The reactors on the subs are still relatively large. Idk about the aircraft carriers, but considering that the technology is almost 50 years old I’d assume their also quite large.
I had asked a former shipmate who dropped out of the nuke program and came over to the regular surface fleet this question. He said the reactors are surprisingly small about the size of 3 or 4 regular filing cabinets.
Talking out of turn? That's a paddlin'. Lookin' out the window? That's a paddlin'. Staring at my sandals? That's a paddlin'. Paddlin' info about the underwater canoe? Oh, you better believe that's a paddlin.
Damn that’s crazy! I swear the original reactors(60’s/70’s era) were still relatively quite large. But of course I’m taking out my ass, my only knowledge comes from a couple dozen sub documentaries.
Exactly. The ancillary equipment is probably quite large. The steam side is definitely massive as well as the desalination system. I’m sure the reactor room is enormous.
Yeah this is what pisses me off. No govt run facilities using the same safe nuclear designs that we put on compressed tubes that shoot missiles at eachother. The anti nuclear movement fucked us in terms of energy generation and waste.
Small modular reactors are in development for carbon free power, and Rolls Royce is involved in developing the one that is likely to be the first to go online. From what I understand, large reactors are inherently more efficient, in terms of fuel usage compared to energy output. But small ones have some safety advantages, and much lower capital expenditure.
Smaller generally implies a higher level of enrichment and a less efficient burn. SM reactors use highly enriched uranium and cost/burn efficiency isn’t a major concern.
Yes I still think it's dumb we can't have govt run nuclear reactors using military tech powering cities. Trust me as much as any other iguana drunk on absinthe
There are radioisotope reactors in space, and a few experimental fission reactors left on graveyard orbits.
The problem with space-grade fission reactors is that they
a) are entirely unshielded
b) extremely inefficient
c) use weapons-grade material instead of regular enriched uranium
All of which doesn't really matter once you have the thing in a stable orbit, but none of these is acceptable down on earth.
Isn't it funny we don't use these for powering society more cuz people are scared and think the hand full of bad things that happened with old ones from the past will happen again (new ones are safer) and the military been using these things for boats that can run forever basically. Sigh.
Car business / brand is owned by the BMW Group, which also owns the Mini brand. It's not related to this company, which is currently in the business of manufacturing airliner engines and power plant turbines.
The sub title for this article is confusing af.
Link to the actual announcement for anyone else curious: https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/our-stories/discover/2023/rr-unveils-space-micro-reactor-model-for-moon-exploration.aspx
The famous acquisition by VW of rolls Royce motor cars when they didn’t get the Rolls Royce name which was held by the parent group. “What did we just buy that cost us 500 million pounds?”.
From what I can tell, Rolls Royce Holdings has many different divisions and subsidiaries that make up the group. Their aerospace division produces jet engines for airliners and fighter jets, and Rolls-Royce Marine Power Operations is making the PW3R nuclear reactors for the UK’s next-generation nuclear submarines.
They make a ton of different products across their various subsidiaries and divisions. It’s kind of like how General Electric makes both washing machines and the GAU-8 Avenger rotary cannon for the A-10
While I could be wrong, I doubt the rolls Royce auto brand had anything to do with this.
Rolls Royce the company hasn’t made cars for many years now. They make jet engines and other industrial things
This is just to get by on the moon until we can get a drill rig up there. Once we get a couple holes punched, maybe a couple frac crews going, and the oil companies start making money, then they’ll shut down all that nasty nuclear stuff.
Living on the moon has too many problems. By the time we are able to overcome these problems we will be able to travel to other solar systems in our galaxy with more hospitable planets.
That demonstration device looks like it is trying to look like the prop in the movie "Chain Reaction". I find it hard to take it seriously given that.
I hope the science on it is better than in that movie.
Because a night on the moon lasts two weeks on Earth. You’d either need some MASSIVE batteries and put all non-essential systems in hibernation, or you want a power source that can keep the lights on until the sun rises again.
