It's time once again for our monthly open thread. Talk about whatever you want, so long as it isn't culture war.
Overhauls are light this week, just the 2025 posts, Suez Parts four, five and six, as well as and Dipole Python.
April 10, 2026
Search
-
Useful Posts
- About
- Topical Index
- Top Posts
- Virtual Meetups
- Discord
- SSC Naval Gazing Posts
- Bibliography
- Link Index
Recent Comments
- Have to correct my first post!…
- Thinking back, about the 'cornfield bomber', my first day at Griffiss AFB was in…
- I've been going to the USAF Museum since the mid-60's, when it was in the conver…
- It feels like the article should mention the balistic missel collection.…
- Also, a bit more indirect, but Nimitz (commander of the Pacific Fleet), Spruance…
- Leahy and Halsey died within weeks of each other, yet Leahy got the class named …
- That's why you arrange to have them fly overhead on career day at the local high…
- It’s apparent that Morrison spent a lot time with senior officers who had an a…
- For some reason, there's something I never understood about this cruise and, to …
RSS Feed
Categories
- Airlines
- Amphibious
- Armament
- Aurora
- Aviation
- Battles
- Battleships
- BB 61
- Coastal Defenses
- Design
- Engineering
- Falklands
- ICNW
- Intro
- Jutland
- Links
- Logistics
- Merchant
- Modern
- Naval Gazing
- News
- NGBC
- Norway
- Nuclear
- Open
- Pictures
- Protection
- Review
- Riverine
- RTW 2
- Russia
- Space
- SYWTBABB
- SYWTBAMN
- Undersea
- WW 2
- WWI
Page last modified on April 09, 2026, at 08:07 PM
- Minimous theme originally by Andy Thompson, adapted by David Gilbert
- powered by BlogIt
Comments
This month marks the 47th anniversary of the Cahaba Tugboat Incident.
I can't think of a weirder bit of rivermanship that was also so well-captured on film.
Another thing that made it interesting was that, despite preceding ubiquitous internet use by years, it experienced viral interest long afterward. I used to have documentation of why, but the links appear to be dying out. I think maybe it resurfaced (pardon the expression) when the Cahaba was rechristened in 1999, but I don't remember.
Either way, I hope the incident remains online for as long as there is an online.
(If it turns out anyone reading this blog was not aware of this incident until now, well, enjoy!)
Weirdly, the person writing the blog was not aware of the incident. Thanks.
I'll recommend an author I recently found: H.P. Willmott. He has a number of books regarding the WWII Pacific War.
On Kindle The Last Century of Sea Power, Volume 1: From Port Arthur to Chanak, 1894-1922 I reading this now The Last Century of Sea Power: From Washington to Tokyo 1922 - 1945 In the queue to be read The Battle of Leyte Gulf: The Last Fleet Action. Good. Empires in the Balance: Japanese & Allied Pacific Strategies to 1942 I found this very interesting as he goes into a lot of the pre war history and politics. There is a hard copy 2nd book of the series that covers Coral Sea to Pearl Harbor. Sadly he passed away before he could write any more in the series. I will note that the first book is written enough as a standalone book, that the other books are not necessary.
Oh, boy. I have opinions on Willmott, and they are not positive. His early work, like Barrier and the Javelin and Empires in Balance is well-regarded (haven't read it, mostly because I just haven't had much reason to look at that part of the war) but his later stuff is frankly wacky. My first serious encounter with him was his book on battleships, which has some of the weirdest errors I've ever encountered in a hardcopy book, claiming that New Jersey used 14" RAP projectiles in Vietnam, something I have never heard anywhere else, and sounds like the sort of story you get from someone who served in the Navy who heard it from a buddy who says he got it from a Chief who was onboard at the time, but everyone involved is a messman and clearly knows nothing about gunnery. And there's no sourcing. I've also looked over some of his later general stuff, and the thing that sticks out at me was basically an Oscar Parkes take on battlecruisers published in 2014, which was about 15 years after the current scholarly consensus had formed around works by the likes of Sumida and Lambert. That sort of thing makes it really hard to take him seriously.
@Bean I haven't come across anything bizarre so far. The stuff I have read so far fills in some blanks in areas leading up to WWII
I think The Last Century of Sea Power was where I found the pre-1990 handling of battlecruisers. It's not crazy the way 14" RAP projectiles in Vietnam is crazy, but it's also not a sign of someone trying to do serious scholarship when you publish that sort of mistake a decade+ after there's been a lot of revision.
The early Wilmott stuff is indeed very good; I'm sorry to hear about the decline in quality.
I was searching the site for your position on the Warthog (lately in the news again), and unfortunately, while I found several hits, they all seem to redirect to "US-Military-Aircraft-Part-1". I don't know why. Even the link I see in the bottom of my browser appears to go to where it's supposed to, but they all go to Part 1 anyway.
For reasons I don't understand, it doesn't actually take you to the links for comments, although it does show them to you. For full posts, which show up below comments, it does work, although on this particular topic, there's also at least one post that search will show but you won't be able to access because it's not published yet.
What are the manning requirements for a submarine or carrier reactor?
I was reading some of the older discussion on CONAG and it seems like one of the downsides was manning requirements. But in the age of FADEC that seems less compelling, particularly for a clean sheet design. On the other hand, with reactor procurement in the low single digits per year it’s hard to amortize the R&D.
The problem is that Naval Reactors is institutionally allergic to FADEC. There's an old joke. "Why did Admiral Rickover's wife spend their entire marriage in the kitchen?" "To ensure the oven did not inadvertently switch into the on position." I think things are a little better now, but only a little.
@bean
Do you (or John Schilling maybe?) have an idea of how many people are actually required currently for each reactor (either on a Virginia or a Ford), in terms of dedicated personnel, and how does that compare to the powerplant on a DDG or LHA?
I have no idea on the reactors, but for the DDGs, it seems like the actual LM2500 would have minimal manning requirements, but probably a few more once you include the transmission and reduction gears, etc. But still probably a small fraction of the engineering billets that in practice spends more of their time working on auxiliary systems like the chiller.
@RedRover: I am far enough away from it that I won't try and answer the what the nukes are up to, but for a DDG: standard Cond III watch for Eng Department was 8 guys:
Central Control Station: EOOW-Engineering Officer of the Watch-overall guy in charge PACC-Propulsion and Auxilaries Control Console, in charge of... propulsion and auxiliaries EPCC-Electric Plant Control Console, in charge of the electrical system
2 EROs (Engine Room Operators, in charge of each of the Engine Rooms)
Rovers: PSM-Propulsion Systems Monitor, dealt with all the main propulsion-y stuff ASM-Auxiliary Systems Monitor, dealt with all the auxiliaries stuff (ACs, the chiller/reefer, steering, water production-I was the Auxiliaries Officer so I was very familiar with this world) Electrician-dealt with electrical issues.
Think with some of the more advanced systems you can basically get rid of the EROs