this post was submitted on
98 points (88% like it)
113 up votes 15 down votes

pics

subscribe2,582,186 readers

7,347 users here now

Submit your Halloween pumpkin pics to /r/horror's carving competition!

A place to share interesting photographs and pictures. Feel free to post your own, but please read the rules first (see below), and note that we are not a catch-all for general images (of screenshots, comics, etc.)

Spoiler code

Please mark spoilers like this:
[text here](/spoiler)

Hover over to read.

Rules

  1. No screenshots, or pictures with added or superimposed text. This includes image macros, comics, info-graphics and most diagrams. Text (e.g. a URL) serving to credit the original author is exempt.

  2. No gore or porn. NSFW content must be tagged.

  3. No personal information. This includes anything hosted on Facebook's servers, as they can be traced to the original account holder. Stalking & harassment will not be tolerated.

  4. No solicitation of votes (including "cake day" posts), posts with their sole purpose being to communicate with another redditor, or [FIXED] posts. DAE posts go in /r/DoesAnybodyElse. "Fixed" posts should be added as a comment to the original image.

  5. Submissions must link directly to a specific image file or to an image hosting website with minimal ads. We do not allow blog hosting of images ("blogspam"), but links to albums on image hosting websites are okay. URL shorteners are prohibited.

  6. No animated images. Please submit them to /r/gif, /r/gifs, or /r/reactiongifs instead.

  • If your submission appears to be filtered but definitely meets the above rules, please send us a message with a link to the comments section of your post (not a direct link to the image). Don't delete it as that just makes the filter hate you!

  • If you come across any rule violations, please report the submission or message the mods and one of us will remove it!

Please also try to come up with original post titles. Submissions that use certain clichés/memes will be automatically tagged with a warning.

Links

If your post doesn't meet the above rules, consider submitting it on one of these other subreddits:

Comics  
/r/comics /r/webcomics
/r/vertical /r/f7u12
/r/ragenovels /r/AdviceAtheists
Image macros Screenshots/text
/r/lolcats /r/screenshots
/r/AdviceAnimals /r/desktops
/r/Demotivational /r/facepalm (Facebook)
/r/reactiongifs /r/DesktopDetective
Wallpaper Animals
/r/wallpaper /r/aww
/r/wallpapers /r/cats
The SFWPorn Network /r/TrollingAnimals
  /r/deadpets
  /r/birdpics
  /r/foxes
Photography Un-moderated pics
/r/photography /r/AnythingGoesPics
/r/photocritique /r/images
/r/HDR
/r/windowshots
/r/PictureChallenge
Misc New reddits
/r/misc /r/britpics
/r/gifs Imaginary Network
/r/dataisbeautiful /r/thennnow
/r/picrequests /r/SpecArt
/r/LookWhoIMet
  /r/timelinecovers
  /r/MemesIRL
  /r/OldSchoolCool
  /r/photoshopbattles
  /r/PastAndPresentPics .

Also check out http://irc.reddit.com

a community for

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

all 33 comments

[–]Cinemaphreak 3 points4 points ago

Here's a question for the armchair military buffs: what did the world's navies think would happen in the event an enemy managed hit the reactors on these vessels? Was the assumption that any engagement would likely happen out in deep, open water and the sea itself would reduce the contamination to "safe" levels?

[–]Sopps 2 points3 points ago

They were first built during the cold war, they probably figured if a carry was sunk it likely meant the start of nuclear war anyways.

[–]pdmcmahon[S] 7 points8 points ago

Doubtful, they are encased and surrounded by the majority of the ship. They are also protected by ~90 fighters and a battle group. Carriers by themselves don't have much in the way of defense or weaponry, they rely on their support system.

Signed, a non-armchair Navy veteran

[–]nayslayer 14 points15 points ago

You didn't answer the question at all.

[–]allstarlaxman 10 points11 points ago

For starters the reactors were engineered to endure "casualty damage". They are located low and central to the exterior of the ship. They are surrounded by 2 levels of containment shielding, and directly underneath the reactors are tank systems that are closed off and filled with water / oil as a shock barrier in the event of of underwater detonation near to or underneath the ship. The ship itself was designed to contain contamination to not only within the ship, but within the reactor plant engineering spaces, and once again within the radiation shielded compartments. There is a lot of steel and lead in between the "zoomies" and between the people spaces, and even more steel and equipment between those, and the ocean. If the ship was sunk and containment breached the water would act as a fantastic moderator to keeping the fuel cool, and to shield the surrounding area from radiation. Even if the control rods were lost and core stayed burning and fissioning at will for years and years, the radiation levels nearby would be pretty much normal due to the immense amount of water shielding. Contamination is different. That's the physical particles of radioactive material that can be ingested/absorbed and if so can cause serious biological damage. Severity here is determined by particle type (liquid/solid/gas) material type (Cs/Rb/Co/ etc.) and concentration (Nx). Further...proximity from source and time exposed all play factors.

So the intial question....I don't think it was assumed, I think there was some serious mathematics and engineering involved by people who make far more money that I do to make that determination.

My opinion...I think if the ship was sunk, than 99% of harmful radiation/contamination would be localized to internal parts of the ship. Barring a catastrophic explosion ripping apart the ship from the inside out, within the reactor compartments (inside the shielding), then...yea, shit will get out and disseminate local to that area of the ocean and with the help of currents...blah blah, it might spread out and increase background radiation levels for a little while but I still think it's nothing to lose sleep over.