NASA has opened a contract for nuclear. The moon's particular period of day and night means that the only place you can use solar usefully to support humans is right at the poles.
Note that there is no "dark side of the moon". The moon has day and night cycles like Earth does. Any area not at the poles has a day and night periods that follow each other. The problem is the period (day plus night) is 30 Earth days long. Trying to go 15 Earth days with no solar heat or electricity is expected to be problematic.
Didn't I see those in all those 60 and 70 sci-fi movies?
Pulsed fusion rocket motors maybe, pulsed fusion mini power sources like "Robot" used I don't think so.
That was from Lost in Space by the way.
N. S
“Remember the time those old car guys accidentally nuked the moon?”
I am aware they are also an aviation manufacturer and such, but those records will be lost during the moonfall and this will be their legacy
Rolls Royce cars aren’t even owned by Rolls Royce holdings any more; it was bought out by BMW in 2003.
Also, it is literally impossible for nuclear reactors to cause a nuclear detonation; the fuel isn’t enriched enough to create the necessary self-sustaining chain reaction.
Nuclear reactors cannot explode like nuclear bombs; the physics simply do not allow for it. The worst that can happen is that it overheats and melts down.
The moon is routinely pelted by asteroids that create impacts with many times more energy than humanity’s strongest nuclear weapons, and we don’t even notice unless we’re actively watching and waiting to see it. Humans could detonate every single warhead we have on the moon, and we’d barely scratch the surface.
You overestimate the power of nuclear explosions (and, again, nuclear reactors cannot physically cause the chain reaction necessary for a nuclear explosion; it is literally not possible), and VASTLY underestimate the size of the moon.
Just saw this answer but thanks for really going into it to explain. Legitimately did not know, but I supposed that all makes sense. That person of rddit
Meh.. it’s just Phillips hue strips gaffa tapped to an oil drum.
Quality LEDs in this collab! /s
I’ll show you my nuclear reactor if you show me yours.
Funny thing about my nuclear reactor is…it’s on my dick
Man, you must have, like, the Rolls Royce of dicks
lol
Wait till elon makes a pos copy lol
Wow nice can we have any of those on earth?
Not sure if the size is comparable but the US military has plenty of small nuclear reactors in submarines and aircraft carriers.
The reactors on the subs are still relatively large. Idk about the aircraft carriers, but considering that the technology is almost 50 years old I’d assume their also quite large.
I had asked a former shipmate who dropped out of the nuke program and came over to the regular surface fleet this question. He said the reactors are surprisingly small about the size of 3 or 4 regular filing cabinets.
Talking out of turn? That's a paddlin'. Lookin' out the window? That's a paddlin'. Staring at my sandals? That's a paddlin'. Paddlin' info about the underwater canoe? Oh, you better believe that's a paddlin.
Opsec?
You can easily search for the majority of systems the Navy uses. It's all public knowledge.
Damn that’s crazy! I swear the original reactors(60’s/70’s era) were still relatively quite large. But of course I’m taking out my ass, my only knowledge comes from a couple dozen sub documentaries.
[удалено]
Exactly. The ancillary equipment is probably quite large. The steam side is definitely massive as well as the desalination system. I’m sure the reactor room is enormous.
There are generator sized nuclear devices the soviets used to use in the Taiga, because there's no power grid. I think they're still around actually.
Not used for war would be my preference
If it’s not used for war, what’s the point? Silly vegan. *Insert diabolical laugh. *
Yeah this is what pisses me off. No govt run facilities using the same safe nuclear designs that we put on compressed tubes that shoot missiles at eachother. The anti nuclear movement fucked us in terms of energy generation and waste.
Small modular reactors are in development for carbon free power, and Rolls Royce is involved in developing the one that is likely to be the first to go online. From what I understand, large reactors are inherently more efficient, in terms of fuel usage compared to energy output. But small ones have some safety advantages, and much lower capital expenditure.
