Bottom Gun BBSSubmarineSailor.com
Find a Shipmate
Reunion Info
Books/Video
Binnacle List (offsite)
History
Boat Websites
Links
Bottom Gun BBS
Search | Statistics | User listing Forums | Calendars | Quotes |
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )


At random: "We shall never forget that it was our submarines that held the lines against the enemy while our fleets replaced losses and repaired wounds." -- Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz
When is a nuclear submarine not a nuclear submarine?
Moderators:

Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [25 messages per page]
   Forums-> Submarine DiscussionMessage format
 
Thomas Courtien
Posted 2009-09-05 3:37 AM (#30463)
Master and Commander

Posts: 1890

Location: Patterson, New York
Subject: When is a nuclear submarine not a nuclear submarine?

I had posted an article about India launching it first home built nuclear subamrine (an FBM sub no less).

The article mentioned that the reactor would be put in next year. Here is some British wit that explains it...



When is a nuclear submarine not a nuclear submarine?

There’s a crude British idiom – ‘All fur coat and no knickers’ – that we use to describe something that is all style and no substance, something that is superficially impressive but lacking the fundamentals underneath.
Take for example, the recently launched Indian nuclear submarine, the INS Arihant (Destroyer of Enemies). Just how many enemies the Arihant could be the destroyer of right now is debatable, for you see…

…the Arihant was launched without its nuclear reactor, which will not be ready for another year, or so. No one is saying for sure when the reactor will be ready…

Ladies and gentlemen, the world’s first non-nuclear nuclear submarine. The reason the Arihant was launched without its reactor seems to be one of prestige – it’s taken more than ten years to get this far and presumably someone in the Indian government said, ‘just get the thing in the water, we’re starting to look like idiots’. In an added comedy twist, the Arihant’s launch tubes aren’t wide enough to accommodate any current designs of sea launched ballistic missiles.

Of course, it’s not the first time a flagship nuclear project has launched without vital components being in place. French nuclear berks AREVA have been building their so-called state of the art OL3 EPR reactor at Olkiluoto in Finland for four years ‘without a proper design that meets the basic principles of nuclear safety’. The EPR may be coming to Britain as part of Gordon Brown’s nuclear ‘renaissance’. There’s going to be all manner of fun.

Still, the Indian government could be really on to something here – they’re showing the way forward. If we can have the non-nuclear nuclear submarine why not the non-nuclear nuclear weapon and the non-nuclear nuclear reactor? Imagine the day when scientists unveil the AFCANKPWR (All Fur Coat And No Knickers Pressurised Water Reactor).
steamboat
Posted 2009-09-05 8:56 AM (#30479 - in reply to #30463)
Master and Commander

Posts: 1814

Location: Boydton, Virginia
Subject: RE: When is a nuclear submarine not a nuclear submarine?

Sorta like "All Hat and no Cow?"

Seems like every country that has a half-a** Navy is getting a submarine now. I still maintain that all those air-independant propulsion diesels may pose a threat some day.

Steamboat sends
RCK
Posted 2009-09-05 11:20 AM (#30483 - in reply to #30463)
Master and Commander

Posts: 1431

Subject: RE: When is a nuclear submarine not a nuclear submarine?

I don't think I'd want to be no the first dive she makes........ Or the last one either!!!!
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [25 messages per page]
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread
Jump to forum :


(Delete all cookies set by this site)
Running MegaBBS ASP Forum Software v2.0
© 2003 PD9 Software