Happy 229th Birthday USMC

Shafts.........now there's an interesting subject. Oops, sorry Timber..........I'm off topic.

The discussion related to the number of reactors in the various classes of Nuclear carriers, not the number of main engines. Enterprise has eight, and the Nimitz class has two. Given that the initial discussion noted both facts, except that you asserted Enterprise had four reactors, and that ALL U.S. carriers have four main engines, reduction gears and shafts, your attempt to make that distinction now doesn't hold water -- that is unless you wish now to claim that Nimitz class vessels have only two main engines and shafts.

You are correct about redundancy, but wrong in terms of the systems architecture. The long-term Navy standard was two prime energy sources per shaft or main engine. As a resull carriers and battleships with four shafts all had eight boilers. Enterprise was designed with these principles in mind.

Later as reactor design & reliability improved, the decision was made to use two much larger reactors on the Nimitz class. This was a major change in the systems architecture in that the redundancy ratio was reveresed - now two prime power sources support four main engines. This was a radical change., and it took some time for folks to get used to carriers steaming along, launching & recovering aircraft, and everything dependent on one operating reactor.

If I wasn't such a nice guy, I might suggest that any idiot with a basic understanding of systems design would have instantly recognized that eight was the natural number for Enterprise and that two for the Nimitz class was the unusual exception, whether one was speaking of power sources or shafts. But I am not that and I will be gracious and tolerant in dealing with your defeat.

Just a silly aside here, as I sweep up the debris (and tally the glassware replacement cost - you guys are doin' great - one exchange of fire and you've already hit the quantity discount) ...

I once stood on the pedestrian gangway attached to the deck of the Golden Gate Bridge of an early, uncharacteristically unfoggy morning, along with a horde of other folks gathered for the same purpose, to watch both Nimitz and the then brand-spankin' new Carl Vinson put to sea for joint trials. The stately behemoths passed line astern beneath the bridge, aircraft and deck vehicles neatly stowed and gleaming across acres of stern, bow waves gently curling out and away, flags and pennants streaming from every halyard, whisps of steam wafting here and there, an honor guard and the ship's band saluting the crowd above as each vessel seemingly inched her way through The Gate and out into the channel. Tiny, almost microscopic-by-comparison pleasure craft stood station at respectable distance, their passengers taking in the spectacle from the lower perspective.

On the horizon, just past The Farallons, could be seen the superstructures and masts of a few lesser warships, escorts, awaiting opportunity to take up station with their charges. Overhead buzzed and fluttered a couple of news helicopters from local TV staions, darting and weaving and lining up artistic camera angles. Along the rail of the bridge, shutters clicked, here and there a flash sparked out, futile against the immensity of the scene's scale, really nothing but part of the show themselves. There were little movie cameras aplenty, and a few huge-by-today's-standards personal videocams. Folks waved, some just with hands, others with scarves or pennants, and buzzed among themselves in little groups, though all in all the assembled multitude was almost oddly quiet for a gathering of such numbers.

Once clear of the bridge, the mighty sisters pulled slowly abeam of one another, their frothy, seafoam wakes merging, roiling, overriding the swells and chop with their own waves, the shrieking, ever-present gulls diving and darting and clamoring and squabbling, savoring the freshly sufaced bounty at the sterns of the two amazons of the seas.

Side by side, the pair made their way to the horizon, aligned with one another in military parade precision, gradually, but perceptably, accellerating, the water at their sterns slowly, then more pronouncedly beginning to foam.

Many minutes and some miles out from The Gate, apparently a signal was given, and the two began what can only be described as a nautical drag race. Simultaneously, their sterns settled visibly into hugely increased mountains of froth, their bow waves changed almost instantly from gentle curls to massive breakers, their joined wakes became rapidly lengthening stark white scars on the ocean surface.

I have no idea which vessel won the contest; apace, they gained then passed over the horizon in far less time than seemed probable, leavinng behind only their wakes, amid which bobbed and flitted the armada of pleasure craft which had gathered for the show.

