|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on May 3, 2019 2:14:41 GMT -6
I hope they fix that. I've gone to war as France with Italy 3 times in as many years. That's just cruel! Are the devs anti-Italian? 😂😂😉 |
|
|
|
Post by christian on May 3, 2019 2:36:14 GMT -6
be unable to move and also highly irradiated The crew members too close to a damaged engine could be killed or sickened by the radiation and heat emitted by the reactor itself but there wouldn't be any fallout. So if the ship was returned to port and the reactor repaired there wouldn't be a radiation problem. if the reactor does melt down its highly likely it will just melt through the floor as we have seen with plants like chernobyl where the core melted through the floor and steel is alot more heat conducting than concrete so the nuclear fuel would likely just melt through the bottom of the ship (that would also be safest for the crew but less safe for the world cause fuel in ocean = not good) |
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on May 3, 2019 2:50:56 GMT -6
A more recent and barely less tragic example is Fukushima, where - if my memory serves me right - what we can talk about is ultimately a complete failure of any form of cooling and thus the meltdown of the operational cores. Unfortunately, that disaster probably models fairly well what happens if a nuclear plant / engine gets seriously pounded, be it tsunami or wartime engagement.
|
|
|
|
Post by christian on May 3, 2019 3:37:26 GMT -6
A more recent and barely less tragic example is Fukushima, where - if my memory serves me right - what we can talk about is ultimately a complete failure of any form of cooling and thus the meltdown of the operational cores. Unfortunately, that disaster probably models fairly well what happens if a nuclear plant / engine gets seriously pounded, be it tsunami or wartime engagement. it does mainly because the reactor itself is unlikely to fail and its more likely its systems that go first |
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on May 3, 2019 5:05:11 GMT -6
A more recent and barely less tragic example is Fukushima, where - if my memory serves me right - what we can talk about is ultimately a complete failure of any form of cooling and thus the meltdown of the operational cores. Unfortunately, that disaster probably models fairly well what happens if a nuclear plant / engine gets seriously pounded, be it tsunami or wartime engagement. The Fukushima Daiichi individual reactor plant capacities were similar to the A4W and A1B reactor plants used on Nimitz and Ford-class carriers but they were significantly larger than the A2W plants used on Enterprise and on submarines. Enterprise would be a more appropriate model for the immediate after-game time period. Because of their smaller size, they produce less decay heat when shutdown so the cooling requirements, while significant shortly after shutdown if there was a high power history prior to, are less than what you see for civilian plants. That includes the fact that naval reactors don't have spent fuel rod pools that require cooling as well. While I can't speak for other navies, there are systems and procedures on USN vessels for providing emergency cooling to a shutdown reactor that don't require electrical power. We can use stored, high pressure air to push water into the reactor vessel or even rely on natural circulation (hot water naturally rises and cooler water descends so if you design the piping systems correctly you can get water flow through the core just from that). Navy reactors on ships have the advantage that they are sitting in the water so while salt water is a desperate last resort it will always be available. While battle damage is the great unknown, in general if the ship has been damaged so badly in the first place that those emergency systems aren't available then it is probably on the way to being sunk or scuttled anyway and so once submerged (unless it takes place in very shallow water) the chance of a melt down has pretty much been eliminated. Since pressurized water reactors have multiple systems of very high temperature water/steam in them the primary concern to the crew initially in any battle is the possibility of a steam rupture either from the steam system piping itself or from the primary coolant water as it flashes to steam upon being exposed to atmospheric pressure if either systems' piping is damaged. The other problem is if the reactor shuts down either due to loss of electrical power or mechanical shock then the ship is going to be dead in the water as the ship loses steam pressure and can't power the propulsion turbines. For game purposes the damage model really wouldn't be that different than for a conventional ship. The true differences would come in radiation exposure to the crew which wouldn't be modeled in-game anyway and the increased cost and complexity of performing repairs. Ships that suffer significant damage to the reactor compartment would take much more time and money to repair and return to service than for conventional ships that take similar levels of damage to their boiler rooms. [Edit - You could have some unique critical hits though such as if the ship uses a water tank as part of the radiation shielding and it is punctured, the increasing radiation levels in the engine room could cause the reactor to be shut down until entry to the reactor compartment is made and the damage to the tank is repaired. The in-game effect would be similar to what you already see when a loss of electrical power critical hit occurs if it is a one reactor ship or the maximum speed might just be reduced if it is a multi-reactor ship.] |
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on May 3, 2019 5:46:19 GMT -6
The Fukushima Daiichi individual reactor(...) Very informative insight, thank you! Learned a great deal from it. |
|
