Holy crap that does looks sexy 
1 Like
I’ll be in my bunk.
4 Likes
3 Likes
Pretty Stennis is Pretty.
The Bad News Bears of carriers.
2 Likes
That sounds like there’s a story behind it.
Is that one with 3 wires only?
I thought you didn’t like propellers… 
They’re perfectly fine when they stay where they belong: out of sight, drowning in liquid and yoked to a nuclear tea kettle.
3 Likes
I’m gonna need a bigger deck.
Yes i said “d E ck”
6 Likes
That’s what she said.
2 Likes
Also shows how small HMS Ocean is…
Oh, there is…
< rant >
So, any time there’s an incident in the fleet involving a protective action initiating in the reactor plants, ie an accidental scram in one or both plants, and incident report is issued, to find the root cause of the problem (there’s a reason we’re hearing that kind of language and procedure now with regards to the Fitzgerald and McCain), and that incident report is copied to all nuclear commands- the school house, prototypes, and every boat and ship in the fleet, as well as the shore maintenance stations and the shipyards… Sometimes this is caused by equipment issues, but usually it’s caused by human error. All the incident reports we read from the Stennis were of the “go big or go home” variety- they didn’t just mess things up, they messed them up royally. Not only that, but the “rocks” (bottom students in all the ratings) from my class of operators were all assigned to Stennis at the same time when we graduated Prototype in September of 2001. We actually talked about that amongst ourselves at the time.
When we transited from Norfolk to San Diego in 2004, we stole the Stennis’s parking space at NAS North Island in Coronado, and they moved up to Washington State. Lots of our chiefs transferred back to the East Coast within 6 months of us getting to California, and they were replaced by and large by leadership from the Stennis (in what came to be known, maybe a year or two later, as the “Stennis Invasion.” By and large a lot of them were incompetent, lazy, or just bad leaders or operators. They promoted and enabled a climate within the department that directly led to this:
http://legacy.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/military/20050505-1156-ca-ussreagan.html
Needless to say, apparently they were all bad operators and, it led to a brain drain on my ship.
There’s more, but those are separate stories for separate times.
</ rant >
The rest I’ll happily tell on Teamspeak. I have vodka and bourbon to finish tonight, after the week I’ve had.
4 Likes
Reagan and Bush, CVN-76 and -77, are the ones with the “enhanced” arresting gear. There are technically still 4 wires (3A and 3B wire), but there’s usually only one or the other rigged at a time.
1 Like
Well technically they’re yoked to turbines of their own, so basically it’s the same thing as a jet engine, right? Just a nuclear-powered jet engine.
That’s how that works, right?
1 Like
So, a jet engine driving a propeller is a turboprop.
A nuclear steam boiler driving a propeller is a…atomprop? Nuke-prop?
2 Likes
Hmmm… I’m gonna have to go poll some other engineers about those semantics…
Turboprops have pretty hefty reduction gears as well, right? and what was the British engine that had two turbines connected to a common propeller? They played around with them a bit after WWII, IIRC…
1 Like
Most turbine helicopters, I believe. But they don’t really count…