The "unlimited" range of nuclear powered aircraft carriers is actually a myth?

The "unlimited" range of nuclear powered aircraft carriers is actually a myth? The escort ships that are essential for Its protection are conventionally powered and you still need to resupply because your crew need food and your aircraft still need missiles, bombs and fuel: https://youtu.be/ObTKRHkIkgI?si=x5D2yrMhh2L7ZGGB

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >ships need food and ammo
    anon coming in with that hard research the media doesn't want you to know about

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The nuclear carrier can operate semi-independently, and its reactors considerably relieve the logistical burden of the carrier group by not having to fuel the escorts AND the carrier itself.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The nuclear carrier can operate semi-independently, and its reactors considerably relieve the logistical burden of the carrier group by not having to fuel the escorts AND the carrier itself.
      You're missing some other super big logi stuff as well, like a nuclear carrier being an unlimited source of desalinated water. It's fricking wild how rarely that gets mentioned, as if it's not a big additional heavy fluid consumable, that was a big deal from the dawn of ships. And now, oh, you just don't have to worry about water for your fleet anymore, ever. For that matter you can supply water to ground stuff too. A single Nimitz class can produce somewhere in the neighborhood of 400,000 gallons of desalinated water, per day.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Is it only the Ford that has that sorta stuff, a quick check tells me that a Spruance class destroyer could desalinate 8000 gallons a day (enough for the crew to have 50 gallons each if it was working minus what the ship itself needed) not sure if the burkes or tico's or anything else has something similar but i'd be surprised if they didn't.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Is it only the Ford that has that sorta stuff
          What? Nimitz is what I was talking about. Ford naturally does as well, though since that no longer has a big steam system but generates much more power they've changed the technical implementation, now it uses a ton of reverse osmosis in the process.

          >a quick check tells me that a Spruance class destroyer could desalinate 8000 gallons a day (enough for the crew to have 50 gallons each if it was working minus what the ship itself needed) not sure if the burkes or tico's or anything else has something similar but i'd be surprised if they didn't.
          A lot of navy ships have some emergency system, but note the difference in capacity, and remember that it can only do that by burning fuel. Desal is fairly energy intensive, which is fine on a nuclear boat but means tradeoffs with conventional. It's still useful to have on hand for emergencies, but it's a direct trade of fuel for water. It doesn't help logistical capacity, it increases logistical flexibility somewhat.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Ford naturally does as well, though since that no longer has a big steam system
            Since when?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I dunno m8 as long as it's had EMALS, which is... the entire lifetime of the design.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It still has a frickhuge steam power plant.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                That steam is being used for other shit.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >that no longer has a big steam system
            How do you think a nuclear reactor works?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >unlimited source of desalinated water. It's fricking wild how rarely that gets mentioned,

        Because pretty much every ship does it. Even little personal yachts do it.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yes I remember when desalination want enormously energy intensive and just free. The point is the carrier isn't burning fuel.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yes it is.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >like a nuclear carrier being an unlimited source of desalinated water.
        Ummm... but do the ships even have unrep capability for water? They can all make their own, so did anybody bother to put in piping to the deck?
        How much fuel does desalinating use, anyway? Is it even meaningful compared to propulsion?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The nuclear carrier can operate semi-independently

      So can a conventional carrier that has fuel to sail half way round the world, something like 2-3 weeks at cruise speed. It's not a wind up ship.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        What's it do when it gets to said location but lacks a port to refuel in?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          What place on earth lacks a port within a day or two? And the carrier doesn't go to port to fill up, the fast fleet tankers bring it.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underway_replenishment

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This. But also, nuclear reactors are stupidly powerful, to the degree that, when it comes to speed, carriers run into physical limitations of their hull design before they run out of horsepower. And on top of that, not only can they outrun their escorts, but they can do it for as long as you want without impacting their total range.

      So obviously the solution is nuclear powered escorts again.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >So obviously the solution is nuclear powered escorts again.
        Please. Just imagine. Maybe laser spam will make this a thing.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        skip the need for escorts, make nuclear submarine carriers
        Surcouf mk2 is the future

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          No. That’s moronic on many different levels

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You're moronic on many levels and that didn't stop your parents from having you.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >nuclear powered
        >laser AA/Anti Drone/Anti missiles batteries
        >railguns
        >battleships
        >at 30-40 knots

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          K15 reactor would easily fit into a FREMM frigate(using frog equipment because I know that the best).
          It would also be a major risk to get these things blown up in your waters on top of expanded capability.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >run into physical limitations of their hull design
        No. It's things like steam pressure in turbine casings, torsion on prop shafts, and such.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          No brainlet, it's the hull efficiency of a displacement hull.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >nuclear powered escorts again.
        My boner has a boner.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >The nuclear carrier can operate semi-independently, and its reactors considerably relieve the logistical burden of the carrier group by not having to fuel the escorts AND the carrier itself.
        You're missing some other super big logi stuff as well, like a nuclear carrier being an unlimited source of desalinated water. It's fricking wild how rarely that gets mentioned, as if it's not a big additional heavy fluid consumable, that was a big deal from the dawn of ships. And now, oh, you just don't have to worry about water for your fleet anymore, ever. For that matter you can supply water to ground stuff too. A single Nimitz class can produce somewhere in the neighborhood of 400,000 gallons of desalinated water, per day.

        frick me. Above certain tonnage it should be mandatory to make all large hulls nukular. its such a hedonistic travesty running floating cities and cargo warehouses on fricking bunker fuel

        >inb4 turdies and italians manning them
        good thing water is such an effective insulator. In deep waters its just another dead reactor(s) at the bottom while in shallow waters its recoverable and detachable with the right design

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You came to this realisation in the wumao thread and you should have read the thread.
    Nuclear carriers can launch aircraft indefinitely, diesel play-pretends have to manage fuel or they will lose the capability to launch aircraft.

