Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Heisenberg might have been here.


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?

<si210l$107$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=81&group=alt.engineering.electrical#81

 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 13:17:24 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <si210l$107$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$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 12:17:25 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ef6b81740d03aca99e604a15205504c6";
logging-data="1031"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19pbclx1IPtdpJ4yqGs0dDvvz5QoMvWqeQ="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:C4lpOBG/CiaG50uRgCsAKGmiwdQ=
In-Reply-To: <si1v0i$559$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:17 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.
>
No, they are not.

> Governments lie about the real reasons to placate the public.
"I think the UK often has just one operational trident sub."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Governments lie about the real facts to placate the public.

>
> Most of the cash poor nuclear powers rely on mobile land nukes.

There are no cash poor nuclear powers.

You need to be pretty well heeled to build a bomb

Wiki:

Contents

1 Statistics and force configuration
2 Recognized nuclear-weapon states
2.1 United States
2.2 Russia (successor to the Soviet Union)
2.3 United Kingdom
2.4 France
2.5 China
3 States declaring possession of nuclear weapons
3.1 India
3.2 Pakistan
3.3 North Korea
4 States indicated to possess nuclear weapons
4.1 Israel
5 Launch authority
6 Nuclear weapons sharing
7 States formerly possessing nuclear weapons
7.1 South Africa
7.2 Former Soviet Republics

None of those are 'cash poor'
None of them lack at the very least a functional air force and some
missile capability

Trains,
> lorries, multiple geographically distance launch sites. More weapons for
> your money. These are countries which are most likely to face a first
> strike.
>
You are making this up, completely. Talking out of your arse really.
>
>

--
"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?

<si21s6$f1f$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=82&group=alt.engineering.electrical#82

 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 13:32:06 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 75
Message-ID: <si21s6$f1f$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$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$1@dont-email.me>
<si20mc$t01$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:32:06 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="c6c9d2f14c7ebe790e9a1f025d0bf227";
logging-data="15407"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Ggy5rD3hr1+m4npI12nmuN7WPLt9HRm0="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/68.12.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:JFIDW/dx4ACK1rXoDMVETcsEXp0=
In-Reply-To: <si20mc$t01$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Pancho - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:32 UTC

On 17/09/2021 13:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 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!

There was the diaspora in 1979.

I was down the boozer with an Iranian mate a couple of weeks ago and he
was telling me with horror how his (English, Catholic) daughter was
embracing her Iranian heritage, wanting to wear a head scarf etc. Him
going, nooo, we never did that in Iran.

> - 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.
>

I think that is pretty much true and Israel does a bit the same with
Iran, presenting them as an existential threat. I think in reality Iran
is much more interested in Saudi. Israel hate rhetoric, is just lip
service. Something that is free and pleases Muslims across the region.

I don't see how genuinely threatening Israel benefits Iran, Israel
doesn't have anything they want. Much better to be the unfairly abused
underdog, to have the bete noir to scare the local plebs into supporting
you.

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

Exactly, but we won't, not after recent events. So they don't need 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.

I thought total humiliation was the reason for Islamic militancy. They
couldn't win in real life so they invent a fairy tale where they are
superior.

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

<Is6dne5wCMjJydn8nZ2dnUU78QWdnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=83&group=alt.engineering.electrical#83

 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!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 03:39:48 -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$2@dont-email.me>
From: cpb...@bignell.me.uk (nightjar)
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 09:39:50 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <shvtpu$crd$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <Is6dne5wCMjJydn8nZ2dnUU78QWdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 19
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-HlDTAtjJOD3JVCgBM9gOpu4bNmff4ozD4Ncf9JrXiPvF23vboB8wD3FewwbIPIxaisOpFNlBO5eAmqD!vhAeY+EJeEsgMAweX1c3lsqFg8XSIyI7wO+N8wkah6XHtqG5gJXjmTV2llJru4U3Pmiw15ahEg==
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: 2120
 by: nightjar - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 08:39 UTC

On 16/09/2021 18:10, GB wrote:
> On 16/09/2021 17:46, nightjar wrote:
....
>> However, there is a high power setting for 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.

I would be most surprised if a nuclear sub put to sea relying on the
memory of the crew, rather than on comprehensive check lists, to ensure
that everything is done right.