My party, relative codgers all, retired to The Presidio, where a wonderful brunch capped the morning. An unfortunate fall of the dice cup left me with the not inconsiderable bar tab. It was great fun, begrudged not at all.

And, a couple nights later, a poker game at my house set me far better than even with that group of fellows.

I'm guided by a signal in the heavens
I'm guided by this birthmark on my skin
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons
First we take Manhattan
Then we take Berlin

Does this mean the contest was a tie?

Hell no ! I won.

But I did like Timber's description of the view from the Golden Gate. This event must have occurred in October, just after Fleet Week in San Francisco as the various ships departed from anchorage. The view from the ship's bridge was just as spectacular (as an interesting aside, our radar & electronics mast was hinged about 40 feet below the top so we could fold it down and clear the bridge.) The scene was memorable, particularly on a clear day with the north slope of the city gleaming in the sunlight, framed by Alcatraz on the left and the deep green forest at the Presidio on the right - and itself framing the Golden Gate with the Marin hills further to the right. Even after three years of it, I never failed to be exhilarated by the scene. Just as exhilarating (but in a different way) was coming into port on a foggy day, passing under the bridge without once seeing it, and then breaking out of the fog just before Alcatraz to again see te city gleaming in the sunlight. .

In those days Coral Sea, an older Essex class carrier, was based there too. Coral Sea had long before been adopted by the city as "San Francisco's own", and a pattern of mutual entertainments had arisen over the years. A few years later Coral Sea was decommissioned, and the title passed to Carl Vinson a year or so before I took command. Once a year we would take a thousand or so SF folks out to sea for a day & put on an air show outside the Faralones. In return there were lots of open invitations for my sailors and their families. I had the pleasure of watching our softball team soundly defeat the SF Police Department's, and the discomfort of watching the Fire Department drag my Marines over the line in a twenty man Tug-of-War. In port, dinners in my mess were highly sought after, as were the occasional overnight trip (in groups of four or five) to watch training operations at sea off the California coast (we would fly them out and back in the COD). All this was sauce to what was itself was an unforgettable set of experiences.

Hummm......you've been known to declare victory precipitously in the past.

Hi guys, and my apologies for being gone for so long - just moved to NY and have spent the last 3 days on round-the-clock work and settling in. I see G OB has attempted a feeble repartee - matters will have to stay there until I have time to go over it.

As Talleyrand observed upon throwing out a lengthy legal petition: "If he were telling the truth he wouldn't need so many words."

<G>

Since Dumbo here can't read and writes things like:

"...the initial discussion noted both facts, except that you asserted Enterprise had four reactors..."

I've no choice but to ask that he re-reads the original statement in which I'm clearly quoting SOMEBODY ELSE.

Dumbo being innocent of internet hazards like spidering programs has blithely gone ahead and posted 2 names of real CNOs - which I'm NOT going to repeat. Discretion isn't one of his few virtues so: try to remember to stop name-dropping altogether (a sure sign of the 3rd-class mind generally) though it's OK to post links with an indication of where the name is to be found.

<Timber, you need those tables and chairs? Didn't think so, and besides we need firewood - it's gettin' kind of cold around here...>

Re-capping here Dumbwit's statements, we note he completely ignored - inter alia - that
(i) the quote was from a CNO who had previously been captain of the Enterprise, that
(ii) the Carl Vinson, launched in 1982, must necessarily have systems designed and built long BEFORE THAT DATE, and so therefore
(iii) neither CNO name the inveterate namedropping dumbwit mentions could possibly qualify for the quote, and finally that
(iv) there is exactly ONE MAN who COULD POSSIBLY HAVE SAID THAT.

Confidence in Dumbwit's thinking capabilities tending asymptotically towards zero, could he pls look up this link>>
http://www.bigefire.com/
>> esp. top-left corner, in which the same man is quoted, this time saying:..

"Carlin's book should be required reading for all prospective carrier CO's, XO's and Flight Deck Officers, and it should be on the reading list for the appropriate courses in the Naval Air Training Command and the Fleet Training Groups."

