Message from @Nathan James 123

Discord ID: 636250509002539028


2019-10-22 17:02:44 UTC  

Also, some nations even NATO ones don't allow nuclear powered ships, or those carrying nuclear weapons into their ports

2019-10-22 17:03:35 UTC  

Nuclear powered carriers are "eh".

2019-10-22 17:03:49 UTC  

Your ship and carrier task force will always need food and refueling

2019-10-22 17:03:58 UTC  

So you're still bound by the same supply limitations as before

2019-10-22 17:04:21 UTC  

For the vast majority of countries, conventional power is superior

2019-10-22 17:04:56 UTC  

The thing is, suppercarriers are the biggest and therefore most fuel hungry ships in the fleet by some margin.

2019-10-22 17:05:19 UTC  

15 years of diesel costs the same as JUST installing the carriers nuclear reactor and fueling it

2019-10-22 17:05:26 UTC  

There's also the higher maintenance costs

2019-10-22 17:05:33 UTC  

The mid-life refueling costs

2019-10-22 17:05:39 UTC  

AND the after-life cleanup costs

2019-10-22 17:05:45 UTC  

You don't need to recite the video

2019-10-22 17:05:48 UTC  

😉

2019-10-22 17:06:02 UTC  

My favourite aspect was the political one

2019-10-22 17:06:13 UTC  

Countries denying nuclear powered ships in their waters

2019-10-22 17:07:04 UTC  

True, but the same ships that refuel your fleet refuel your carrier @leavethisbotnet

2019-10-22 17:09:04 UTC  

Carriers do use up a lot of space for hanger and other stuff, you don't necessarily have to refuel the other ships as often as the carrier.

2019-10-22 17:09:47 UTC  

Food stores on a typical destroyer are a month

2019-10-22 17:09:50 UTC  

Same for the carrier

2019-10-22 17:10:46 UTC  

The Queen Elizabeth class has a longer range than her escorts anyway

2019-10-22 17:12:22 UTC  

A large fleet that wants to project power (One of the main reasons for a carrier anyway) will require a large auxiliary fleet already

2019-10-22 17:14:34 UTC  

If he pulls the bill what effect will that have?

2019-10-22 17:14:36 UTC  

My guess is, one of the major reasons is to minimize downtime during operations, since CVs are extremely important.

2019-10-22 17:14:58 UTC  

Don't quote me on this but I believe the downtime for a mid-life refueling is a couple years

2019-10-22 17:15:26 UTC  

@Hopix I assume it would essentially end the deal and he would support a GE instead

2019-10-22 17:15:35 UTC  

2 years for a sub and 3 for a carrier

2019-10-22 17:15:42 UTC  

"I believe the downtime for a mid-life refueling is a couple years"

2019-10-22 17:15:43 UTC  

😉

2019-10-22 17:15:46 UTC  

But that doesn't happen in the middle of military operation.

2019-10-22 17:15:50 UTC  

But we still extend?

2019-10-22 17:16:00 UTC  

I would imagine so

2019-10-22 17:16:00 UTC  

True, but it could happen before those operations occur

2019-10-22 17:16:11 UTC  

He needs opposition support for a GE

2019-10-22 17:16:16 UTC  

The ship could be in drydock during the start of the conflict

2019-10-22 17:16:23 UTC  

And the normally scheduled one is still years away

2019-10-22 17:16:35 UTC  

I don't see how he'll get a GE

2019-10-22 17:16:36 UTC  

You can plan the refuelling long ahead, and you can have plenty reserves to refuel years later if you absolutely need it now.

2019-10-22 17:16:41 UTC  

He won't @Hopix

2019-10-22 17:16:49 UTC  

That assumes you know when the conflict will start @leavethisbotnet

2019-10-22 17:17:11 UTC  

He would have to get a decent amount of opposition MP's to support him

2019-10-22 17:17:30 UTC  

It could happen after the 31st