--
Colin Bignell

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

<xsmdnZhHTJyV7tn8nZ2dnUU78VmdnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=84&group=alt.engineering.electrical#84

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!border2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!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 05:50:48 -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$1@dont-email.me>
<si1qui$s8g$1@dont-email.me>
From: cpb...@bignell.me.uk (nightjar)
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:50:48 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <si1qui$s8g$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <xsmdnZhHTJyV7tn8nZ2dnUU78VmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 13
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-biJzymLP2KMs7+dXTVKVtjBTMLQdzVEYHMX+iAan8op4U6AMLFC2pvaZXIP3Ljw1Kl7r+I/R58GD7FO!fCNpBksQ3porgdGUktHy6FevgITBc4wRnrpdB3jb7P3VOTt9clcmY70OSt500KLto2POZLSn0A==
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: 1870
 by: nightjar - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 10:50 UTC

On 17/09/2021 11:33, Steve Walker wrote:
....
> Although not used much, there have been commercial nuclear ships before
> - and a number of icebreakers.

One of which had to jettison its reactor after what is thought to have
been a partial meltdown. At it was a Soviet vessel, details are not
available.

--
Colin Bignell

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

<si2614$7af$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=85&group=alt.engineering.electrical#85

 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 14:43:00 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <si2614$7af$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$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>
<si210l$107$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 13:43:00 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="c6c9d2f14c7ebe790e9a1f025d0bf227";
logging-data="7503"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+Yo/58AWWqZqy/q3XuLtmG7l21SAPyAvM="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/68.12.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:RVxsvVOWw072ZDl8bwf4IiEsUtE=
In-Reply-To: <si210l$107$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Pancho - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:43 UTC

On 17/09/2021 13:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>> Most of the cash poor nuclear powers rely on mobile land nukes.
>
> There are no cash poor nuclear powers.
>
> You need to be pretty well heeled to build a bomb
>
> Wiki:
>
> Contents
>
>     1 Statistics and force configuration
>     2 Recognized nuclear-weapon states
>         2.1 United States
>         2.2 Russia (successor to the Soviet Union)
>         2.3 United Kingdom
>         2.4 France
>         2.5 China
>     3 States declaring possession of nuclear weapons
>         3.1 India
>         3.2 Pakistan
>         3.3 North Korea
>     4 States indicated to possess nuclear weapons
>         4.1 Israel
>     5 Launch authority
>     6 Nuclear weapons sharing
>     7 States formerly possessing nuclear weapons
>         7.1 South Africa
>         7.2 Former Soviet Republics
>
> None of those are 'cash poor'
> None of them lack at the very least a functional air force and some
> missile capability
>

North Korea.

>
>
> Trains,
>> lorries, multiple geographically distance launch sites. More weapons
>> for your money. These are countries which are most likely to face a
>> first strike.
>>
> You are making this up, completely. Talking out of your arse really.

<https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2021-09-17/north-korea-s-train-missile-launch-video>

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

<si26c4$h3c$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=86&group=alt.engineering.electrical#86

 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 14:48:51 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <si26c4$h3c$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$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$1@dont-email.me>
<si20ih$qi7$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:48:52 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="c6c9d2f14c7ebe790e9a1f025d0bf227";
logging-data="17516"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19jMJprfTOIu5SeTHgfVjygFJ5qHRu7j50="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/68.12.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:BTMymkhhB0XnsEMqGfT+dSqi5RU=
In-Reply-To: <si20ih$qi7$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Pancho - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:48 UTC

On 17/09/2021 13:09, Steve Walker wrote:
> 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.

Are they? It seems quite possible advance sub tracking could exist now,
or in the near future.

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.

Are they? Subs in the open ocean vs a missile launcher vehicle in the
interior of a country. Possibly with lots of missile launcher decoys.
Sub decoys aren't so cheap..

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

<si27tc$6f6$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=87&group=alt.engineering.electrical#87

 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 15:15:08 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 61
Message-ID: <si27tc$6f6$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$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>
<si210l$107$1@dont-email.me> <si2614$7af$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 14:15:08 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ef6b81740d03aca99e604a15205504c6";
logging-data="6630"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18sLxKFxiizGR7O8NbZLrMzxop5YBCOhlQ="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:lMrN74BND9Kp9o8BDzLpDngDtOE=
In-Reply-To: <si2614$7af$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Fri, 17 Sep 2021 14:15 UTC

