Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Adapt. Enjoy. Survive.


tech / alt.engineering.electrical / Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

SubjectAuthor
* OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?gareth evans
+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Scott
|+- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?gareth evans
|+- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?newshound
|+- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)
|`- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Martin Brown
+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?nightjar
|+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?GB
||+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Spike
|||+- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?GB
|||`- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?alan_m
||`* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?nightjar
|| `* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?GB
||  +* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Scott
||  |+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?GB
||  ||+- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?gfretwell
||  ||+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Steve Walker
||  |||+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Tim Streater
||  ||||`- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?The Natural Philosopher
||  |||+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?tony sayer
||  ||||`- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?gfretwell
||  |||+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?GB
||  ||||+- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?newshound
||  ||||+- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?gfretwell
||  ||||+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Rod Speed
||  |||||+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Pancho
||  ||||||`* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Rod Speed
||  |||||| `* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Pancho
||  ||||||  +* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?The Natural Philosopher
||  ||||||  |`- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Pancho
||  ||||||  `- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Rod Speed
||  |||||`* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?alan_m
||  ||||| `- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Rod Speed
||  ||||`* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?The Natural Philosopher
||  |||| `- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?alan_m
||  |||+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Pancho
||  ||||+- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?gfretwell
||  ||||+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Rod Speed
||  |||||`* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?nightjar
||  ||||| `- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Rod Speed
||  ||||+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?The Natural Philosopher
||  |||||`* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?72y33
||  ||||| +* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?The Natural Philosopher
||  ||||| |`* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?72y33
||  ||||| | +* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Fredxx
||  ||||| | |`- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Rod Speed
||  ||||| | `* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?The Natural Philosopher
||  ||||| |  `- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?72y33
||  ||||| `* Australian subs (was: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense thenewshound
||  |||||  `- Re: Australian subs (was: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?)Rod Speed
||  ||||`* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Steve Walker
||  |||| +* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Pancho
||  |||| |+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Steve Walker
||  |||| ||`* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Pancho
||  |||| || `- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Rod Speed
||  |||| |+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?The Natural Philosopher
||  |||| ||+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Pancho
||  |||| |||`* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?The Natural Philosopher
||  |||| ||| `- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?72y33
||  |||| ||`* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?newshound
||  |||| || `* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Pancho
||  |||| ||  +- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?newshound
||  |||| ||  `* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?The Natural Philosopher
||  |||| ||   `* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Pancho
||  |||| ||    +* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Rod Speed
||  |||| ||    |`* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Pancho
||  |||| ||    | +- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?The Natural Philosopher
||  |||| ||    | `* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Rod Speed
||  |||| ||    |  `* Pifco Xmas tree lightsgareth evans
||  |||| ||    |   +* Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsgareth evans
||  |||| ||    |   |+* Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsDavid Wade
||  |||| ||    |   ||`* Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsIan Jackson
||  |||| ||    |   || +- Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsgareth evans
||  |||| ||    |   || `- Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsgfretwell
||  |||| ||    |   |+* Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsnewshound
||  |||| ||    |   ||`- Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsBrian Gaff \(Sofa\)
||  |||| ||    |   |`* Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsBrian Gaff \(Sofa\)
||  |||| ||    |   | +* Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsMartin Brown
||  |||| ||    |   | |`* Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsTim+
||  |||| ||    |   | | +- Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsThe Natural Philosopher
||  |||| ||    |   | | `- Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsMike Humphrey
||  |||| ||    |   | `- Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsSH
||  |||| ||    |   +- Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsMartin Brown
||  |||| ||    |   `* Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsBrian Gaff \(Sofa\)
||  |||| ||    |    `- Re: Pifco Xmas tree lightsIan Jackson
||  |||| ||    `- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?The Natural Philosopher
||  |||| |`- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Rod Speed
||  |||| `- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?nightjar
||  |||`- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Rod Speed
||  ||`- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Rod Speed
||  |`- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?alan_m
||  +- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Rod Speed
||  `- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?nightjar
|+* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?newshound
||+- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?gfretwell
||`- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?The Natural Philosopher
|`* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)
| `- Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?newshound
`* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Dimitris Tzortzakakis
 `* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?newshound
  `* Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?Tim Streater

Pages:12345
Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<iqio43Fglv5U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=56&group=alt.engineering.electrical#56

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 15:41:19 +1000
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <iqio43Fglv5U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me> <usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me> <tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me> <rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net M9BtUAHPPZMrGkaT+0dxrgsx+yhI+KwL3Mmhfs8nMoKnz+ezs=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:NN7udonwMtxhfYAj9ry2y1Z+EjM=
In-Reply-To: <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 05:41 UTC

GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.com> wrote
> On 16/09/2021 18:17, Scott wrote:
>> GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.com> wrote
>>> On 16/09/2021 17:46, nightjar wrote:
>>>> On 16/09/2021 16:49, GB wrote:
>>>>> On 16/09/2021 15:54, nightjar wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The main engineering problem seems to be keeping it from making
>>>>>> detectable noise while the boat is running in quiet mode.
>>>>>
>>>>> That doesn't seem to be an issue, judging by the Vigil films. There's
>>>>> a tannoy system that must be audible miles away, and the crew seem to
>>>>> shout at each other the whole time. What difference would a little
>>>>> gurgling from the reactor make?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I'm talking about real life :-)
>>>
>>> :)
>>>
>>>
>>>> However, there is a high power setting fro the coolant pumps, which is
>>>> relatively noisy. That is used when maximum power is more important
>>>> than
>>>> stealth. It is also used when leaving port, as it prevents any spy or
>>>> spy ship from listening for the boat's silent running signature.
>>>
>>> That's interesting. I wonder what happens if they forget to do that
>>> once? Do they scrap the fleet and buy a new one? If so, it would be
>>> quite an expensive mistake.
>>>
>> Could they not just alter one of the components, preferably the
>> noisiest one?
>>
>
>
> Nah! If you're going to do the job, do it properly.
>
> If I had the choice between several dozen new hospitals and a fleet of new
> nuclear submarines, I'd want to be equipped to start a nuclear war we
> couldn't survive. Wouldn't you?