Smaller generally implies a higher level of enrichment and a less efficient burn. SM reactors use highly enriched uranium and cost/burn efficiency isn’t a major concern.
Yes I still think it's dumb we can't have govt run nuclear reactors using military tech powering cities. Trust me as much as any other iguana drunk on absinthe
Wow cool to know that all of Earth = US Military
Why not a cruise liner or a transport ship then?
Because it’s very tightly controlled and often very secretive. No one wants a nuclear powered cargo ship getting hijacked
This, along with nuclear worries in places like new Zealand, was part of the reason the SS Savanah was discontinued.
I’m the captain now!
We have nuclear reactors in satellites these days
There are radioisotope reactors in space, and a few experimental fission reactors left on graveyard orbits. The problem with space-grade fission reactors is that they a) are entirely unshielded b) extremely inefficient c) use weapons-grade material instead of regular enriched uranium All of which doesn't really matter once you have the thing in a stable orbit, but none of these is acceptable down on earth.
I’m guessing they can get away with a small lunar reactor because they don’t have to care about radiation shielding… so no thanks
Ok so add radiation shielding and put it on earth
Isn’t this that flashing prop that you see in every vaguely sci-fi TV show or movie?
[The most important device in the universe.](https://techunwrapped.com/the-most-important-device-in-the-universe-a-couple-of-flashing-tubes/)
Looks exactly like the fifth element thing they made léelo in
I'm going to have to take some pictures. For the archive.
Isn't it funny we don't use these for powering society more cuz people are scared and think the hand full of bad things that happened with old ones from the past will happen again (new ones are safer) and the military been using these things for boats that can run forever basically. Sigh.
Are those Tucker Tubes??
Livik was able to add a third tube without triggering a Hisenberg collapse! It’s called Billups Tubes now.
/r/LowerDecks is leaking and I'm here for it.
….Livik!
Are we sure that RR that makes turbines is the same business that makes the cars? It was my understanding that car business sold but kept the name.
Car business / brand is owned by the BMW Group, which also owns the Mini brand. It's not related to this company, which is currently in the business of manufacturing airliner engines and power plant turbines.
The sub title for this article is confusing af. Link to the actual announcement for anyone else curious: https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/our-stories/discover/2023/rr-unveils-space-micro-reactor-model-for-moon-exploration.aspx
The author of the article thinks it’s the same Rolls Royce as the cars.
The famous acquisition by VW of rolls Royce motor cars when they didn’t get the Rolls Royce name which was held by the parent group. “What did we just buy that cost us 500 million pounds?”.
[удалено]
I'm sorry, you're thinking Maybach. That's the luxury car brand owned by Mercedes, a well-known electric minivan manufacturer.
From what I can tell, Rolls Royce Holdings has many different divisions and subsidiaries that make up the group. Their aerospace division produces jet engines for airliners and fighter jets, and Rolls-Royce Marine Power Operations is making the PW3R nuclear reactors for the UK’s next-generation nuclear submarines. They make a ton of different products across their various subsidiaries and divisions. It’s kind of like how General Electric makes both washing machines and the GAU-8 Avenger rotary cannon for the A-10
While I could be wrong, I doubt the rolls Royce auto brand had anything to do with this. Rolls Royce the company hasn’t made cars for many years now. They make jet engines and other industrial things
It’s definitely an error on the author’s part.
Question- don’t most reactors still just heat up water to turn turbines? How is that going to work on the moon which is a little dry?
My guess? It’ll use thermocouples, similar to how radioisotope thermoelectric generators work.
"Plans" This submission is a violation of the sub's-rules.
This is just to get by on the moon until we can get a drill rig up there. Once we get a couple holes punched, maybe a couple frac crews going, and the oil companies start making money, then they’ll shut down all that nasty nuclear stuff.
120 inches? Why not just say 10 feet?
When are they gonna put these into their Phantom cars?
Different Rolls-Royce.
Living on the moon has too many problems. By the time we are able to overcome these problems we will be able to travel to other solar systems in our galaxy with more hospitable planets.