On 17/09/2021 14:43, Pancho wrote:
> On 17/09/2021 13:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>>> Most of the cash poor nuclear powers rely on mobile land nukes.
>>
>> There are no cash poor nuclear powers.
>>
>> You need to be pretty well heeled to build a bomb
>>
>> Wiki:
>>
>> Contents
>>
>>      1 Statistics and force configuration
>>      2 Recognized nuclear-weapon states
>>          2.1 United States
>>          2.2 Russia (successor to the Soviet Union)
>>          2.3 United Kingdom
>>          2.4 France
>>          2.5 China
>>      3 States declaring possession of nuclear weapons
>>          3.1 India
>>          3.2 Pakistan
>>          3.3 North Korea
>>      4 States indicated to possess nuclear weapons
>>          4.1 Israel
>>      5 Launch authority
>>      6 Nuclear weapons sharing
>>      7 States formerly possessing nuclear weapons
>>          7.1 South Africa
>>          7.2 Former Soviet Republics
>>
>> None of those are 'cash poor'
>> None of them lack at the very least a functional air force and some
>> missile capability
>>
>
> North Korea.
>
doesn't have nuclear weapons. just *says* it has

>>
>>
>> Trains,
>>> lorries, multiple geographically distance launch sites. More weapons
>>> for your money. These are countries which are most likely to face a
>>> first strike.
>>>
>> You are making this up, completely. Talking out of your arse really.
>
> <https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2021-09-17/north-korea-s-train-missile-launch-video>
>
So not a train - a missile.

--
“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?

<iqk75eFpkblU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=88&group=alt.engineering.electrical#88

 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: 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: Sat, 18 Sep 2021 05:04:12 +1000
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <iqk75eFpkblU1@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$2@dont-email.me> <iqjam2Fk5s8U1@mid.individual.net> <si1tj7$d8f$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net yl2/kv/3ybeuzOGMNS/QMAhbXLd5N8YY29mTyPjfrU4azGXxk=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:XOWDKbMnG8nLH9qmw3F3PdPT8dI=
In-Reply-To: <si1tj7$d8f$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 19:04 UTC

Fredxx <fredxx@nospam.co.uk> wrote
> 72y33 wrote
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote
>>> 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?

Nope, but doesn’t need to be to make it impossible for the yanks
to hold it if they were actually stupid enough to try invading.

> I'm surprised you're willing to draw the comparison?

There is no 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?

<iqk7qgFpo6iU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89&group=alt.engineering.electrical#89

 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: 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: Sat, 18 Sep 2021 05:15:25 +1000
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <iqk7qgFpo6iU1@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$1@dont-email.me> <iqj9qnFk0s6U1@mid.individual.net> <si1uie$ton$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net HxzEo8fpe4iqpwOTO0Qzmw6/ivbY3SHpLx8yzJA6Dgj5ZX+uw=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:conT2ESDlsUKm5HuJ7wQFaEsAQs=
In-Reply-To: <si1uie$ton$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 19:15 UTC

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

But Israel's nukes ensure that no one like Iran will
actually be stupid enough to try nuking them.

Israel's nukes ensure that even if Iran does end up
with nukes, that there will only ever be a standoff
like there is with India and Pakistan, both with nukes.

> Additionally, they are protected against these weaker enemies by US
> backing.

Only with conventional war. It is unlikely that the US
would nuke Iran if Iran was stupid enough to nuke Israel.

> 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.

Yes, but Israeli nukes do ensure that only the most stupid
nut case in Iran would be stupid enough nuke Israel.

And difficult to see that even the most stupid nut case would
anyway given all the palestinians so close and in Israel.

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

Nope, they think the same that having their own nukes
would ensure that Israel would never nuke them.

That’s why North Korea has nukes but wont be stupid enough to use them.

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

<iqk8b4Fps4aU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90&group=alt.engineering.electrical#90

 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: Sat, 18 Sep 2021 05:24:18 +1000
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <iqk8b4Fps4aU1@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$1@dont-email.me> <si1qui$s8g$1@dont-email.me> <si1v0i$559$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 DBMOJ2cOgRCxS712x/Snqg3UiqsVGSLfKJnJ9KiM4h7VYEXgU=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:AIY92qyREI3OLG2kFPfXuhQCJWg=
In-Reply-To: <si1v0i$559$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 19:24 UTC

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

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

> Do they?

Yep.

> With modern equipment. I actually suspect subs are more vulnerable to
> being taken out in a pre-emptive strike.

You're wrong. There is no way to work out where a sub with
nukes is once its out in the open ocean submerged and they
can stay that way for very long times with nuke powered subs.

> I think the UK often has just one operational trident sub.

Yes, but that is still one hell of a deterrent because that one
sub is plenty to ensure that only the most stupid would try
nuking the UK.

> Governments lie about the real reasons to placate the public.

Doesn’t matter what they say, they aren't for a first strike.

> Most of the cash poor nuclear powers rely on mobile land nukes.

Which are much easier to work out where they are than nuke subs.

> Trains, lorries,

Much easier to find those than a nuke sub.

> multiple geographically distance launch sites.