Nope, and we have just stupidly decided to have a fleet of new nuclear
submarines
and have told the frogs to take theirs and shove them where the sun don’t
shine.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<iqiojlFgogpU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=57&group=alt.engineering.electrical#57

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 15:49:36 +1000
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <iqiojlFgogpU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me> <usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me> <tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me> <rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me> <si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net hJifMb1f8zhQptWvmKAmKwpjNoFQYRV7DA8YovNqf3rfNQQrs=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9mbXZi7JT1oisxkBG40bL0A+wjE=
In-Reply-To: <si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 05:49 UTC

Steve Walker <steve@walker-family.me.uk> wrote
> On 16/09/2021 18:24, GB wrote:
>> On 16/09/2021 18:17, Scott wrote:
>>> GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.com> wrote
>>>> On 16/09/2021 17:46, nightjar wrote:
>>>>> On 16/09/2021 16:49, GB wrote:
>>>>>> On 16/09/2021 15:54, nightjar wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The main engineering problem seems to be keeping it from making
>>>>>>> detectable noise while the boat is running in quiet mode.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That doesn't seem to be an issue, judging by the Vigil films. There's
>>>>>> a tannoy system that must be audible miles away, and the crew seem to
>>>>>> shout at each other the whole time. What difference would a little
>>>>>> gurgling from the reactor make?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I'm talking about real life :-)
>>>>
>>>> :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> However, there is a high power setting fro the coolant pumps, which is
>>>>> relatively noisy. That is used when maximum power is more important
>>>>> than
>>>>> stealth. It is also used when leaving port, as it prevents any spy or
>>>>> spy ship from listening for the boat's silent running signature.
>>>>
>>>> That's interesting. I wonder what happens if they forget to do that
>>>> once? Do they scrap the fleet and buy a new one? If so, it would be
>>>> quite an expensive mistake.
>>>>
>>> Could they not just alter one of the components, preferably the
>>> noisiest one?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Nah! If you're going to do the job, do it properly.
>>
>> If I had the choice between several dozen new hospitals and a fleet of
>> new nuclear submarines, I'd want to be equipped to start a nuclear war we
>> couldn't survive. Wouldn't you?
>
> The whole point is that having nuclear armed submarines at sea means that
> no-one can attack without potentially suffering a retaliatory attack.
> Hospitals are of no use if someone decides to obliterate your country,
> knowing that there will be no response.
>
> While it would be better if no countries had nuclear weapons, while some
> potential enemies do, it makes sense to have your own response of last
> resort.

Not really if there is no chance that anyone will be silly enough to nuke
your country.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<iqiphuFgtlcU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=58&group=alt.engineering.electrical#58

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!4.us.feeder.erje.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 16:05:46 +1000
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <iqiphuFgtlcU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me> <usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me> <tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me> <rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me> <si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0c3a$kf0$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net pgCXgUnp9kGJ5lEpzdRrLAttVbdHjMUcOw1B/chHLd2DY8Q7c=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:O2DcO2S0GkUzT6mCobUfIISVppI=
In-Reply-To: <si0c3a$kf0$1@dont-email.me>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 06:05 UTC

GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.com> wrote
> Steve Walker wrote

>> The whole point is that having nuclear armed submarines at sea means that
>> no-one can attack without potentially suffering a retaliatory attack.
>
> The Argentinians attacked the Falklands, without us obliterating BA. What
> better target to attack than one that cannot retaliate?
>
> By not turning the whole of Argentine into radioactive glass, our
> so-called nuclear deterrent lost all credibility.

It wasn’t intended to deter that sort of action,
it was intended to deter a nuclear attack.

> So, we might as well scrap it. Clearly, if we won't nuke the Argies, we
> certainly won't nuke the Ruskies.

But might nuke the frogs if they had nuked the UK.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<iqiqf4Fh3rdU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=59&group=alt.engineering.electrical#59

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 16:21:20 +1000
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <iqiqf4Fh3rdU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me> <usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me> <tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me> <rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me> <si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net Sa9mPWB0F9o2moHHHomLuAexrStVEAtW8R/pMc4Wn5rZfn+18=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:jHE7rU3RoVFUiLY4yUy2bZFAjY8=
In-Reply-To: <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 06:21 UTC

Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote
> Steve Walker wrote

>> The whole point is that having nuclear armed submarines at sea means that
>> no-one can attack without potentially suffering a retaliatory attack.
>> Hospitals are of no use if someone decides to obliterate your country,
>> knowing that there will be no response.
>>
>> While it would be better if no countries had nuclear weapons, while some
>> potential enemies do, it makes sense to have your own response of last
>> resort.

> I thought nuclear armed subs were essentially a first strike weapon.

Nope, they are the best deterrent because no one knows where
they are so can't eliminate your nukes in their first strike so you
cant strike back. And there is no need for an early detection
capability with short range attacks either.

> They can hide just offshore of the target, reducing warning time to a few
> minutes.

In fact it isn't feasible to hide just offshore with many enemys.

> ICBMs are just as effective for retaliation,

Nope, because everyone knows where they are and can
nuke them in their first strike, particularly if they do the
first strike quite close to them, so you cant retaliate.

> and much cheaper. They can be mobile and so hard to destroy.

But still much easier to find than a nuke missiled sub.

> The problem is they take much longer from launch to arrival and give the
> target nation time to react to an attack.

A nuke missiled sub does that in spades.

> But we aren't giving the Aussies nuclear bombs are we? We are just giving
> them nuclear powered subs.

They aren't being given, they are being sold to us.

> I was more intrigued by the idea of nuclear powered container ships.