Bro, 120 inches are 10 foot, just say 10 foot
lol ... "120 inches"? What is this, the 19th century? 😹
Looks like it’s about to construct Leeloo
Thermal bandages!
As long as I can still charge my phone on the moon, I am good with this.
Not as powerful as the flux capacitor in my Delorean.
Bro this is literally the start to Fallout just 70 years late
Fallout takes place in like, 2250 or something. So it’s possible.
That demonstration device looks like it is trying to look like the prop in the movie "Chain Reaction". I find it hard to take it seriously given that. I hope the science on it is better than in that movie.
Oh but when I build one it’s a problem
Well, you built one in your shed and tweeted about it.
Why are these scientists not using metric?
Yes that’s what we need, steam and pressure vessels on a friggin moon base.
How about that solar power?
Doesn't work too well on the shadowed side of the moon, which is related to the project according to the article
Well that makes sense.
Because a night on the moon lasts two weeks on Earth. You’d either need some MASSIVE batteries and put all non-essential systems in hibernation, or you want a power source that can keep the lights on until the sun rises again.
NASA has opened a contract for nuclear. The moon's particular period of day and night means that the only place you can use solar usefully to support humans is right at the poles. Note that there is no "dark side of the moon". The moon has day and night cycles like Earth does. Any area not at the poles has a day and night periods that follow each other. The problem is the period (day plus night) is 30 Earth days long. Trying to go 15 Earth days with no solar heat or electricity is expected to be problematic.
Can that go in an sr-71?
Look up Whitey on the Moon lyrics.
Wait a minute Doc, are you telling me this Sucker is Nuclear!?
Fusion engines well it’s not invented by GM but still one step closer to the mackie and soon space AT&T pay your bills fucko
Bob Lazar has upped his grift game.
It’s not the size that matters, it’s about performance.
Rolls-Royce doesn’t sell autos anymore.
Anyone else read that as 120 inch dong?
It looks like a giant…
Lol this is a tube with some LED rods
Didn't I see those in all those 60 and 70 sci-fi movies? Pulsed fusion rocket motors maybe, pulsed fusion mini power sources like "Robot" used I don't think so. That was from Lost in Space by the way. N. S
Its "Conceptual" - At the conference, Rolls-Royce displayed a prototype of this mini reactor, which is currently incapable of producing power.
well the moon will possibly be brighter
This harkens back to the idea of a [nuclear-powered car](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Nucleon).
This is why RR went up today?
This is how the explosion happens
Looks like the nuke Steve Buscemi rode in Armageddon
It’s the next best thing, these mini reactors.
“Remember the time those old car guys accidentally nuked the moon?” I am aware they are also an aviation manufacturer and such, but those records will be lost during the moonfall and this will be their legacy
Rolls Royce cars aren’t even owned by Rolls Royce holdings any more; it was bought out by BMW in 2003. Also, it is literally impossible for nuclear reactors to cause a nuclear detonation; the fuel isn’t enriched enough to create the necessary self-sustaining chain reaction.
My comment was what is referred to as “a joke”
It looks really close to the machines in the game Prey (2017)
Lunar Godzilla!!
What the fuck does a car company have to do with space? Multinational type shit?
So if it blows up, the moon going to alright?
Nuclear reactors cannot explode like nuclear bombs; the physics simply do not allow for it. The worst that can happen is that it overheats and melts down. The moon is routinely pelted by asteroids that create impacts with many times more energy than humanity’s strongest nuclear weapons, and we don’t even notice unless we’re actively watching and waiting to see it. Humans could detonate every single warhead we have on the moon, and we’d barely scratch the surface. You overestimate the power of nuclear explosions (and, again, nuclear reactors cannot physically cause the chain reaction necessary for a nuclear explosion; it is literally not possible), and VASTLY underestimate the size of the moon.
Just saw this answer but thanks for really going into it to explain. Legitimately did not know, but I supposed that all makes sense. That person of rddit
1/3 of a first down.