Trivial to keep a list of those and take those out.

> More weapons for your money.

But far more likely to be useless.

> These are countries which are most likely to face a first strike.

That’s bullshit. Even Trump wouldn’t be that stupid and the US
military wouldn’t do it even if he was stupid enough to order one.

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

<iqk8vmFpvm5U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=91&group=alt.engineering.electrical#91

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.mixmin.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.karotte.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: Sat, 18 Sep 2021 05:35:15 +1000
Lines: 96
Message-ID: <iqk8vmFpvm5U1@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$2@dont-email.me> <iqjam2Fk5s8U1@mid.individual.net> <si1vn7$evm$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net JjvYRR4+2hWFOkPAARMatA6Kl+sxlYxRjzo5pqyyssJgX61Dk=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:E4S+pofpbbFUOS8GZb5VWlc7L4Y=
In-Reply-To: <si1vn7$evm$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 19:35 UTC

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

That’s not an ad hominem, it’s a turn of phrase.

>> - 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,

I did address the basic point, at the bottom.

> that the north of Australia is huge and empty,

More mindless pig ignorant bullshit particularly
with the east and west coasts.

> and there is nothing there to stop chinese landing craft waltzing in,
> apart from submarines..

More mindless pig ignorant bullshit with the airforce.

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

>> More mindless bullshit.

> More insults and ad hominems.

Nope, statement of fact in that case.

> And complete lack of rational arguments

And that is a bare faced lie with Afghanistan.

>>>> 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?

Pity about Afghanistan.

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

Bullshit. They would never stay forever.

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

More mindless bullshit.

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

<iqldkmF1ub6U6@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=92&group=alt.engineering.electrical#92

 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: 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: Sat, 18 Sep 2021 11:44:37 +1000
Lines: 61
Message-ID: <iqldkmF1ub6U6@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$1@dont-email.me> <si1qui$s8g$1@dont-email.me> <si1v0i$559$1@dont-email.me> <si20ih$qi7$1@dont-email.me> <si26c4$h3c$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net +h1hHacISJDURHGg2wWXDAyRc8P1yRn7QxKNonWzNWncMxs4A=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:y6ZRu229EpYap7pnrYwynouMj4I=
In-Reply-To: <si26c4$h3c$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 - Sat, 18 Sep 2021 01:44 UTC

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

> Are they?

Yep.

> It seems quite possible advance sub tracking could exist now, or in the
> near future.

Nope, how do you propose that would be done ?

It just isn't feasible to do it with a huge raft of audio
signature recording devices and trivial to keep track
of them notifying home when they see your sub go by.

Not feasible to detect the magnetic anomaly going
by with a satellite either. If that was possible, no one
would be bothering with the very high cost of nuke
firing subs.

> 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.
>
> Are they?

Yep, because its easy to work out where they are.

> Subs in the open ocean vs a missile launcher vehicle in the interior of a
> country. Possibly with lots of missile launcher decoys.

How odd that we haven't seen anyone doing that and
they aren't a useful decoy if they haven't been seen.

> Sub decoys aren't so cheap..

But are much harder to keep track of.

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

<iqldkqF1uc3U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=93&group=alt.engineering.electrical#93

 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!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed9.news.xs4all.nl!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: Sat, 18 Sep 2021 11:51:29 +1000
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <iqldkqF1uc3U1@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$1@dont-email.me> <si1qui$s8g$1@dont-email.me> <si1v0i$559$1@dont-email.me> <si210l$107$1@dont-email.me> <si2614$7af$1@dont-email.me> <si27tc$6f6$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 Uu+bRLjT0J5vf7U8XX1ZNAhK7lv9pCiX8uDhaUTq/nW5kVJro=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:tb+PddPmmjTD3pIeklUYh8ZUJoE=
In-Reply-To: <si27tc$6f6$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 - Sat, 18 Sep 2021 01:51 UTC

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote
> On 17/09/2021 14:43, Pancho wrote:
>> On 17/09/2021 13:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>>> Most of the cash poor nuclear powers rely on mobile land nukes.
>>>
>>> There are no cash poor nuclear powers.
>>>
>>> You need to be pretty well heeled to build a bomb
>>>
>>> Wiki:
>>>
>>> Contents
>>>
>>> 1 Statistics and force configuration
>>> 2 Recognized nuclear-weapon states
>>> 2.1 United States
>>> 2.2 Russia (successor to the Soviet Union)
>>> 2.3 United Kingdom
>>> 2.4 France
>>> 2.5 China
>>> 3 States declaring possession of nuclear weapons
>>> 3.1 India
>>> 3.2 Pakistan
>>> 3.3 North Korea
>>> 4 States indicated to possess nuclear weapons
>>> 4.1 Israel
>>> 5 Launch authority
>>> 6 Nuclear weapons sharing
>>> 7 States formerly possessing nuclear weapons
>>> 7.1 South Africa
>>> 7.2 Former Soviet Republics
>>>
>>> None of those are 'cash poor'
>>> None of them lack at the very least a functional air force and some
>>> missile capability
>>>
>>
>> North Korea.
>>
> doesn't have nuclear weapons.