Problem with those is do you trust a philippino crew to never
fuck up and ram another ship with undesirable consequences.
With non nuke powered container vessels the worst you risk
is a bad oil spill or a blocked canal or seaway for a while.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si1dbg$5kq$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=60&group=alt.engineering.electrical#60

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tnp...@invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 07:41:52 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <si1dbg$5kq$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
<si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <iqhop3Fb4v8U1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 06:41:53 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ef6b81740d03aca99e604a15205504c6";
logging-data="5786"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1801T/4djAjQk9xzHrfXuMgjEVB9HRqROY="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:aHohaIpjZj2PwXrr/ViauX7f9Jo=
In-Reply-To: <iqhop3Fb4v8U1@mid.individual.net>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 06:41 UTC

On 16/09/2021 21:46, Tim Streater wrote:
> Yes, I think GB is suffering from the "why have nuclear subs with missiles
> when we aren't going to use them?" syndrome. He overlooks that they have been
> in use, 24x7, for the last 50 years or whatever it is.
Why have crash barriers when the whole idea is not to crash?

--
“A leader is best When people barely know he exists. Of a good leader,
who talks little,When his work is done, his aim fulfilled,They will say,
“We did this ourselves.”

― Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si1dhd$814$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=61&group=alt.engineering.electrical#61

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tnp...@invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 07:45:00 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <si1dhd$814$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me>
<tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me>
<rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
<si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0c3a$kf0$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 06:45:01 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ef6b81740d03aca99e604a15205504c6";
logging-data="8228"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1900WUmFZZs/UFu+gBo8KmzPUvWf5EJ4QA="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:LbyxtwbOiE9aPXyNxzXjKp+gYL0=
In-Reply-To: <si0c3a$kf0$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 06:45 UTC

On 16/09/2021 22:14, GB wrote:
> On 16/09/2021 20:34, Steve Walker wrote:
>
>> The whole point is that having nuclear armed submarines at sea means
>> that no-one can attack without potentially suffering a retaliatory
>> attack.
>
> The Argentinians attacked the Falklands, without us obliterating BA.
> What better target to attack than one that cannot retaliate?
>
one that has nuclear weapons. There was no need to escalate a lttle s
american adventure beyond retaking te falklands and shooting d0own a few
plabes directly involved

> By not turning the whole of Argentine into radioactive glass, our
> so-called nuclear deterrent lost all credibility.

No, our credibility was enhanced, among sane people

So, we might as well
> scrap it. Clearly, if we won't nuke the Argies, we certainly won't nuke
> the Ruskies.
>
Usual emotionally loaded false logic.

>
>

--
“A leader is best When people barely know he exists. Of a good leader,
who talks little,When his work is done, his aim fulfilled,They will say,
“We did this ourselves.”

― Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si1dos$9ae$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=62&group=alt.engineering.electrical#62

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tnp...@invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 07:49:00 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <si1dos$9ae$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me>
<tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me>
<rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
<si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 06:49:00 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ef6b81740d03aca99e604a15205504c6";
logging-data="9550"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+grA0VeLqw521syMV8n/Juy4/jnYXKNl8="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:L+r4BJXVn+xB7NEk/7vAm1hsZD0=
In-Reply-To: <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 06:49 UTC

On 17/09/2021 01:11, Pancho wrote:
> I thought nuclear armed subs were essentially a first strike weapon.
> They can hide just offshore of the target, reducing warning time to a
> few minutes.
That tooo.

>
> ICBMs are just as effective for retaliation, and much cheaper. They can
> be mobile and so hard to destroy. The problem is they take much longer
> from launch to arrival and give the target nation time to react to an
> attack.

The whole point of first strike was to take out fixed icbm sites to
prevent retaliation

>
> But we aren't giving the Aussies nuclear bombs are we? We are just
> giving them nuclear powered subs.
>
I believe so.
They are most useful to destroy incoming naval craft - the chinese dont
want to bomb Taiwan, or Australia - they want to annex it.

> I was more intrigued by the idea of nuclear powered container ships.

Indeed.

--
"Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They
always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them"

Margaret Thatcher

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si1dtr$9ae$2@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=63&group=alt.engineering.electrical#63

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tnp...@invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 07:51:39 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <si1dtr$9ae$2@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<29Odnbry1oxnOd78nZ2dnUU78fXNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 06:51:39 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ef6b81740d03aca99e604a15205504c6";
logging-data="9550"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/1W0cNgYw4QATjfD7Dfy1K6JyOfiLvAtg="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:bKFd5jFfu74cG+sFWPMtJmOQMsw=
In-Reply-To: <29Odnbry1oxnOd78nZ2dnUU78fXNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 06:51 UTC

On 16/09/2021 21:11, newshound wrote:
> The steam temperature in a commercial PWR is a bit over 300 deg C and I
> expect the submarine figure is comparable. They will probably be aiming
> for a condenser temperature around 30 deg C, giving a pretty good vacuum
> (about 30 torr). A surprising proportion of the energy in a steam
> turbine is delivered by the Low Pressure rotor(s)

With nuclear power, given that they are practically fuelled for life,
there is no especial demand for efficiency.
There is a demand for compactness however. They may not have a low
pressure rotor!

--
The lifetime of any political organisation is about three years before
its been subverted by the people it tried to warn you about.

Anon.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si1fkv$k92$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=64&group=alt.engineering.electrical#64

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bria...@blueyonder.co.uk (Brian Gaff \(Sofa\))
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 08:20:59 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <si1fkv$k92$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me> <jtl6kg9vfqea3ck5sohhm79f9kll4l0isd@4ax.com>
Reply-To: "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk>
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 07:21:03 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="fb2a3a21657c4b3d91514fdac50d8a47";
logging-data="20770"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/8TIFQyHWgFBEnP+mzYhb6"
Cancel-Lock: sha1:EEnR7YygLc2GO11smROeDh/Ymkw=
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.1830
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
 by: Brian Gaff \(Sofa\) - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 07:20 UTC

Maybe the same designers that made the old Blakes 7 series and Crossroads
built the models and sets?
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Scott" <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:jtl6kg9vfqea3ck5sohhm79f9kll4l0isd@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 14:49:28 +0100, gareth evans
> <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>After following the Vigil TV series (with all its
>>reported errors)
>
> As an aside would you recommend Vigil? A friend of my said the
> submarine looked like a free gift from a cornflakes packet.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si1fqh$4n7$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=65&group=alt.engineering.electrical#65

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!Vxqz0v/qIfnlGAf4dUOR+A.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: '''newsp...@nonad.co.uk (Martin Brown)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 08:24:00 +0100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <si1fqh$4n7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<jtl6kg9vfqea3ck5sohhm79f9kll4l0isd@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="4839"; posting-host="Vxqz0v/qIfnlGAf4dUOR+A.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.14.0
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Martin Brown - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 07:24 UTC

On 16/09/2021 15:42, Scott wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 14:49:28 +0100, gareth evans
> <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> After following the Vigil TV series (with all its
>> reported errors)
>
> As an aside would you recommend Vigil? A friend of my said the
> submarine looked like a free gift from a cornflakes packet.

