| Submit your comments on this article |
| Russia |
| Russia nuclear cruiser in critical condition |
| 2004-03-23 |
| Newsflash - no link yet. Russian Navy quoted as saying nuclear cruiser Peter the Great is steaming back to port and is in danger of ’exploding’. I’m assuming this means that the reactor would suffer some form of meltdown. Sounds serious. |
| Posted by:Lux |
| #14 Kirov-class? Yes |
| Posted by: snellenr 2004-3-23 3:11:57 PM |
| #13 Kirov-class? (Don't have time to look it up m'self.) |
| Posted by: Mike 2004-3-23 2:38:48 PM |
| #12 Yahoo News Link here |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-3-23 1:30:52 PM |
| #11 Aren't the only nuclear-powered ships in the USN carriers and submarines? Currently, yes. For a number of years, the USN had 9 nuclear powered cruisers, the Long Beach being the first. The USS Bainbridge was a nuclear powered frigate, later redesignated as a cruiser. They've all been scrapped, now there is only the Ticonderoga class of 27 ships. |
| Posted by: Steve 2004-3-23 11:04:08 AM |
| #10 I was part of a small exercise with a Ukranian vessel in the Black Sea. If the Russian ships are in the same state of repair as the Ukraninans, I could believe things are really bad. The ship was infested with cockroaches, they were buring oil so bad that it looked like they were on fire (you could see the smoke OTH). We met up in Constanta, Romania and went out from there - only after the US Navy bought more fuel for them. They showed up with only enough fuel for a 1 way trip. They were gap jawed at our ship because it was so clean. |
| Posted by: Yosemite Sam 2004-3-23 11:02:27 AM |
| #9 Aren't the only nuclear-powered ships in the USN carriers and submarines? They also had nuclear-powered ice breakers. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-3-23 10:56:26 AM |
| #8 ...IIRC, Petr Veliky has a combined nuclear/gas turbine plant because the Sovs couldn't build a reactor big enough and reliable enough for something like her. (Note also that their one attempt at building a fleet carrier - an nuclear application if there ever was one - was conventionally powered.) Maintenance on Soviet warships was iffy to begin with, and it's gotten worse since the Collapse. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2004-3-23 10:42:31 AM |
| #7 Happy that this turned out to be hyperbole. The cruiser has 2 300MW reactors, which wouldn't quite be in the Chernobyl class of accident, but it wouldn't be pleasant. |
| Posted by: Lux 2004-3-23 10:40:17 AM |
| #6 PG looks like one of those star crossed ships. There is a picture at the link also. |
| Posted by: Mr. Davis 2004-3-23 10:06:08 AM |
| #5 A nuclear cruiser? That's the strangest thing I've ever heard. Aren't the only nuclear-powered ships in the USN carriers and submarines? |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-3-23 9:45:15 AM |
| #4 Newsday article indcates political motivation. |
| Posted by: GK 2004-3-23 7:22:09 AM |
| #3 I think someone may have jumped the gun on this one. This report puts the statements in a more political perspective. http://www.bellona.no/en/international/russia/navy/northern_fleet/incidents/32924.html |
| Posted by: DanM 2004-3-23 7:12:27 AM |
| #2 Now Google's got the story - via Rooters / AFP - but apparently exactly what's in your link, so far. |
| Posted by: .com 2004-3-23 5:58:07 AM |
| #1 very terse link |
| Posted by: Lux 2004-3-23 4:44:13 AM |