We know it has because we have seen them test
those and we know that’s where Pakistan got theirs.

> just *says* it has

Wrong.

>>> Trains,
>>>> lorries, multiple geographically distance launch sites. More weapons
>>>> for your money. These are countries which are most likely to face a
>>>> first strike.
>>>>
>>> You are making this up, completely. Talking out of your arse really.
>>
>> <https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2021-09-17/north-korea-s-train-missile-launch-video>
> So not a train - a missile.

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

<Uu2dnZD01_nXk9v8nZ2dnUU78KvNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=94&group=alt.engineering.electrical#94

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!border2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2021 11:05:30 -0500
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <si1g32$mjv$1@dont-email.me>
From: newsho...@stevejqr.plus.com (newshound)
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2021 17:05:29 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <si1g32$mjv$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <Uu2dnZD01_nXk9v8nZ2dnUU78KvNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Lines: 30
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-YVyYLmxah2Hr2lVIfqLl37+oU3K4tnN01i/PHlpJihVbwbIqekooTcH0aMNmbjJTiv8vpgCFBDFTDWl!qh/vswTBq53cukHMj20guS7/+a9A2ZuR7LTG/4ap94Hs8ItTIQFS4Hk4UJmEGLd1e/SXnRlNJ2aL!NJIFncc0bjH1mTVnniiYfWNaYg==
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: 2870
 by: newshound - Sat, 18 Sep 2021 16:05 UTC

On 17/09/2021 08:28, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
> 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
>
Two points. You have to dump "low temperature" heat somewhere to have a
thermodynamic cycle from which you extract energy. In a sub, the only
place is the sea.

IIRC the Soviets have used fast reactors in subs, I think with lead or
lead/bismuth cooling rather than sodium. I think everyone else uses
pressurised water reactors.

While mixing sodium and water is bad news, the death knell for the
Dounreay Prototype Fast Reactor was corrosion, more accurately stress
corrosion cracking, on the *water* side of the sodium to water heat
exchanger where the steam is raised. This is hot, very pure water which
poses more materials challenges than the the cold seawater-to-steam
condenser.

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

<iqqq8pF30heU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=95&group=alt.engineering.electrical#95

 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: jun...@admac.myzen.co.uk (alan_m)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 08:07:03 +0100
Organization: At Home
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <iqqq8pF30heU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <shvi1l$qg9$1@dont-email.me>
<usydnd3WzLwPx978nZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <shvp1j$bvc$1@dont-email.me>
<iqh7nbF7srhU1@mid.individual.net>
Reply-To: news@admac.myzen.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net 0RXMXNy0dXg1TPSb+FKpQAxr55vmoB0/Jt6Tk1/HnuEDa1n3+T
Cancel-Lock: sha1:jV3Gl+r1pQHP0jEdi+BRRPACus0=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.14.0
In-Reply-To: <iqh7nbF7srhU1@mid.individual.net>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: alan_m - Mon, 20 Sep 2021 07:07 UTC

On 16/09/2021 16:55, Spike wrote:
> On 16/09/2021 15:49, 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?
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_running_(submarine)
>
>

Drill a few holes in the propeller....

https://www.maritime-executive.com/corporate/revolutionary-propeller-technology-reduces-underwater-radiated-noise

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

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

<iqqqohF3396U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=96&group=alt.engineering.electrical#96

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!lilly.ping.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: jun...@admac.myzen.co.uk (alan_m)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 08:15:27 +0100
Organization: At Home
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <iqqqohF3396U1@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>
Reply-To: news@admac.myzen.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net a/Kn8s3irpR5C/zSbkXNvgfqktCb8ZhN8Ha0xaokkARkV52APt
Cancel-Lock: sha1:LGONkbogDUWSMtKQcpengoC1J2A=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.14.0
In-Reply-To: <rvu6kgdv1bstddo3fgi7g796ai54upnpkq@4ax.com>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: alan_m - Mon, 20 Sep 2021 07:15 UTC

On 16/09/2021 18:17, Scott wrote:

