Can someone explain why the Soviets built it

as a steam powered ship instead of a nuclear powered ship?

Doesn't make sense, does it?

Steam ships can go to places that nuclear-powered ships can't because of treaties.

They did build some nuclear powered ships...

Battleships that is

old, dated, stolen technology like everything in russia

Nuclear powered ships use the heat generated from the reactor to generate STEAM which powers turbines.

They don't just fucking fire "nuclear" out the back like a rocket you fucking imbeciles, all nuclear vessels are steam turbine powered.

Like most reason why soviet and Russia build anything to display their penis to usa

They had nuclear powered ice breakers and battlecruisers, Russia hasn't had a new battleship since 1916.

Apparently it has to do with the Dardanelles not allowing nuclear material to pass throught the straight.

fucking this

everyone thinks 'nuclear powered' means its like some kind of antimatter chamber on the starship enterprise that just 'emits energy' and somehow that powers everything.

Honestly I have no idea.

Probably because the old Kiev class carriers were steam powered.

It was cheaper to simply scale up the concepts of the Kiev class to build the new carrier. If they had opted for a nuclear carrier they probably would have had to start from scratch.

Just a guess.

Nuclear powered ships are steam powered m8y.

Nuclear is just a hot rock that makes steam.

its probably best that its not nuclear powered, russians treat radiation like a fucking meme.
>pic related, some russian nuclear generators dumped on the roadside

>warp drive will not be developed within your lifetime
Feels pretty bad.

Because you have to look at the context.

The Kuznetsov class was designed to provide some aerial support to cover a Soviet breakout through the North Sea as well as providing anti-air and point defence for the fleet in general. It's not nuclear powered because it was never intended for power projection or to carry large numbers of aircraft; rather it's designed for aerial and point defence.

Unlike the US supercarriers which are designed to be the main striking arms and centres of a carrier group that is tasked with expeditionary warfare on a global level.

Nuclear powered ships still get power from a steam turbine, you turbo tard.

Please kys

On the bright side, at least it doesn't have

A

F U C K I N G
C
K
I
N
G

R A M P
A
M
P

>Looking at you, everyone other country on Earth

So that means no US nuclear carriers or subs either?

every other country*

russia doesn't have the facilities

To land Comey's jet, once he applies for asylum from the U.S.

Nuclear reactors are steam generators you kraut cuck. Are you taking advice from Ahmed and Jamaal? Your country is lost, end it now.

It actually does.
You can even see it in OP

It does have a ramp!

Itt everyone knows OP was asking about why a ship was conventionally fueled instead of nuclear fueled, but a few turbo-autists couldn't pass up the chance to fail at humanity

Russia's navy strength is 80% submarine, which is far smarter than having half it's assets on the surface, like we do in the US.

Russia has 63 subs, US has 70. But it's a well known fact that Russia has better submarine tech, and has for decades.

... you goof, the Kuznetsov has a RAMP.

You can see the tip of it in OP's pic

>Nuclear reactors are steam generators

You don't want steam in the reactor m8y, you'll get a Chernobyl.

They're glorified water heaters, just keep the water under pressure and it won't boil.

>all nuclear vessels are steam turbine powered.

Umm, no.
Nuclear submarines aren't steam powered.
Steam is just a simple method used on ships where size of the power generator and emmissions arent an issue.
Sub's use a different type of nuclear power that converts directly to electricity.

this.

Their blue water navy has been in disrepair for a decade or more. They had to build something.

USN iirc does not enter the black sea, officially

I could be completely wrong

Yup.

>Dardanelles
ITS HELLESPONT YOU DIRTY OTTOMAN

still looks formidable, even if it does have the smarter ramp, instead of steam powered slingshots.

what a heap of shit......

Can't recall anything larger than a destroyer entering the Black Sea, that could be the reason.

If someone hits that ship with a missile there won't be all this radioactive shit complicating the survival of the people on it?

Uwot.

Los Angeles have 2 steam generators attached to their reactor m8y.

Their 2 main engines and 2 SSTGs run on steam from them.

But it's a glorious Soviet heap of shit that gets the job done in spite of not making any sense to the rest of the world.

>steam powered ship instead of a nuclear powered ship?
And i thought germans werent retarded enough to not understand how nuclear reactors work
Protip: its a nuclear one that is steam engine and diesel is internal conbustion one

Looks shabby

>russians treat radiation like a fucking meme.

what does that even mean?

>But it's a well known fact that Russia has better submarine tech, and has for decades.

>They don't just fucking fire "nuclear" out the back like a rocket

he said ship, stop being a contrarian tart.

>way smaller than even nimitz class carriers
>dirty as fuck
>can only hold 6 or 7 planes on the runway
>hangar bay looks tiny as shit
>maybe 20 planes total

A United States carrier can hold up to 80 fighter aircraft. We have 11carriers. Fuck off Russia.

>better

No

The Virginia class and Astute class SSNs are both better than AkulaU class, and roughly matched by the Akula-A (upgraded model).. not enough is known about Russia's newest post-Soviet attack subs to make a real decision on quality. But I'd say it's on par as well.

If I had to put money on who is best, the Astute class has my vote.

It was built in fucking Black Sea, if it had nuclear power — it would stay in this fucking pond due to turks.

Shits and giggles.

As a steam plant worker this post gave me cancer. Thanks op you are a true faggot.

It isnt. It used to be. Things change.

Its also not called the "Iroqouis nation" anymore. Its called New York.

>internal combustion
Are you sure they haven't converted it to just burn the diesel externally straight out of a nozzle under the boiler?