It has *very* high ceilings for a submarine. Presumably needed for the
cameras to get the right angle but means it doesn't look realistically
claustrophobic like the reality would actually be.

It looks like it might be a half decent thriller but not realistic.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si1g32$mjv$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=66&group=alt.engineering.electrical#66

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bria...@blueyonder.co.uk (Brian Gaff \(Sofa\))
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 08:28:30 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <si1g32$mjv$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me> <usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Reply-To: "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk>
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 07:28:34 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="fb2a3a21657c4b3d91514fdac50d8a47";
logging-data="23167"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/sCFv7AzE+2pOuiYgu61wb"
Cancel-Lock: sha1:HqJh6p64m7W439nPWxRHyQap/EA=
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.1830
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
 by: Brian Gaff \(Sofa\) - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 07:28 UTC

I would have thought that using sea water would be very difficult, due to
the corrosion it might create in the heat exchanger, or whatever they use to
cool the water. Besides, if heat from water changed as the sub moved, surely
it would be detectable quit easily by the other side.
There have been some terrible depictions of nuclear reactors in films and
TV shows over the years. The one in The world is not Enough is pretty stupid
in my view. I cannot see it of course but the audio describer explained the
end scene and he sounded almost embarrassed at the situation.

I would have thought that many reactors these days that needed to be small
may well use some other material to get the heat away to do the work. Sodium
perhaps, though let that come in contact with water and you have a very bad
day.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"nightjar" <cpb@bignell.me.uk> wrote in message
news:usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com...
> On 16/09/2021 14:49, gareth evans wrote:
>> After following the Vigil TV series (with all its
>> reported errors) and also the prog on HMS Trenchard,
>> when a Brit U-boat is powered by nuclear fuels, how
>> do they condense the steam?
>
> Sea water heat exchanger
>
>> With sea water? If so, there must be difficulties
>> in sealing the intakes and outfalls from deep sea
>> pressures.
>
> The main engineering problem seems to be keeping it from making detectable
> noise while the boat is running in quiet mode.
>
>>
>> Perhaps the steam is heated to 200C and only cools to
>> 100C through the turbines before recirculating
>> so no condensing is
>> required. This, of course, will be wasteful
>> of some thermodynamic energy, but there's so much
>> in reserve in the nuclear fual that perhaps it does not
>> matter.
>>
>
>
> --
> Colin Bignell

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<94-dnfjPlrc8z9n8nZ2dnUU78T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=67&group=alt.engineering.electrical#67

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!4.us.feeder.erje.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 03:32:33 -0500
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me>
<tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me>
<rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
<si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me>
<iqiqf4Fh3rdU1@mid.individual.net>
From: cpb...@bignell.me.uk (nightjar)
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 09:32:31 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <iqiqf4Fh3rdU1@mid.individual.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <94-dnfjPlrc8z9n8nZ2dnUU78T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 16
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-BnFm5hqmwo4vsB5XnzU5HkWeyYvbcS5ZxERy7uODgW40qmSvHLGkAAFKq7L1gFGfyElBl181ctYfdNZ!pCmIHPX6dMrEOqacN4nLPpZ7KwY8XiOlLvlOuaOhz8yfBEsPb+Xn1CHJTL70t34WSZ1i3xBaTg==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2198
 by: nightjar - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 08:32 UTC

On 17/09/2021 07:21, Rod Speed wrote:
> Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote
....
>> I was more intrigued by the idea of nuclear powered container ships.
>
> Problem with those is do you trust a philippino crew to never
> fuck up and ram another ship with undesirable consequences.
> With non nuke powered container vessels the worst you risk
> is a bad oil spill or a blocked canal or seaway for a while.

You don't need Filipinos to have a nuclear accident. There have been 32
known accidents involving nuclear weapons or nuclear powered vessels.
Six US nuclear weapons have been lost and never found again.

--
Colin Bignell

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si1lro$qo0$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=68&group=alt.engineering.electrical#68

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Pancho.D...@outlook.com (Pancho)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 10:07:03 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <si1lro$qo0$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me>
<tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me>
<rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
<si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0c3a$kf0$1@dont-email.me>
<iqiphuFgtlcU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 09:07:04 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="c6c9d2f14c7ebe790e9a1f025d0bf227";
logging-data="27392"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+XLK91J2Mdp7yZ4sTaG+flgKVVEb34nbs="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/68.12.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xYPVyZHZxp0YW01FDmFy/jmLKEk=
In-Reply-To: <iqiphuFgtlcU1@mid.individual.net>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Pancho - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 09:07 UTC

On 17/09/2021 07:05, Rod Speed wrote:
> GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.com> wrote
>> Steve Walker wrote
>
>>> The whole point is that having nuclear armed submarines at sea means
>>> that no-one can attack without potentially suffering a retaliatory
>>> attack.
>>
>> The Argentinians attacked the Falklands, without us obliterating BA.
>> What better target to attack than one that cannot retaliate?
>>
>> By not turning the whole of Argentine into radioactive glass, our
>> so-called nuclear deterrent lost all credibility.
>
> It wasn’t intended to deter that sort of action,
> it was intended to deter a nuclear attack.
>

I think you'll find the UK nuclear capability was intended to deter a
Soviet conventional invasion of Europe. That is why we retained a first
strike option.