> Could they not just alter one of the components, preferably the
> noisiest one?
>

or adopt WW2 acoustic mine sweeping technology by fitting a Kango
vibrating hammer to the hull of the ship ;)

From
https://www.vernonlink.uk/wwii

"
In late October the recovery and exploitation of an acoustic mine –
found ashore in the mouth of the River Ogmore near Porthcawl - allowed
a more effective sweep to be developed. This was the Kango vibrating
hammer – known as the ‘SA’ (Sweep Acoustic) that was being widely fitted
before the end of the year and was to see significant success fitted
either in the bows of a vessel or streamed outboard. The risks remained
significant though; the minesweeping trawler RADNOR CASTLE had to be
beached off Plymouth following a too-close detonation and in December HM
Trawler COURTIER detonated 4 acoustics in swift succession, the last one
breaking the legs of 4 crew members and putting the trawler in dock for
several months. A less conventional minesweeper also incurred damage in
late December 1940; the fast Isle of Man Steam Packet SS VICTORIA had
already set off 8 or 9 mines during her transits back and forth to
Liverpool, but on the 27th the detonation just off the Douglas Bar Light
was a little too close and she had to be towed back to port although, in
this instance, no casualties were reported.
"

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

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

<iqqr1nF360dU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=97&group=alt.engineering.electrical#97

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.mixmin.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.karotte.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: jun...@admac.myzen.co.uk (alan_m)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 08:20:21 +0100
Organization: At Home
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <iqqr1nF360dU1@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>
Reply-To: news@admac.myzen.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net 2UGSnjrxfmOmOuIBC+XjCwsegCHgDMfy+gBuwiPMQ3mwqDIgyC
Cancel-Lock: sha1:txQNm9r2fKeYcKz23PmGVoeZQqE=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.14.0
In-Reply-To: <iqiphuFgtlcU1@mid.individual.net>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: alan_m - Mon, 20 Sep 2021 07:20 UTC

On 17/09/2021 07:05, Rod Speed wrote:

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

Don't we now need the nuclear deterrent more than ever? We are still in
danger of WW3 as predicted by the Brexit project fear campaign!

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

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

<iqqrlgF39aqU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=98&group=alt.engineering.electrical#98

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.datentrampelpfad.de!akk.uni-karlsruhe.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: jun...@admac.myzen.co.uk (alan_m)
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.d-i-y
Subject: Re: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 08:30:55 +0100
Organization: At Home
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <iqqrlgF39aqU1@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>
<si1dhd$814$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: news@admac.myzen.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net 423jWKxeYrWi4rja64Bo9gaApCGIMIwE+PrSBzcQhKH//0E+Rt
Cancel-Lock: sha1:dfVl6Yl1BKNKfCUjyKwZt8HK5Zw=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.14.0
In-Reply-To: <si1dhd$814$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: alan_m - Mon, 20 Sep 2021 07:30 UTC

On 17/09/2021 07:45, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 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

and sinking a war ship that the Japanese had failed to do in Pearl harbour.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

Australian subs (was: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?)

<R9qdnXtRAN6wytX8nZ2dnUU78U3NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=99&group=alt.engineering.electrical#99

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed7.news.xs4all.nl!border2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 04:41:01 -0500
Subject: Australian subs (was: 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>
<si1dos$9ae$1@dont-email.me> <iqj92fFjsc2U1@mid.individual.net>
From: newsho...@stevejqr.plus.com (newshound)
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 10:41:01 +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: <iqj92fFjsc2U1@mid.individual.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <R9qdnXtRAN6wytX8nZ2dnUU78U3NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Lines: 25
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-enFJCcGL0Vc+bYLXIsyHq7sg1oZ8XYy922pu7BNCl2O2rt47gWOkptnMitt4blzj+6y92Ne74CG/8k5!XePthxg035QuY3UwSDo4A/x31HJIrZgWZIdtIHvF+1VB/0raCpWciaDCmnQrH9u8ZVmiB4feJFPS!8Z2aZyGNO/c0PUMTfnHNuU16vw==
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: 2528
 by: newshound - Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:41 UTC

On 17/09/2021 11:30, 72y33 wrote:

>>>
>> 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.
>
>
I am sure the *point* of the new deal is that the Astute-like subs will
give Australia very much better intelligence capability on Chinese
activities in the South China Sea and elsewhere. Undoubtedly the
information will be shared completely with the USA and the UK. It also
means Australia and its regional friends will have more credibility in
protesting about Chinese activities to the UN, thus giving expansionist
Chinese more diplomatic headaches.

It's a bit like Teddy Roosevelt's "Speak softly and carry a big stick".

