Quote:
Originally Posted by Franklin Van Valkenburg
This doesn't look too good to me. While I love the old diesel boats... these times merit the use of nuclear boats. They can stay under longer and are quieter... an advantage we [the USA] shouldn't throw away. Sure the price tag looks appealing, but a nuke boat pays for itself and can only be rendered useless when technology improves. Sounds to me like the current administration is trying to go green by cutting the nuclear navy out and is restricting the military's budget.
|
Actually, a diesel sub is quieter than a nuke one. Reason being is the Reactor Coolant Pumps and the Main Seawater Pumps which are always running. On my boat we could shut the RCP's off and switch to "natural circulation" but we still had to turn steam back into water, so the MSW pumps stayed on. And as for going "green", last I heard we were looking at making the next CG and DDG's nuclear to save on fuel costs. Gas Turbines can burn a lot of fuel. Not to mention oil has to run out sometime and having oil powered ships sitting at dock isn't good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franklin Van Valkenburg
I think America is more worried about the weak economy and whether they will get to have those three flashy cars than they are about the F-22, F-35, DD(X), and nuke boat programs. Its not just about national security... the F-22 program is in danger of being cancelled because "$140 million per Raptor is too costly." I say that is the price to be paid for the world's best fighter aircraft. If the program was cut, 95,000 jobs would be lost!
|
As for the F-22, $140 million per aircraft is an outrageous price compared to other aircraft in service, hence they're not continuing the F-22. The F-35 is much cheaper, can still do the job, and isn't overkill. Projects get killed either because they cost too much, or they don't perform to standards. Just part of the military.
anyways @tomagabriel your project looks good cant wait for release. And what's this reference to Ohio I keep reading?