PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
- Status
My guess would be at least two more years...Probably by June 2018 she'll put to sea.
A new carrier in the making.
She's coming along nicely as they now begin to build up the sponsons to hold the flight deck overhang.
It will really start getting exciting when they do the island lift.
Agreed. Launch probably early next year. Then another 10+ months of outfitting.
My guess is two years as well.
No need to hurry.
it's obvious what they are doing and they have been very circumspect, careful, and very methodical to date.
Intrepid
Major
Confirmed: carrier with ski-jump!
To admit I don't agree. Even if - some might correct me if I'm still wrong ! - I not sure how far the deck construction already progressed, these huge external parts on side holding the flight deck are clearly showing (at least for me) that they are already well above Your proposed level.
Fitting a molten salt reactor to a ship is quite unlikely. The problem here is NOT the heat transport ability of the molten salt, which is indeed very high, but the very high amounts of moderator required tor this reactor to operate.
The limitations lie in the volume of the moderator i.e. the graphite (C) to fuel ratio. This is typically 10-12 times the volume of the fuel. In light water (H2O) moderated and cooled reactors, the fuel elements are typically tenth's of an inch apart. but in graphite moderated reactors, they are in the order of several inches apart, resulting in an enormous reactor core.
This is a characteristic also shared by heavy water (D2O) moderated reactors. Another is the ability to achieve criticality using natural uranium fuels without requiring enrichment (resulting in substantially cheaper fuel). Indeed the large volume and relatively low power density of these reactors allows refueling during full-power operation. This is not possible in light-water moderated reactors which must be dismantled for refueling.
It was for these reasons, 1) operation on natural uranium-based fuels and 2) the ability to add, remove, replace fuel at power that these reactors (graphite and heavy water) became the basis of designs of the poorer nuclear powers - Britain, France and India allowing them to make power and plutonium at the same time. Subsequent advances in centrifuge enrichment technology reduced this economic advantage.
Seen from the perspective of pure moderation (reduction of neutron energy by collision) graphite (C) is a relatively poor moderator vs light water (H2O). It requires many more collisions to reduce the neutron's energy to thermal levels. Fortunately, it also has much lower tendency to absorb neutrons, (typically capture via the (n, y) reaction). So it has a superior moderating ratio (number of neutrons moderated over number captured).
But it is a bulky moderator. No graphite moderated reactor has ever been used on a ship to my knowledge.
Soviet reactors designs using a molten metal lead-bismuth coolant are an entirely different type of reactor, which has NO moderator and are in fact FAST reactors.
The limitations lie in the volume of the moderator i.e. the graphite (C) to fuel ratio. This is typically 10-12 times the volume of the fuel. In light water (H2O) moderated and cooled reactors, the fuel elements are typically tenth's of an inch apart. but in graphite moderated reactors, they are in the order of several inches apart, resulting in an enormous reactor core.
This is a characteristic also shared by heavy water (D2O) moderated reactors. Another is the ability to achieve criticality using natural uranium fuels without requiring enrichment (resulting in substantially cheaper fuel). Indeed the large volume and relatively low power density of these reactors allows refueling during full-power operation. This is not possible in light-water moderated reactors which must be dismantled for refueling.
It was for these reasons, 1) operation on natural uranium-based fuels and 2) the ability to add, remove, replace fuel at power that these reactors (graphite and heavy water) became the basis of designs of the poorer nuclear powers - Britain, France and India allowing them to make power and plutonium at the same time. Subsequent advances in centrifuge enrichment technology reduced this economic advantage.
Seen from the perspective of pure moderation (reduction of neutron energy by collision) graphite (C) is a relatively poor moderator vs light water (H2O). It requires many more collisions to reduce the neutron's energy to thermal levels. Fortunately, it also has much lower tendency to absorb neutrons, (typically capture via the (n, y) reaction). So it has a superior moderating ratio (number of neutrons moderated over number captured).
But it is a bulky moderator. No graphite moderated reactor has ever been used on a ship to my knowledge.
Soviet reactors designs using a molten metal lead-bismuth coolant are an entirely different type of reactor, which has NO moderator and are in fact FAST reactors.
- Status