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

<MNWdnSGIT5DjxdX8nZ2dnUU78UvNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=100&group=alt.engineering.electrical#100

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder5.feed.usenet.farm!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed7.news.xs4all.nl!border2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 04:46:38 -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$1@dont-email.me>
<si1qui$s8g$1@dont-email.me> <si1v0i$559$1@dont-email.me>
<si210l$107$1@dont-email.me>
From: newsho...@stevejqr.plus.com (newshound)
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 10:46:37 +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: <si210l$107$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <MNWdnSGIT5DjxdX8nZ2dnUU78UvNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Lines: 13
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-KZ3XrWMLM+PdKmMmjK+JwckiL5PVE9oXhZwGEeEbztWXv4ysNVM8jblBAtRs4g/+QfndA49/6Ko4uDt!JFva6pwRtZwrCRpFOcNWyPMmTUrhQEoFmHG9gFVWV+kSV05qxmHwsYNe+fy7eOTrL3yprL36HRGb!uecHhnkPdIsn6DA3hTIzVIHt7A==
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: 2099
 by: newshound - Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:46 UTC

On 17/09/2021 13:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>
>
>> Governments lie about the real reasons to placate the public.
> "I think the UK  often has just one operational trident sub."
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Governments lie about the real facts to placate the public.
>

Not just the public. Having four (with two at sea much of the time, even
if only one is notionally on service duty) gives an aggressor who has
spotted one the Dirty Harry dilemma "Do you feel lucky, punk?"

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

<si9m1c$fv7$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=101&group=alt.engineering.electrical#101

 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: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 10:59:07 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <si9m1c$fv7$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$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>
<si210l$107$1@dont-email.me>
<MNWdnSGIT5DjxdX8nZ2dnUU78UvNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:59:08 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="4dbafbd3aa675c55b5ac6c12f1099787";
logging-data="16359"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19M6c+d8uDgHaToKWB9Y5QyQzX9CPrZcr8="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/68.12.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:8cPvPt5tc4TUs+l0CukjfVNwoZs=
In-Reply-To: <MNWdnSGIT5DjxdX8nZ2dnUU78UvNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Pancho - Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:59 UTC

On 20/09/2021 10:46, newshound wrote:
> On 17/09/2021 13:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> Governments lie about the real reasons to placate the public.
>> "I think the UK  often has just one operational trident sub."
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> Governments lie about the real facts to placate the public.
>>
>
> Not just the public. Having four (with two at sea much of the time, even
> if only one is notionally on service duty) gives an aggressor who has
> spotted one the Dirty Harry dilemma "Do you feel lucky, punk?"

Yeah right! Good point. An aggressor on the USA can be asked: "Can you
destroy only 2,800 of my possibly deployed nuclear weapons or can you
get all 2,821." 21 missed would be enough to devastate and nation.

There is no need for nuclear deployed missiles on subs. It makes no
discernable difference to the viability of detering a first strike
against the US.

Subs do give the USA a better chance of launching a first strike against
somewhere like North Korea.

Why somewhere like the UK would want to put all its eggs in one basket
(or maybe two baskets) is also a puzzle.

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

<iqr4i2F4ttfU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=102&group=alt.engineering.electrical#102

 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: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 20:02:37 +1000
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <iqr4i2F4ttfU1@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> <iqqr1nF360dU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net fA0nNQDozggz/Djt+3oYfwTVRU2YyCZsK1YMqKXET8o4P0+Lw=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Fu7qDNxxnBoVhj3dILXqU1XaoXY=
In-Reply-To: <iqqr1nF360dU1@mid.individual.net>
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 - Mon, 20 Sep 2021 10:02 UTC

alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

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

> Don't we now need the nuclear deterrent more than ever?

Nope, there is no possibility of anyone nuking
the UK and even if some stupid frog chose to
do that, Trident wouldn’t stop them doing that.

> We are still in danger of WW3

Nope.

> as predicted by the Brexit project fear campaign!

That was always just another stupid lie.