A great deal was learned from that event - and much was altered in the nuclear systems - though Dumbwit seems blissfully unaware of minor details he purports to pontificate on.

<Over to you, G OB, we still got the ceiling rafters which I left alone - and don't even THINK of nuclear ordnance, Timber's place is upwind of me!>

Thanks to the Marines, all the Army guys where my fiance is at got their allotted amount of alcohol in Iraq!!

2 beers and a shot of rum.

my fiance said that his friend is the one who passed out the beer.

i said, so does this mean you're drunk?

he said, NO .....I SAID I HAD THE ALLOTTED AMOUNT .....what was the question again?

lol

We once figured out that some fine sand, a whole buncha aviation gas, a big mesh-sided parts bin, and one of those huge smoke evacution fans could be used to chill a couple cases of beer in next to no time. Hadda be real carefull about nearby ignition sources, though -

I am struggling, really struggling to grasp the "discretion " that HofT believes is to be found in "hiding" the reference to a well-known public person in a link that is one click away, compared to listing the name. I have known these guys for years.

"Dumbo" & "name-dropper" -- is she merely awkward & in over her head or is she trying to goad me?? Probably both.



OK the link names Adm. Jim Holloway, the first skipper of Enterprise and later CNO. The Trojan Harpy's references to "the quote" make no sense at all. Virtually every CNO since Holloway has been nuclear-trained, and knows the engineering configuration of Enterprise and of all of the Nimitz class carriers (of which Carl Vinson was #3) cold, as a matter of basic, common knowledge. That includes both Watkins and Trost, as well as Holloway and others. They and many others were all "qualified" for the quote. The ONE-man theory is sustained only by her boundless ignorance.


The electronic systems installed in carriers are updated throughout their service lives (about 50 years). The powerplants are designed to last the lifetime of the ship. At most the internal; composition of the reactor fuel modules are upgraded as plant data is accumulated over the life of the ship. Nimitz required refueling after 17 years. The latest Nimitz class carriers have nuclear fuel that lasts the lifetime of the ship. All carriers have four shafts & screws (love that naval terminology): the conventional carriers have eight boilers and the first nuclear carrier, designed after the same pattern had eight reactors. And all nine (so far) of the Nimitz class carriers have exactly two reactors.

Now it's ".. Dumbwit's thinking thinking capabilities tending asymptotically towards zero," She IS trying to goad me. However "asymptotically" adds nothing to the insult - a telling affectation. Clearly in well over her head here.

What shall I claim as a prize?

Dunno 'bout over her head - that could be a risky assumption applied to HofT ... a likely point of tactical error of some later inconvenience.

However, the goading point - yeah, she's good at that - where's the surprise there? She's a girl, after all


<ducks quickly behind the bar>

I think you're right about that first point, timber.




<hiding behind chair, here to witness the slapdown>

Yeah, and a smartass one at that.

SHE IS IN OVER HER HEAD AND FAKING IT.

Dumbo's the one who's in over his head and faking it, not I.

IS THERE A SINGLE GODDAMN POINT HE CAN MAKE WITHOUT REAL-NAME-DROPPING?

If so, proceed.

There is NOTHING in what Dumbo said not available in just about EVERY SINGLE WEB SITE OUT THERE.

The discussion with JLH III (stick to INITIALS, dimwittie, this is a PUBLIC SITE) concerned SYSTEMS DESIGN, REDUNDANCY, SELF-REPAIRING AND SELF-SEALING SEA SYSTEMS. NOT by any means available on public websites, btw.....

I'll be back later this week - this is getting so boring that I don't have the heart to bring down whatever's left of the roof of Timber's place <G>

Oh yeah - "asymptotically" unless otherwise specified refers to time (delta T, you may have heard of it). Truly a bore, G OB, and a pretentious bore at that.

Now focus on making ONE point ON SUBJECT - that being a quote of JLH, available in Annapolis to confirm it if necessary..... Duh.