Militarily nukes are now virtually useless to the UK. As GB illustrates
we can't use them in normal conflicts. Nuclear weapons are mainly useful
for small, militarily weak, nations deterring conventional
attacks/intimidation by much more powerful nations. North Korea and Iran
being obvious examples where they have/would have utility. Obviously
giving nutters nukes is not a good idea. I'm just pointing out the way
things are, like it or not.

There is some benefit to a US deterrent against intimidation by other
nuclear powers and maybe we should contribute to that. However the
current US arsenal is ludicrously oversized.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<iqj8jcFjpkjU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=69&group=alt.engineering.electrical#69

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!news.dns-netz.com!news.freedyn.net!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 20:22:30 +1000
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <iqj8jcFjpkjU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me> <usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me> <tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me> <rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me> <si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me> <iqiqf4Fh3rdU1@mid.individual.net> <94-dnfjPlrc8z9n8nZ2dnUU78T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net 2b7ULIo+2KWanTLwRxNBiA6Xsip9+DlwOwjr2kSWE+SFV9N7U=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:VfhjVEq6CI7DHvfGjTyZZ5Elk4w=
In-Reply-To: <94-dnfjPlrc8z9n8nZ2dnUU78T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 10:22 UTC

nightjar <cpb@bignell.me.uk> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote

>>> I was more intrigued by the idea of nuclear powered container ships.
>>
>> Problem with those is do you trust a philippino crew to never
>> fuck up and ram another ship with undesirable consequences.
>> With non nuke powered container vessels the worst you risk
>> is a bad oil spill or a blocked canal or seaway for a while.
>
> You don't need Filipinos to have a nuclear accident. There have been 32
> known accidents involving nuclear weapons or nuclear powered vessels.
> Six US nuclear weapons have been lost and never found again.

But those weren't nuke powered container ships tho
they might have used a few puerto ricans at times.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<iqj92fFjsc2U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=70&group=alt.engineering.electrical#70

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: 72y...@gmail.com (72y33)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 20:30:34 +1000
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <iqj92fFjsc2U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me> <usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me> <tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me> <rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me> <si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me> <si1dos$9ae$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net 1vX70QsSj7cdQyET+pO68wqMaRYwFV8cL/yf+aXzjOsE/wPnI=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:q9sPgvEultNEHnVI7kkBd/WkVhU=
In-Reply-To: <si1dos$9ae$1@dont-email.me>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: 72y33 - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 10:30 UTC

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote
> Pancho wrote

>> I thought nuclear armed subs were essentially a first strike weapon. They
>> can hide just offshore of the target, reducing warning time to a few
>> minutes.
> That tooo.
>
>>
>> ICBMs are just as effective for retaliation, and much cheaper. They can
>> be mobile and so hard to destroy. The problem is they take much longer
>> from launch to arrival and give the target nation time to react to an
>> attack.
>
> The whole point of first strike was to take out fixed icbm sites to
> prevent retaliation
>
>>
>> But we aren't giving the Aussies nuclear bombs are we? We are just giving
>> them nuclear powered subs.
>>
> I believe so.
> They are most useful to destroy incoming naval craft - the chinese dont
> want to bomb Taiwan, or Australia - they want to annex it.

There is no possibility of China annexing Australia.

Even the USA doesn’t have what it takes to do that.

>> I was more intrigued by the idea of nuclear powered container ships.
>
> Indeed.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si1qui$s8g$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=71&group=alt.engineering.electrical#71

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ste...@walker-family.me.uk (Steve Walker)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:33:52 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <si1qui$s8g$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me>
<tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me>
<rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
<si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 10:33:54 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="3324b075331d4d9276901fa02d49dc91";
logging-data="28944"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19Ja7jMKjNh8QBtN499quoVGQJXAPY5l4w="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.1.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:kOj371QDMWpH8WG76kcYElIuv7w=
In-Reply-To: <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Steve Walker - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 10:33 UTC

On 17/09/2021 01:11, Pancho wrote:
> On 16/09/2021 20:34, Steve Walker wrote:
>
>> The whole point is that having nuclear armed submarines at sea means
>> that no-one can attack without potentially suffering a retaliatory
>> attack. Hospitals are of no use if someone decides to obliterate your
>> country, knowing that there will be no response.
>>
>> While it would be better if no countries had nuclear weapons, while
>> some potential enemies do, it makes sense to have your own response of
>> last resort.
>
> I thought nuclear armed subs were essentially a first strike weapon.
> They can hide just offshore of the target, reducing warning time to a
> few minutes.

No, although they can be used that way, that is not the purpose of them.
The idea is that once out at sea, no-one knows where they are, so they
cannot be targetted to be knocked out before an attack on their home
country and will remain available to respond.

Indeed, they may not even respond - each Prime Minister gives a letter
to the sub commanders, to be opened *after* an attack on the UK. That
letter tells them whether to fire back or not in such an event. The idea
being that an enemy won't know whether we would respond or not, but the
PM has that control.

> ICBMs are just as effective for retaliation, and much cheaper. They can
> be mobile and so hard to destroy. The problem is they take much longer
> from launch to arrival and give the target nation time to react to an
> attack.

But subs hide much better. Time taken to arrive is not a problem for a
retaliatory weapon though.

> But we aren't giving the Aussies nuclear bombs are we? We are just
> giving them nuclear powered subs.

Agreed.

> I was more intrigued by the idea of nuclear powered container ships.