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

<adSdnYVY_fBd7NX8nZ2dnUU78W3NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=103&group=alt.engineering.electrical#103

 copy link   Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical uk.d-i-y
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!border2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 06:34:24 -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$1@dont-email.me>
<si1qui$s8g$1@dont-email.me> <si1v0i$559$1@dont-email.me>
<si210l$107$1@dont-email.me>
<MNWdnSGIT5DjxdX8nZ2dnUU78UvNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
<si9m1c$fv7$1@dont-email.me>
From: newsho...@stevejqr.plus.com (newshound)
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 12:34:24 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <si9m1c$fv7$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <adSdnYVY_fBd7NX8nZ2dnUU78W3NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Lines: 33
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-pXH6KlqV2Z0x7PmZjI8e54teEosTJp9CSO42t5zOvd5byOg7eJEHSbz753nNhg+Ov6bZuDTnTt+A1KO!Fd3c1oSAgA02AOkZFsmrOXGJZ98NczbMJ64D51/Gp0UMZbkI+loFDzrxSB5XktPqT6h268ba0azZ!kWgyF9x9OVrLzXR/gnVgYomXlg==
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: 3065
 by: newshound - Mon, 20 Sep 2021 11:34 UTC

On 20/09/2021 10:59, Pancho wrote:
> On 20/09/2021 10:46, newshound wrote:
>> On 17/09/2021 13:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Governments lie about the real reasons to placate the public.
>>> "I think the UK  often has just one operational trident sub."
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> Governments lie about the real facts to placate the public.
>>>
>>
>> Not just the public. Having four (with two at sea much of the time,
>> even if only one is notionally on service duty) gives an aggressor who
>> has spotted one the Dirty Harry dilemma "Do you feel lucky, punk?"
>
> Yeah right! Good point. An aggressor on the USA can be asked: "Can you
> destroy only 2,800 of my possibly deployed nuclear weapons or can you
> get all 2,821." 21 missed would be enough to devastate and nation.
>
> There is no need for nuclear deployed missiles on subs. It makes no
> discernable difference to the viability of detering a first strike
> against the US.
>
> Subs do give the USA a better chance of launching a first strike against
> somewhere like North Korea.
>
> Why somewhere like the UK would want to put all its eggs in one basket
> (or maybe two baskets) is also a puzzle.
>
>
Not to me. Look up why Atlee's inner cabinet started the independent
weapons programme. And hardly one basket, as Galtieri found to his cost.

Re: Australian subs (was: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?)

<iqrthdF9lllU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=104&group=alt.engineering.electrical#104

 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: Australian subs (was: OT Nuclear U-Boats; how do they condense the steam?)
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2021 03:08:59 +1000
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <iqrthdF9lllU1@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> <R9qdnXtRAN6wytX8nZ2dnUU78U3NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net KhxJUTSHpjRsDBGcIV4FUwNstdwlsLRKKgsz+oM6SI/SIzE6M=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:UhNkVxc5rCilK2pXLN9NlKPVD38=
In-Reply-To: <R9qdnXtRAN6wytX8nZ2dnUU78U3NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
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 - Mon, 20 Sep 2021 17:08 UTC

newshound <newshound@stevejqr.plus.com> wrote
> 72y33 wrote

>>> 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.

> I am sure the *point* of the new deal is that the Astute-like subs will
> give Australia very much better intelligence capability on Chinese
> activities in the South China Sea and elsewhere.

There is no point in us having stupidly expensive subs for that.

The US is quite capable of proving that intelligence with what they already
have.

> Undoubtedly the information will be shared completely with the USA and the
> UK.

Sure, but the USA doesn’t need it, they already have vastly better sources
of that.

> It also means Australia and its regional friends will have more
> credibility in protesting about Chinese activities to the UN,

That’s bullshit too.

> thus giving expansionist Chinese more diplomatic headaches.

They don’t give a damn about what anyone thinks about
what they are doing there, or about the Uyghurs either.

And those subs are a stupidly expensive way to do that anyway.
FAR better things to spend that sort of money on.

> It's a bit like Teddy Roosevelt's "Speak softly and carry a big stick".

It isn't a big stick in our case. It isn't even a twig.

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

<siaiar$dm$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=105&group=alt.engineering.electrical#105

 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: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 19:02:03 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <siaiar$dm$1@dont-email.me>
References: <shvi1l$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>
<si210l$107$1@dont-email.me>
<MNWdnSGIT5DjxdX8nZ2dnUU78UvNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
<si9m1c$fv7$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 18:02:03 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="89fb50bc8dcdc937868956659f24068b";
logging-data="438"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+L5ledHmJ9AFY+m+4x9MFeXX+6KtIqIUs="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:w+Q8lQBtGtKVosHN6hq9Hbew5xo=
In-Reply-To: <si9m1c$fv7$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Mon, 20 Sep 2021 18:02 UTC

On 20/09/2021 10:59, Pancho wrote:
> There is no need for nuclear deployed missiles on subs. It makes no
> discernable difference to the viability of detering a first strike
> against the US.

Bollocks

You may THINK you will get most of the silos, you KNOW you wont get any
of the subs

--
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
...I'd spend it on drink.

Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)

Pages:12345
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor