Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
#1 ...Sadly, there's no way around this especially as Enterprise's reactors - ancient Westinghouse A2Ws - are not in good shape and have had some problems in recent years that would absolutely preclude any possibility of opening her up as a museum.
Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2012-03-11 07:47||
Is it too late to sink the Enterprize in the Iranian part of the straits of hormuz with the old reactor primed for meltdown ?
That would give the mullahs a foretaste of things to come and a little whiff of their own medicine.
Posted by Elder of Zion 2012-03-11 08:03||
#3 Would they sink her as a reef?
Posted by john frum 2012-03-11 08:15||
#4 tree huggers would probably bitch abput it being a reef since it had nuke reactors during service and scap metal is too high.
Posted by chris 2012-03-11 10:25||
#5 That's a good argument for sinking her as a reef, chris. ;-p
Posted by Barbara 2012-03-11 10:29||
#6 So why spend all the $$ for that really long tow to WA? aren't there other shipyards or breaker's yards closer??
Or perhaps it could founder under mysterious circumstances and become that unscheduled reef....
Posted by USN, Ret. 2012-03-11 12:21||
#7 Unfortunately nuclear ships cannot be used for reefs as the enhanced radiation in their steel is too high.
The Russians dumped expended nuclear reactors in the Arctic ocean along with a huge amount of radioactive waste. The Swedes about had a heart attack over it when they found out.
There was even a suggestion that the US could take one of its overbuilt Los Angeles class submarines that it was mothballing, and instead de-mil it, give it a bottom hatch like the Seaview, and use it to entomb such things with a huge amount of underwater concrete, working in concert with a surface cargo ship.
It would be noisy as hell underwater, but it would no longer need to be stealthy, so would mostly run on the surface.
Posted by Anonymoose 2012-03-11 12:24||
#8 yeah, that and... Look! Gozirra!
Posted by Frank G 2012-03-11 13:25||
#9 I didn't mean to say that the Enterprise should be hauling garbage. I meant to say that should be hauled away AS garbage!
Posted by Mizzou Mafia 2012-03-11 16:21||
#10 The diesel generators are used as backup generators for nukepower plants.
Posted by BigAl 2012-03-11 18:04||
#11 As one ENTERPRISE ends, the technology for another develops ... ...???
* DEFENCE.PK/FORUMS > [Space.com] USAF X37B MARKS ONE YEAR IN ORBIT | AIR FORCE'S MYSTERIOUS SPACE-PLANE SURVIVES ONE YEAR IN ORBIT.
The Brits still have their britches/panties in a wad oer the costs + need for the new QE-class CVF - I STILL WOULD RANTHER SEE THE US GIVE THEM THE ENTERPRISE ANDOR A NIMITZ(S) THAN TO SEE 'EM SUNK AS REEFS. I imagine the USDOD-Navy would prolly choose a NIMITZ as testbed for all-purpose, BattleSpace-centric "Motherships".
Posted by JosephMendiola 2012-03-11 22:25||
#12 Sure got Our money's-worth outta that big, hot puppy. Not even a china syndrome meltdown over the decades...How could that even be?
It's just not "fair"!
Posted by Jusomble Whinens3272 2012-03-11 23:44||