure level lower than atmosphere to control air leaks. It's also nothing more than steel girders and sheet metal. The hydrogen explosions blew that last bit apart, which really isn't a major part of radiation containment in the event of an accident. I believe it's mostly designed to keep radiation in from the cooling ponds.
I didn't realize North Korea had artillery capable of being fired 1000km.
Douche and Turd is an inspiring commentary on the two-party political system currently in place in the US.
I've found that most people that hate South Park probably have only viewed episodes from the first couple seasons, where it was strictly toilet humor. They likely haven't watched the newer episodes.
I recommend 'Smug Alert!'.
It's the result of a 15 meter tsunami.
Remember, the plant weathered the quake just fine and its backup systems were running UNTIL the tsunami came along. This is really the bit that makes me facepalm over all the moratoriums on nuclear plants that are going on.
Yes, Germany, tsunami's are a huge problem for you.
Yes. That is how current designs function. They use an electromagnetic to hold the control rods up. When the power for the electromagnet is severed the control rods fall into place. Fukushima reactor designed featured control rods that were lifted into the reactor.
That said, control rods weren't the problem at Fukushima.
Perhaps for some governments it's a purpose. For the United States government, it's not. Anyone who tells you differently is a dirty liar.
I thought she had 7 husbands.
By far #3 is the most dangerous threat.
How about throwing the numbers around about the water consumption of thermoelectric plants compared to hydroelectric plants?
If I remember the numbers from the USGS it was around half a gallon of water consumed for ever kWh from thermoelectric plants (all types) and around 15 gallons consumed for every kWh from hydroelectric. Consumed water means water lost to evaporation.
"When I want my men to remember something important, to really make it stick, I give it to them double dirty. It may not sound nice to some bunch of little old ladies at an afternoon tea party, but it helps my soldiers to remember. You can't run an army without profanity; and it has to be eloquent profanity. An army without profanity couldn't fight it's way out of a piss-soaked paper bag."
I read one article that made the statement that the tsunami was above the magnitude they had prepared for.
$37.125 per gallon.
Let's say you wanted to invest in a race horse.......
It's pretty funny, because the backup generators and the pumps were working right after the earthquake and the cooling was working fine too.
Tip: When you're planning for disasters you treat each disaster separately, even if they can be linked (earthquake causes tsunami).
American jets?
Excuse me for a moment while I bash my head against my desk.
The earthquake didn't cause the problems. The backup generators and coolant pump systems were functioning perfectly fine after the quake hit. I say that's rather robust. It wasn't until the tsunami came along and took out the backup generators that the shit started to hit the fan.
And to pre-empt any argument that they should have planned for such a large earthquake causing a tsunami. Tsunami size and earthquake magnitude are not directly linked. A smaller magnitude quake could have caused just as bad a tsunami and the same magnitude quake could cause a lesser tsunami.
This incident is a combination of two disasters.