[–]SgtSmackdaddy 0 points1 point ago

Well I guess the problem is less the EM radiation and alpha/beta radiation, but rather things like radioactive iodine and caesium leaking into the ocean and poisoning marine life and ultimately humans.

[–]allstarlaxman 0 points1 point ago

We had 2 nuclear submarines lost, the Ruskies have lost a few more (on record...) plus they scuttle their old ships in a bay in the arctic (this is a rumor I heard while in the service...)

Dug this up real quick regarding nuclear accidents. I quoted 2 relevant paragraphs near the bottom.

link

U.S. Navy officials report there is little likelihood of radioactive release from the U.S. ships. Reactor fuel elements in American submarines are made of materials that are extremely corrosion resistant, even in sea water. The protective cladding on the fuel elements corrodes only a few millionths of an inch per year, meaning the reactor core could remain submerged in sea water for centuries without releases of fission products while the radioactivity decays.

Comprehensive deep ocean radiological monitoring operations were conducted at the Thresher site in 1965, 1977, 1983, and again in 1986. None of the samples obtained showed any evidence of release of radioactivity from the reactor fuel elements.

[–]m4110m 12 points13 points ago

He'd make a great politician.

[–]billmelater 3 points4 points ago

I'd vote for him!

[–]Chronotachometer 5 points6 points ago

His point is that it's unlikely that the carriers would ever be hit in the first place, which is true, and if they were it's unlikely that the reactors would be damaged. The ship is big, and the reactors are relatively small. Even if sunk, the reactors will likely just end up sitting on the ocean floor for as long as they need to. The reactors in Enterprise were derived from submarine models, and are consequently very tough.

Interestingly, Enterprise had 8 separate reactors. Once the reliability of nuclear powered surface ships was proven, the Nimitz and rest of her class were all designed around it and only needed two larger reactors. The 8 reactors are probably going to make decommissioning Enterprise mighty interesting...

[–]alwaysdriven 0 points1 point ago

A reactor lost at sea is pretty much going to contain itself/be contained by the massive amount of water to attenuate the radiation. The level of danger is pretty minimal considering that at worst, the reactor would be completely submerged in water.

[–]allstarlaxman 0 points1 point ago

CIWS, NSSMS, and RAM mounts help though. Were you a carrier guy/gal?

[–]pdmcmahon[S] 1 point2 points ago

I was on a tender, actually. One of the first co-eds.

[–]allstarlaxman 0 points1 point ago

ah ok. Wasn't the gable, was it? Former carrier brat here. CVN-71-derful.

[–]pdmcmahon[S] 0 points1 point ago

USS Acadia, I even decommissioned her.

[–]foust117 1 point2 points ago

Modern carriers are tough to take down. Been that way since the Korean War.

[–]Timmyc62 1 point2 points ago

To be frank, I doubt anyone in the establishment was worried about radiation contamination as a result of a sinking due to enemy action, as there would likely be something far more pressing to be concerned about if the world situation devolved into such a state where the US Navy faced the destruction of its carrier fleet.

[–]underyourradar 2 points3 points ago

Old photo... those look alot like F-4's on the bow. That's Vietnam era isn't it?

[–]Chronotachometer 1 point2 points ago

Yes. Also there are A-7's or F-8's, A-5's, and A-4's. You can really appreciate how small the A-4 was for it's time. The photo was taken late July, 1964.

[–]some_random_noob 1 point2 points ago

i like the upvoting aircraft carrier, meme warriors make it so.

[–]TheOppositeOfPizza 1 point2 points ago

Trivia: this is from the 1982 film Koyaanisqatsi (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085809/)

[–]juxtap0zed 2 points3 points ago

Nuke-u-lar. It's pronounced nuke-u-lar.

[–]mdhol 1 point2 points ago

Which Navy is that?

[–]pdmcmahon[S] 1 point2 points ago

U.S., it's the USS Enterprise.

[–]mdhol -2 points-1 points ago

Really? It doesn't look like a nuclear aircraft carrier. If anything I would say that is a smoke stack on the port side of the island and if it is I would wager that is the Kitty Hawk.

Plus the island doesn't look remotely correct and all CVN's look moreorless the same.

[–]pdmcmahon[S] 2 points3 points ago

Look at the 65 on the bow, the USS Enterprise was CVN 65.

Plus, it was from the Kitty Hawk class of carriers. You might be thinking of the Nimitz class.

[–]mdhol 2 points3 points ago

Nimitz class carriers are CVN. The Kitty Hawk was a CV (Non-Nuclear).

And I think you're right. I forgot that CVN 68 was when they changed the class from Enterprise to Nimitz.

[–]Timmyc62 3 points4 points ago

CVN 65 Enterprise was the sole ship-of-class. In this picture, her island still has the original "beehive" ECM structure before it was modernized later to a more conventional mast. You can always distinguish Enterprise from the Nimitzes by the square shape of the island, compared to the longer, thinner ones on pretty much every other USN carrier.

The other two ships in this photo are CGN 9 Long Beach and then-DLGN 25 Bainbridge, all nuclear-powered. This was the first around-the-world cruise by a nuclear-powered taskgroup, called Operation Sea Orbit.

[–]Iloldalot 0 points1 point ago

also, the USS Reagan is nuclear

[–]Willkill7 0 points1 point ago

Some aircraft carriers can go 20 years without refueling.

Wish my car could do that.

[–]Daduck 0 points1 point ago