Although not used much, there have been commercial nuclear ships before
- and a number of icebreakers.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<iqj9qnFk0s6U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=72&group=alt.engineering.electrical#72

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!4.us.feeder.erje.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 20:43:30 +1000
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <iqj9qnFk0s6U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me> <usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me> <tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me> <rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me> <si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0c3a$kf0$1@dont-email.me> <iqiphuFgtlcU1@mid.individual.net> <si1lro$qo0$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net 8SS8JspIIKhShB27OJEBhAursLu4DxkDOUyogi/et1HnX3gGA=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:VOD4CDLMRX+VoZNIesc8xwfbcUM=
In-Reply-To: <si1lro$qo0$1@dont-email.me>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 10:43 UTC

Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.com> wrote
>>> Steve Walker wrote

>>>> The whole point is that having nuclear armed submarines at sea means
>>>> that no-one can attack without potentially suffering a retaliatory
>>>> attack.
>>>
>>> The Argentinians attacked the Falklands, without us obliterating BA.
>>> What better target to attack than one that cannot retaliate?
>>>
>>> By not turning the whole of Argentine into radioactive glass, our
>>> so-called nuclear deterrent lost all credibility.
>>
>> It wasn’t intended to deter that sort of action,
>> it was intended to deter a nuclear attack.

> I think you'll find the UK nuclear capability was intended to deter a
> Soviet conventional invasion of Europe.

Nope, NATO would have done that fine.

> That is why we retained a first strike option.

That wouldn’t have deterred a Soviet conventional invasion of Europe.

> Militarily nukes are now virtually useless to the UK.

That’s not true or Trident with nuking by the frogs.

> As GB illustrates we can't use them in normal conflicts.

Trident was never intended for use in normal conflicts,
they were always about deterring nuke strikes on the UK.

> Nuclear weapons are mainly useful for small, militarily weak, nations
> deterring conventional attacks/intimidation by much more powerful nations.

That was never what Trident was about.

> North Korea and Iran being obvious examples where they have/would have
> utility.

And Israel.

> Obviously giving nutters nukes is not a good idea. I'm just pointing out
> the way things are, like it or not.

But don’t have a clue what Trident was about.

> There is some benefit to a US deterrent against intimidation by other
> nuclear powers and maybe we should contribute to that. However the current
> US arsenal is ludicrously oversized.

But Trident isn't, just irrelevant now and a waste of money.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si1rqg$123$2@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=73&group=alt.engineering.electrical#73

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tnp...@invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:48:47 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <si1rqg$123$2@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me>
<tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me>
<rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
<si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me>
<si1dos$9ae$1@dont-email.me> <iqj92fFjsc2U1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 10:48:48 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ef6b81740d03aca99e604a15205504c6";
logging-data="1091"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19sMYdA9J+MbfxRDsc1VkK3TzIGLGWAOLY="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ki3lR8K+OZaPT2StOYcFQqJj8zM=
In-Reply-To: <iqj92fFjsc2U1@mid.individual.net>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 10:48 UTC

On 17/09/2021 11:30, 72y33 wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote
>> Pancho wrote
>
>>> I thought nuclear armed subs were essentially a first strike weapon.
>>> They can hide just offshore of the target, reducing warning time to a
>>> few minutes.
>> That tooo.
>>
>>>
>>> ICBMs are just as effective for retaliation, and much cheaper. They
>>> can be mobile and so hard to destroy. The problem is they take much
>>> longer from launch to arrival and give the target nation time to
>>> react to an attack.
>>
>> The whole point of first strike was to take out fixed icbm sites to
>> prevent retaliation
>>
>>>
>>> But we aren't giving the Aussies nuclear bombs are we? We are just
>>> giving them nuclear powered subs.
>>>
>> I believe so.
>> They are most useful to destroy incoming naval craft  - the chinese
>> dont want to bomb Taiwan, or Australia - they want to annex it.
>
> There is no possibility of China annexing Australia.

Every possibility I would say - Australia is not very heavily populated.
And is not very defensible. And is full of pacifists who would probably
welcome them with open arms

>
> Even the USA doesn’t have what it takes to do that.

Course it does.
>
>>> I was more intrigued by the idea of nuclear powered container ships.
>>
>> Indeed.
>
>

--
"I am inclined to tell the truth and dislike people who lie consistently.
This makes me unfit for the company of people of a Left persuasion, and
all women"

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<iqjam2Fk5s8U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=74&group=alt.engineering.electrical#74

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: 72y...@gmail.com (72y33)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 20:58:05 +1000
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <iqjam2Fk5s8U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me> <usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me> <tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me> <rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me> <si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me> <si1dos$9ae$1@dont-email.me> <iqj92fFjsc2U1@mid.individual.net> <si1rqg$123$2@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net 33t8pACblj5SKdVGhRzTOQEqRX4AxMGn5AEkQ4WzoCqtJVyVk=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:jQYL0OXdYtTArmihr/8WrWdEUcc=
In-Reply-To: <si1rqg$123$2@dont-email.me>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: 72y33 - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 10:58 UTC

"The Natural Philosopher" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:si1rqg$123$2@dont-email.me...
> On 17/09/2021 11:30, 72y33 wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote
>>> Pancho wrote
>>
>>>> I thought nuclear armed subs were essentially a first strike weapon.
>>>> They can hide just offshore of the target, reducing warning time to a
>>>> few minutes.
>>> That tooo.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> ICBMs are just as effective for retaliation, and much cheaper. They can
>>>> be mobile and so hard to destroy. The problem is they take much longer
>>>> from launch to arrival and give the target nation time to react to an
>>>> attack.
>>>
>>> The whole point of first strike was to take out fixed icbm sites to
>>> prevent retaliation
>>>
>>>>
>>>> But we aren't giving the Aussies nuclear bombs are we? We are just
>>>> giving them nuclear powered subs.
>>>>
>>> I believe so.
>>> They are most useful to destroy incoming naval craft - the chinese dont
>>> want to bomb Taiwan, or Australia - they want to annex it.
>>
>> There is no possibility of China annexing Australia.

> Every possibility I would say

More fool you...

- Australia is not very heavily populated.
> And is not very defensible.

That is mindless bullshit.

And is full of pacifists who would probably
> welcome them with open arms

More mindless bullshit.

>> Even the USA doesn’t have what it takes to do that.
>
> Course it does.

Fraid not. No possibility of holding it.

They couldn’t even manage that with Afghanistan.