As opposed to your carrier which spends most of it's life in dock due to it's reactor being two submarine ones taped together and a dodger propeller shaft that can't handle the torque.

Russians are demon from the underworld so they are naturally drawn to underwater.

Subs are one trick ponies though.

>u-boat
>boat

Russian sub tech declined in the 1980s due to funding issues.

It doesn't get the job done. The entire battle group is slowed down because it can't go faster than the tug boat they have to take with them anywhere they go because the carrier breaks down every time it leaves port.

Yeah but that one trick is a pretty good one.

Kuznetsov is not a carrier, it's a missile cruiser that can also carry aircraft.

The latest subs fielded by Russia aren't even nuclear, but diesel-electric, which can actually be more stealthy than nuclear subs that leave both a thermal trail and have to use the reactor on at all times. (Though the power and duration of the DE is infinitely lower).

That's because it's old and poorly maintained. The whole point of the Kuznetsov class was to basically keep NATO air power off the Baltic fleet until it cleared the North Sea. It's being pressed into a role it was never designed for.

this is true in the sense that hammers and sledge hammers are both tools.

Did you miss the endless buttblast this thing is causing by being a mobile shipwreck? And it's not even gotten to Syria yet.

Wow what a fucking heap. This is all they have?

don't forget who's piloting the subs, which accounts for half of their effectiveness.

You are, NATO (including USN) ships have been up in the Black Sea for decades.

Interesting.. how do they stop the subs?No Ticonderogas at all?

'dem Sukhois...

brb, fapping.

The new Virginia class nuclear subs can actually shut down their reactor coolant pumps and rely on natural fluid flow at low power due to their core design, makes them better than even diesel electric when at low power mode.

Soviet technology new design. American use old 1942 design.

>Sub's use a different type of nuclear power that converts directly to electricity.
Is this as retarded as it sounded when I read it?

BEST.SHIP.EVER.

Get the fuck back to /r/eddit you progressive green cuck

>Nuclear is just a hot rock that melts steam

No, nuclear engines produce heat through controlled nuclear reactions; this heat heats water to produce steam to turn a turbine.

Jesus, the Americans are retarded meme is real.

Looks dirty as fuck

Idk, man. With a surface ships you can monitor and control below surface, surface and air space.

I don't know much about Navies but it doesn't sound that simple that subs > surface vessels.

If I increase the price of coal - would it sink?

He's a retard, confusing sci-fi with reality.

As someone who has jacked off on the back of a submarine reactor, I can confirm they are attached to steam generators.

It's actually the accompanying supply ships that is slowing the convoy down.

Those ocean going tugs can actually scoot along quickly when they're not towing something thanks to their high HP per ton rating.

>make one really shitty ship and use it to fool stupid americans because in reality.

Russia's navy strength is 80% submarine

you fell for one of the oldest tricks in the book.

"hey, look over there while i kick you in the nuts"

Retard. There was no such as a indian nation

The fuel rods are literally just hot rocks. Where they get the heat from is irrelevant in this description. He's right, you're wrong.

Unfortunately, our first nuclear supercarrier was sold for scrap by Ukrainians after USSR collapsed.
And second Kuznetsov-class carrier they sold to China.
Never trust to Ukrainians.

The
>controlled nuclear reactions
are achieved by immersing the fuel rods in varying depths of heavy water (Since heavy water is good at absorbing neutron radiation, and neutron radiation is what causes the chain reactions).

So he's for all intents and purposes correct. It's just a hot rock making steam.

Sometimes it embarrasses me to share the same website with retards like you.

Where are you getting any of this from?

Oh, I was talking about the nuclear payload on those subs. If they can get one to where it can really unload, it'd be pretty decisively devastating regardless of countermeasures or return fire.

>Admiral Krakatoa, mobile volcano
that was a fun thread

AFAIK subs also use steam turbine, you can however generate directly energy with radioactive material.
Its an thermolelectric system like those peltiere elements, they use the temperature difference of two sides to create an energy flow. Also works in reverse.

Mostly used in really smallscale systems like weatherstations or space probes.
They are called RTGs radio-thermic-generators.

The more you know.

Holy shit you're dumb. A nuclear powered submarine STILL USES STEAM to propel turbines, which generates electricity and powers the propellers. The bits that are moving are just more compact.

Let me break this down for someone who isn't able to think logically.
1) Highly-radioactive material generates heat.
2) This heat reacts with water, causing it to turn into water vapor, which increases the air pressure inside a valved chamber.
3) This causes the valve to move.
4) This movement causes friction inside a turbine, which generates electricity.
5) This movement also causes an axle to spin, which causes the propellers to spin.

Were talking about terminology you utter buffoon.

We still build both nuclear and diesel-electric subs, as they have very different mission profiles.

Uranium is a rock.

People that work with uranium call it a hot rock.

Remove your head from your anus.

yeah the mobile volcano thing literally made me piss my pants

Irrelevant. The tug boat that that hauls this massive shit bucket is probably diesel.

How you tell Russian submariner?

He glows in dark.

lol look at the fucking oil leak

Yes, it is.

Where they get their heat from is extremely relevant.

Fossil Fuel engines get their heat from burning fossil fuels and Nuclear Engines get their heat from nuclear interactions.

Hot rocks can't produce motion.

When it comes to generating the kind of mechanical force needed to move something like a bigass ship though, Nuclear to steam is the only way you can do it.

I'm pretty sure to get that kind of amperage out of RTG's the entire volume of the carrier would have to be filled with them, linked up in series and ready to go out like a christmas tree if one goes down.

Yeah they cant go visit new zealand, such a tragedy.