Is the ship travel eve return r used into favor as alternative for plane.

[Nibb31]

NS Savannah was the first nuclear merchant ship:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NS_Savannah

But there have been a few others, but none were very successful.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_marine_propulsion#Civilian_nuclear_ships

Edited June 5, 2014 by Nibb31

[Seret]

Is it possible to attach some hydrofoils to a cruise ship and increase its speed?

Probably not something on the scale of a cruise ship, no. The Russian navy does have hydrofoil patrol boats in the 200-300t range. Why do you ask?

[Nibb31]

It is still possible to travel on board cargo ships nowadays. Most freighters have a couple of passenger cabins. It's slow, cheap, and lonely though. You eat with the crew, but you'd better bring your own entertainment because there isn't much to do on board.

[Seret]

You eat with the crew

Good opportunity to brush up on your Filipino then.

[jwenting]

Sometimes it helps to learn to write comprehensible English before you start posting rants and questions to a forum. This is one of those times.

[jwenting]

Is not it a bit dangerous when a bunch of civilians playing with nuclear toys?

They're Soviet ships. Built when everything was government owned, including the people.

But no, it's not dangerous to have civilians handling nuclear systems. It's in fact very common and causes far less problems than having the government handle them.

Think every nuclear power station in the US except submarines, carriers, and a few research reactors (and previously the ones used to make plutonium for weapons).

Think every nuclear power station in France, and indeed most any western country.

OTOH there's Chernobyl, which was government owned. There's the accidents with Soviet nuclear powered submarines (the US had a few as well but those weren't reactor related).

[Nuke]

Is it possible to attach some hydrofoils to a cruise ship and increase its speed?

hydrofoils might be possible, your hull and foils would have to be pretty damn robust structurally. they also have their speed limits due to hydrodynamic drag. i think ive seen some hover ferries, which would probibly give you the best speed. hovercraft have less interaction with the water and so are not limited by drag in the same way. even a basic catamaran can be pretty damn fast, we have a couple of them in our ferry system, and they haul ass.

[Nibb31]

They're Soviet ships. Built when everything was government owned, including the people.

But no, it's not dangerous to have civilians handling nuclear systems. It's in fact very common and causes far less problems than having the government handle them.

Think every nuclear power station in the US except submarines, carriers, and a few research reactors (and previously the ones used to make plutonium for weapons).

Think every nuclear power station in France, and indeed most any western country.

OTOH there's Chernobyl, which was government owned. There's the accidents with Soviet nuclear powered submarines (the US had a few as well but those weren't reactor related).

Of the 4 nuclear cargo ships ever built, 1 was American, 1 was Russian, 1 was German, and 1 was Japanese.

Three Mile Island was operated by a private corporation. French nuclear plants were built by government-owned power company. The US government has also been responsible for stuff like this:

http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/23/5742800/did-kitty-litter-just-kill-the-most-successful-nuclear-waste-facility

Nuclear accidents happen out of neglect. Governments and corporations from all countries are capable of screwing up. Assuming that an installation is inherently safe simply because it's operated by a US corporation and not by a foreign government agency is reckless. It's the rules and regulations around the operation of a nuclear facility that makes it safe, not the entity that's operating it.

[jwenting]

3MI proves that civilians can run things safely, the accident there was fully contained, no damage or exposure outside the complex.

The French reactors are civilian operated, even if the company might have been government owned at one point.

yes, neglect plays a big part. And government agencies are far more likely to create situations where neglect goes unnoticed, uncorrected, even rewarded than are private companies who after all have a financial incentive to run things efficiently and without accidents as accidents are expensive.

Where large scale industrial accidents did happen many can be traced back to either random bad luck or government subsidies and other anti-competitive measures that caused the company to effectively have become a government agency.

[Pawelk198604]

They're Soviet ships. Built when everything was government owned, including the people.

But no, it's not dangerous to have civilians handling nuclear systems. It's in fact very common and causes far less problems than having the government handle them.

Think every nuclear power station in the US except submarines, carriers, and a few research reactors (and previously the ones used to make plutonium for weapons).

Think every nuclear power station in France, and indeed most any western country.

OTOH there's Chernobyl, which was government owned. There's the accidents with Soviet nuclear powered submarines (the US had a few as well but those weren't reactor related).

What I meant was that the soldiers are more disciplined than we simple civilians, and are less willing to sell nuclear materials, to dangerous individuals. and the institution, among other things, such as the famous or rather infamous al Qaeda

[PakledHostage]

yes, neglect plays a big part. And government agencies are far more likely to create situations where neglect goes unnoticed, uncorrected, even rewarded than are private companies who after all have a financial incentive to run things efficiently and without accidents as accidents are expensive.

Citation needed. Without it, your post is nothing more than right-wing rhetoric...

[Javster]

The French reactors are civilian operated, even if the company might have been government owned at one point.

And yet any accidents have been very minor and easily contained. And now France is the biggest exporter of electricity in the world.

[Javster]

airlines to day just run really fast buses. back in the 60s and 70s they may have glamorized flying. they would feed you and give you all kinds of free stuff. the first time i flew (in the early 90s) i got a pair of wings, a deck of cards, food that didnt suck, and a bottomless glass of coke, and there was a movie. but these days after you and your stuff are finished being violated at the security line, they herd you into that aluminum can, pack you in like sardines and send you on an all day roundabout route to your destination, and if you want any snacks you have to buy them from the overpriced vendors in the concourse.

i used to love to fly, but they have completely ruined it. its more fun to take a bus or a train. but boats take the cake in the fun department. with modern ship designs it need not take forever either.

Are you comparing the same class here?

Modern flights can be very comfortable with right airline

[Nuke]

Are you comparing the same class here?

Modern flights can be very comfortable with right airline

the indignation of airport security will ruin any flight no matter how luxurious. i mean if they gave me unlimited booze for free, unlimited snacks, they let me pick the in flight movie, the pilot let me fly the plane for abit, and i got to spend time in the lavatory with the female flight attendant of my choice. i think my experience would still be ruined by airport security.

Edited June 7, 2014 by Nuke