>>>> I was more intrigued by the idea of nuclear powered container ships.
>>>
>>> Indeed.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si1tj7$d8f$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=75&group=alt.engineering.electrical#75

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: fre...@nospam.co.uk (Fredxx)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:19:02 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <si1tj7$d8f$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me>
<tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me>
<rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
<si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me>
<si1dos$9ae$1@dont-email.me> <iqj92fFjsc2U1@mid.individual.net>
<si1rqg$123$2@dont-email.me> <iqjam2Fk5s8U1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:19:03 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="84a37fa279bd4094b19b6042388923be";
logging-data="13583"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19Ok2xCL/hEEWqNKJ8BBAFQ"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.14.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Tu8zqpoaWzJhHzHblBE6lB4BD1o=
In-Reply-To: <iqjam2Fk5s8U1@mid.individual.net>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Fredxx - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:19 UTC

On 17/09/2021 11:58, 72y33 wrote:
>
>
> "The Natural Philosopher" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:si1rqg$123$2@dont-email.me...
>> On 17/09/2021 11:30, 72y33 wrote:
>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote
>>>> Pancho wrote
>>>
>>>>> I thought nuclear armed subs were essentially a first strike
>>>>> weapon. They can hide just offshore of the target, reducing warning
>>>>> time to a few minutes.
>>>> That tooo.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ICBMs are just as effective for retaliation, and much cheaper. They
>>>>> can be mobile and so hard to destroy. The problem is they take much
>>>>> longer from launch to arrival and give the target nation time to
>>>>> react to an attack.
>>>>
>>>> The whole point of first strike was to take out fixed icbm sites to
>>>> prevent retaliation
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But we aren't giving the Aussies nuclear bombs are we? We are just
>>>>> giving them nuclear powered subs.
>>>>>
>>>> I believe so.
>>>> They are most useful to destroy incoming naval craft  - the chinese
>>>> dont want to bomb Taiwan, or Australia - they want to annex it.
>>>
>>> There is no possibility of China annexing Australia.
>
>> Every possibility I would say
>
> More fool you...
>
> - Australia is not very heavily populated.
>> And is not very defensible.
>
> That is mindless bullshit.
>
> And is full of pacifists who would probably
>> welcome them with open arms
>
> More mindless bullshit.
>
>>> Even the USA doesn’t have what it takes to do that.
>>
>> Course it does.
>
> Fraid not. No possibility of holding it.
>
> They couldn’t even manage that with Afghanistan.

Is Australia equally corrupt and inhabited by religious freaks too
seemingly all too happy to commit suicide in human guided weapons?

I'm surprised you're willing to draw the comparison? But then you in
Australia and I don't.

>>>>> I was more intrigued by the idea of nuclear powered container ships.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed.
>
>

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si1uie$ton$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=76&group=alt.engineering.electrical#76

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Pancho.D...@outlook.com (Pancho)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:35:42 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <si1uie$ton$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me>
<tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me>
<rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
<si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0c3a$kf0$1@dont-email.me>
<iqiphuFgtlcU1@mid.individual.net> <si1lro$qo0$1@dont-email.me>
<iqj9qnFk0s6U1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:35:42 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="c6c9d2f14c7ebe790e9a1f025d0bf227";
logging-data="30487"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18ON2IFjg2URdIWUfrYC83NmbVNCn1O+wk="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/68.12.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:o5NeREzdg+b306e+CjgtOFSrb7I=
In-Reply-To: <iqj9qnFk0s6U1@mid.individual.net>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Pancho - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:35 UTC

On 17/09/2021 11:43, Rod Speed wrote:

>> North Korea and Iran being obvious examples where they have/would have
>> utility.
>
> And Israel.
>

Maybe 50 years ago, maybe in the future, but at the moment they are the
dominant regional power. Additionally, they are protected against these
weaker enemies by US backing.

I think a lot of the reason Israel and the US suspect Iran of seeking
nuclear weapons is because it is what they would do in Iran's position.

Personally I'm not so sure. I think the Iranian leadership may think
differently.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si1v0i$559$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=77&group=alt.engineering.electrical#77

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Pancho.D...@outlook.com (Pancho)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:43:14 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <si1v0i$559$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me>
<tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me>
<rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
<si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me>
<si1qui$s8g$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:43:14 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="c6c9d2f14c7ebe790e9a1f025d0bf227";
logging-data="5289"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18dJIPSvQ8daDl0ZRVLjmznCkBUFQQCuKM="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/68.12.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:zlSzlFSHXI/w4/x0sPc5hsjPEyA=
In-Reply-To: <si1qui$s8g$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Pancho - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:43 UTC

On 17/09/2021 11:33, Steve Walker wrote:

>
> But subs hide much better. Time taken to arrive is not a problem for a
> retaliatory weapon though.
>

Do they? With modern equipment. I actually suspect subs are more
vulnerable to being taken out in a pre-emptive strike. I think the UK
often has just one operational trident sub.

Governments lie about the real reasons to placate the public.

Most of the cash poor nuclear powers rely on mobile land nukes. Trains,
lorries, multiple geographically distance launch sites. More weapons for
your money. These are countries which are most likely to face a first
strike.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si1vn7$evm$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=78&group=alt.engineering.electrical#78

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tnp...@invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:55:18 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 77
Message-ID: <si1vn7$evm$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me>
<tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me>
<rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
<si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me>
<si1dos$9ae$1@dont-email.me> <iqj92fFjsc2U1@mid.individual.net>
<si1rqg$123$2@dont-email.me> <iqjam2Fk5s8U1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:55:19 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ef6b81740d03aca99e604a15205504c6";
logging-data="15350"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/YoZh3rnvWJSeRAglxjaVWHKpGSCPLy7k="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:owGDWtpuV0cD5c1QU83vEOAROfQ=
In-Reply-To: <iqjam2Fk5s8U1@mid.individual.net>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:55 UTC