    Knock out the refueling ships of the play-pretend battle group and they have to go home while coping that they would frick you up if you didn't destroy their fuel trucks.

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Don't fall for the bait, /k/

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The great things about aircraft carriers is that you can land cargo planes on them. They can't carry fuel but they can carry food and missiles.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The great things about aircraft carriers is that you can land cargo planes on them.
      Really?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        at least a C-130 Hercules

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          That was only a test, no C-130s land operationally on aircraft carriers, the only transport aircraft that takes off and lands on carriers carrying cargo are the C-2 Greyhound.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Black person have you really never heard of a C-2 Greyhound?

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nuclear aircraft-carrier actually provide fuel for their escort ships.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    When you think about it, a nuclear carrier can carry a non-nuclear carrier's worth of fuel for its airplanes

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >The escort ships that are essential for Its protection are conventionally powered
    you can rotate them in and out

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You can also keep bringing supply ships with fuel and ammo with conventional powered carriers.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Way too expensive, manpower and resource intensive to do for more than one conventionally powered super carrier, You're going to have to constantly have tankers on station along your planned route because not only do those planes you're launching need fuel, so does that gigantic, fuel hungry super carrier.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Well yes, "unlimited" is a bit of a misnomer because unless your crew, aircraft and escorts can also subsist on nuclear power you're going to need regular replenishment.
    What it does do is relieve a large part of the logistical strain. Though I suppose if you have a large enough or competent enough auxiliary fleet then you can absorb that extra strain to no loss.

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It frees up logistics. With non nuclear you have to supply a carrier with fuel. That fuel takes up space that could otherwise be used for other ships. Non nuclear carriers aren’t as good as nuclear carriers as far as logistical needs go

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Sometimes I autistic dream of an all nuclear powered navy

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >DID YOU KNOW
    >PERPETUAR ENERGY DO NOT EXIST
    >ONE DAY SUN WILL BURN OUT

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    (the only)nation with nuclear powered aircraft carriers also has enough logistics vessels to support a(actually several) CBG indefinitely. the rest of the world does not. the aircraft carrier also only contributes to the logistics burden by food consumption, aviation fuel, parts and lube, which is less than a conventional carriers that also need hundreds of tons of fuel per day during combat operations. that capacity can instead be used to maintain a more capable battle group, or enable more activity and a higher overall speed.
    nukes are the way to go, unless you are poor.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >(the only)nation with nuclear powered aircraft carriers
      Am I a joke to you?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >carrier(s)
        Yes you are a joke to us

  14. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Escort ships

    Why does an aircraft carrier need escort ships? It's fricking huge. Surely it can protect itself.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Never hard of Carrier Strike Groups?

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    One can store more aircraft fuel and munitions without space devoted to ship fuel.

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nuclear power also makes carriers great for humanitarian missions. A Nimitz class carriers reactor can be hooked up to local electrical grids and provide power for a small town's worth of homes and still be able to conduct regular operations.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >A Nimitz class carriers reactor can be hooked up to local electrical grids
      The TG sets do not provide that much power. You may be confused by the USS Lexington powering Tacoma, WA for a month- but the ship had TGs for propulsion, which is maybe 15x other electric loads.
      >still be able to conduct regular operations
      Not from pierside.

  17. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    resupplying food is far easier than resupplying fuel. An aircraft carrier can get food from pretty much any port just by parking outside and ferrying it over. I assume they can only get fuel from very specialized ports or from specialized ships which are a huge target in a war.

  18. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You're right. The US has been wrong about CVNs this whole time, as is China, which is working toward building them right now.

  19. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    its one of the largest ships that doesnt need a resupply and keeps costs down in the long run

  20. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Have the man himself explain it.

  21. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    so we should bring back nuclear cruisers and destroyers then

  22. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  23. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  24. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The main advantage of nuclear aircraft carriers is being way faster (that's why nuclear missiles cruisers used to be a thing), having better endurance and having steam to divert to catapults.

    It is advantageous from a capability/operational POV but the hefty kick in the balls comes in the form of maintenance being way worse than a conventional carrier and having worse availability which the US doesn't care about due to having 11 carriers but the French navy is often cooked and carrierless due to refueling their single carrier.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Wrong:

      https://i.imgur.com/eD3nQ61.png

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        see

        You came to this realisation in the wumao thread and you should have read the thread.
        Nuclear carriers can launch aircraft indefinitely, diesel play-pretends have to manage fuel or they will lose the capability to launch aircraft.

        Knock out the refueling ships of the play-pretend battle group and they have to go home while coping that they would frick you up if you didn't destroy their fuel trucks.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        30+ knots is a wide category. 35 knots is not the same as 30

  25. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Food is easier to resupply in a random port than carrier fuel. Aviation fuel is only a limit to how long you can fight. It also means the ship can move by itself to the next supply point. It's easier to organize the resupply of a CAG if the ship can go in any port.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *