Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Steve Williams)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Converting to nuclear power (was Re: Aircraft Carriers.)
Message-ID: <1991Mar22.043518.22717@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 22 Mar 91 04:35:18 GMT
References: <1991Mar7.013113.59@cbnews.att.com> <1991Mar13.002206.6352@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (william.b.thacker)
Organization: David Taylor Research Center, Bethesda, MD
Lines: 26
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Steve Williams)

>why not convert the other Kitty Hawk class and Forrestal class
>carriers to nuclear power too ?

I remembered that Congress debated on whether or not to make the USS
JOHN F KENNEDY a nuclear powered carrier or not.  It was pointed out
that installing the nuclear reactor in the JOHN F KENNEDY would nearly 
double the cost.

To illustrate this point, let us compare the cost of building the KITTY
HAWK class carriers with the ENTERPRISE.

The cost for building USS KITTY HAWK was $265.2 million; USS CONSTELLATION,
$264.5 million; and USS JOHN F KENNEDY, $ 248.8 million.

By comparison, the cost of building USS ENTERPRISE was $451 million.

Looks like it would not be cost effective.

Steve Williams

"An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes which can be made
in a very narrow field."   -- Niels Bohr, Danish Scientist