On 17/09/2021 11:58, 72y33 wrote:
>
>
> "The Natural Philosopher" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:si1rqg$123$2@dont-email.me...
>> On 17/09/2021 11:30, 72y33 wrote:
>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote
>>>> Pancho wrote
>>>
>>>>> I thought nuclear armed subs were essentially a first strike
>>>>> weapon. They can hide just offshore of the target, reducing warning
>>>>> time to a few minutes.
>>>> That tooo.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ICBMs are just as effective for retaliation, and much cheaper. They
>>>>> can be mobile and so hard to destroy. The problem is they take much
>>>>> longer from launch to arrival and give the target nation time to
>>>>> react to an attack.
>>>>
>>>> The whole point of first strike was to take out fixed icbm sites to
>>>> prevent retaliation
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But we aren't giving the Aussies nuclear bombs are we? We are just
>>>>> giving them nuclear powered subs.
>>>>>
>>>> I believe so.
>>>> They are most useful to destroy incoming naval craft  - the chinese
>>>> dont want to bomb Taiwan, or Australia - they want to annex it.
>>>
>>> There is no possibility of China annexing Australia.
>
>> Every possibility I would say
>
> More fool you...
wow. You START with an ad hominem!
>
> - Australia is not very heavily populated.
>> And is not very defensible.
>
> That is mindless bullshit.

And carry on with insults without addressing the basic point, that the
north of Australia is huge and empty, and there is nothing there to stop
chinese landing craft waltzing in, apart from submarines..
>
> And is full of pacifists who would probably
>> welcome them with open arms
>
> More mindless bullshit.
More insults and ad hominems. And complete lack of rational arguments
>
>>> Even the USA doesn’t have what it takes to do that.
>>
>> Course it does.
>
> Fraid not. No possibility of holding it.
No possibility of retaking it. How many men did it take to

(a) take
(b) retake the falklands?

>
> They couldn’t even manage that with Afghanistan.
>
They didn't even try

And the Afghans are far more likely to resist invasion than limp wristed
latte drinking urban hipster Australians

--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si20ih$qi7$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=79&group=alt.engineering.electrical#79

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ste...@walker-family.me.uk (Steve Walker)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:09:51 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <si20ih$qi7$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me>
<tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me>
<rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
<si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0mfc$i2q$1@dont-email.me>
<si1qui$s8g$1@dont-email.me> <si1v0i$559$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:09:53 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="3324b075331d4d9276901fa02d49dc91";
logging-data="27207"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX197xnmCYBadIxlrzaSWxySTOZRpKP4lu0w="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.1.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:fUhbt3xkU3rZAEXqZv3MozV9h00=
In-Reply-To: <si1v0i$559$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Steve Walker - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:09 UTC

On 17/09/2021 12:43, Pancho wrote:
> On 17/09/2021 11:33, Steve Walker wrote:
>
>>
>> But subs hide much better. Time taken to arrive is not a problem for a
>> retaliatory weapon though.
>>
>
> Do they? With modern equipment. I actually suspect subs are more
> vulnerable to being taken out in a pre-emptive strike. I think the UK
> often has just one operational trident sub.

Subs are far more hidden than any land-based system. At times of high
tension, they will usually arrange for more than one to be at sea at the
same time - indeed this was one of the arguments against the Lib-Dem
proposal to save money by buying fewer.

> Governments lie about the real reasons to placate the public.
>
> Most of the cash poor nuclear powers rely on mobile land nukes. Trains,
> lorries, multiple geographically distance launch sites. More weapons for
> your money. These are countries which are most likely to face a first
> strike.

More weapons, but easier to wipe-out pre-emptively.

Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?

<si20mc$t01$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=80&group=alt.engineering.electrical#80

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tnp...@invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:11:56 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <si20mc$t01$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me>
<tN6dnVCZkrJT6d78nZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me>
<rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com> <shvuk8$kar$1@dont-email.me>
<si0681$bab$1@dont-email.me> <si0c3a$kf0$1@dont-email.me>
<iqiphuFgtlcU1@mid.individual.net> <si1lro$qo0$1@dont-email.me>
<iqj9qnFk0s6U1@mid.individual.net> <si1uie$ton$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:11:56 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ef6b81740d03aca99e604a15205504c6";
logging-data="29697"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/1NAYP0kfyC6pr7KaIvL9uApB+plgsxZU="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:cKsCp7FfuW7B82+icJOo0+Gy2BI=
In-Reply-To: <si1uie$ton$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:11 UTC

On 17/09/2021 12:35, Pancho wrote:
> On 17/09/2021 11:43, Rod Speed wrote:
>
>>> North Korea and Iran being obvious examples where they have/would
>>> have utility.
>>
>> And Israel.
>>
>
> Maybe 50 years ago, maybe in the future, but at the moment they are the
> dominant regional power. Additionally, they are protected against these
> weaker enemies by US backing.
>
> I think a lot of the reason Israel and the US suspect Iran of seeking
> nuclear weapons is because it is what they would do in Iran's position.
>
> Personally I'm not so sure. I think the Iranian leadership may think
> differently.

Well I have quite a lot of interest in Iran - I have known many Iranians
for reasons I do not understand! - and where the regime is at is using
the West much as nicola sturgeon uses england, as a scapegoat for every
ill the regime has inflicted on the country.

This comes to a head with the 'Rothschild conspiracy' which maintains
that the Jewish Rothschilds, based in England, are the secret illuminati
that are running the world and pissing on Iran, specifically.

This is OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT POLICY. And believed by the majority of Iranians

To that end it sponsors acts of terrorism to maintain enmity with the
UK, America and Israel in order to say 'look, they are waging war
against us'. It would love to have nuclear weapons to threaten Israel
with.

And to threaten Britain and the USA with in case we thought of doing a
Desert storm on them.

Now having nuclear weapons ourselves is no defence against Iran's
nuclear weapons. Any use of nuclear weapons against Iran would like
arouse sympathy across the islamic diaspora. Use of nuclear weapons by
Iran would receive tacit acclaim across the same diaspora. In fact the
only thing that works against Islamic militancy is total utter public
humiliation.

--
“Some people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of
a car with the cramped public exposure of 
an airplane.”

Dennis Miller

Pages:12345
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor