[MurMan]

I was a nuclear power plant operator on a submarine during this period. Wanting another challenge (young & crazy ...), I applied for duty at McMurdo Station in 1971. My request was not approved and I was told that the Navy had a shortage of qualified submarine nuc's. Sounds like the Navy had already decided to decommission it.

I've always regretted not going to Antarctica, but this article makes me think that I dodged a bullet. This plant was a maintenance nightmare. Plus, operating a reactor with a mix of personnel sounds bad. We certainly had our personnel issues on subs, but at least all of us in Engineering had the shared experiences of nuclear power school, prototype training, and sub qualification.

[cturner]

Interesting people come to hacker news. (I'd give another upvote for your username if I could.) What is the essential set of skills/foundation knowledge for a nuclear power plant operator of the sort that you get on a submarine?

What do you think of the submarine systems that were designed for you to interact with? Context - I have been thinking recently about submarines and wondering how crew size could be reduced through automation. (I am aware that a lot of work went into this on the Independence class ships, but my working assumption is that this was let down by poor structuring of the design team, rather than that automation is a fundamentally bad idea)

Did you have to manage boredom when you were on-shift but did not have much to do? Or is there plenty to do? Or are you allowed to study when there is not much in the way of active responsibilities?

[MurMan]

You're right about HN. Experts in all domains.

My experience is from the Vietnam era and doesn't apply today. I was drafted mid-way through an EE program when I got behind in units. Virtually all of us had similar backgrounds. The Navy had a knack for teaching nuclear physics & math to bright people with a high school education.

The S5W plant that I operated had virtually no automation. Just safety interlocks and a few automatic shutdowns. Everything was analog. The electrical controls used mag-amps: dumb and inefficient, but reliable as hell. Safety was achieved by detailed operating procedures and highly trained crews. We studied and drilled constantly. Most over-qualified group of people I've known.

There's no way that I could describe what it was like at sea in a few lines here. It might make for an interesting HN thread as there are other nuc's here. :-)

[tnorthcutt]

I for one would enjoy reading such a thread!

You might enjoy Destin Sandlin's recent series of videos made on board a nuclear submarine: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLjHf9jaFs8XWoGULb2HQR...

[yourapostasy]

> The Navy had a knack for teaching nuclear physics & math to bright people with a high school education.

I would very much like to know your take on why the Navy has this knack. I'd like to research what it takes to reproduce that knack by other organizations, in other fields of endeavor.

When you say "bright people", how does an ASVAB VE+AR+MK+MC=252 broadly approximate to percentile?

I'm also curious how the Navy selects for people who can apply that brightness over sustained periods of time.

[MurMan]

> I would very much like to know your take on why the Navy has this knack.

I think the obvious answer is that they have to. The Navy has a lot of technology that needs maintenance at sea. Problem diagnosis requires understanding. We didn't rely on black box replacement.

I had nearly two years of engineering math when I was drafted and joined the Navy. The Navy skipped all of the derivations and went straight to the concepts of limits, derivatives, and integrals. Even some differential equations that describe reactor dynamics. Calculations were limited to algebra. Testing focused on calculus concepts rather than numerical answers.

This produced technicians with the ability to understand how the power plant worked but without the formal math and physics need for power plant design.

The only thing I can offer about how the Navy selects people is that it presents the various training programs early, starting with the recruiters. Certain programs are presented as being most difficult and are described in glowing terms. The challenge was definitely an attraction for me.

[eitland]

> I would very much like to know your take on why the Navy has this knack. I'd like to research what it takes to reproduce that knack by other organizations, in other fields of endeavor.

Maybe most interesting for us in this forum many military schools still includes lots and lots of physical training. I guess that is a huge advantage they have.

Some other points:

- Military organizations do have some options that are out of reach for civilian schools today. Knowing you can risk

- humiliation in front of peers (20 something years ago I once forgot to close the window on our room before service and had to run in to fix it while 36 other guys "enjoyed some extra time for pushups". I still remember it.),

- a permanent record for sleeping or otherwise not paying attention,

- a fine and a night behind bars for not being sober or for not behaving

- or being thrown out

sets a standard.

- Also I guess it also becomes obvious during training that failure to learn the required skills might easily cost you and others their lives.

[cyberlurker]

> The Navy had a knack for teaching nuclear physics & math to bright people with a high school education.

From what I’ve seen, this is still true.

[krisoft]

> I have been thinking recently about submarines and wondering how crew size could be reduced through automation.

I believe the Alfa class submarines went this exact route. According to Sutton it had a crew complement of 32: http://www.hisutton.com/Alfa_Class_Submarine.html

Much more modern plans along similar design thinking is the SHELF reactor. It is designed to operates in an underwater, sealed capsule that is monitored and controlled remotely. Source: https://aris.iaea.org/Publications/smr-status-sep-2012.pdf

[TameAntelope]

That's amazing and specific experience, very cool!

One thing I noticed at the top of the article was that they used the steam as a source of fresh water as well, did subs do this too, when you worked on them?

[MurMan]

Yes. Subs use low-pressure steam to desalinate sea water. Having lots of fresh water for showers was a huge benefit of nuc boats over diesel boats.

[Zenst]

Handy, also for oxygen production. Did you ever have to light the candle?

[qrybam]

For anyone else wondering what “light the candle” means in this context:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_oxygen_generator

[Zenst]

If you want too see one in action: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3Ud6mHdhlQ around 10:19 onwards shows the candle being put into action.

[jshmrsn]

I knew exactly what video you were going to link :) I love when the internet feels small for a moment.

[stainforth]

Every 2 hours in 2 parts of the ship? That seems like a lot of labor.

[MurMan]

Oxygen generators use electricity (electrolysis), not steam.

Thankfully, we never had to use oxygen candles. Candles are effective only in a small closed space. That would have been a serious emergency.

[Zenst]

Ah yes, was referring to the excess drinking water aspect knowing electrolysis upon sea water will produce chlorine due to the salt, which really would be an emergency in itself.

Glad to hear you didn't have a situation to use one and does seem a very rare situation, but neat that there is a solid backup.

[nielsbot]

You might find this series from Smarter Every Day interesting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3Ud6mHdhlQ I didn't find a bit about how they make drinking water, but here's an episode about how they regenerate their oxygen on a nuclear sub.

[throwawaybutwhy]

How many times did you get to talk with Rickover? And yes, thank you for your service.

[MurMan]

Just once, briefly when he did an inspection of our boat in Guam. My last memory of him was standing next to the ladder as he left. His pants raised as his ankle reached my eye level exposing a leg that was smaller than my wrist. To me, this was a perfect example of Rickover: a giant in many respects, but small and petty in others.

[seanf]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyman_G._Rickover Fascinating read, sounds like Robert Moses of the Navy