USN nuclear powered surface units

Naval discussions covering the latter half of the 20th Century.
User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

USN nuclear powered surface units

Postby Karl Heidenreich » Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:40 am

Are there, apart from the CVN, SSN and SSBN, nuclear powered surface units in the USN inventory?
I was aware that in the 70ies and 80ies there were some but don´t know if they are still operational.
Are there operational nuclear powered warships in other navies as were the Kirovs?

Very best regards...
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Postby lwd » Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:01 am

Here's an article which addresses your question.
http://www.uic.com.au/nip32.htm
From that article:
The USA has the main navy with nuclear-powered aircraft carriers (11), while both it and Russia have had nuclear-powered cruisers (USA: 9, Russia 4). Russia has eight nuclear icebreakers in service.

The US had one merchant ship and a couple of others were built.

Some more info at this site:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL33946.pdf
Apparently all the US nuclear powered ships left are CVs and subs.

culverin
Member
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:31 pm
Location: Hampshire. England.

Re: USN nuclear powered surface units

Postby culverin » Fri May 03, 2013 10:51 pm

Good 2nd link you have there lwd which seems to have been updated too. 1st appears defunct.
It has long intrigued me why the name Long Beach, CGN 9 was selected for the 1st US nuclear cruiser especially as it is a name with no previous naval history.
US cruisers had traditionally been named to honour Cities and Towns, which Long Beach certainly is, but seems rather obscure, certainly to non Americans, so who or what influenced this choice.
A full broadside. The traditional English salute.
Thanks. Sean.

User avatar
Rick Rather
Member
Posts: 139
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 4:15 am
Location: Dallas, Texas USA

Re: USN nuclear powered surface units

Postby Rick Rather » Sat May 04, 2013 1:48 am

culverin wrote:Good 2nd link you have there lwd which seems to have been updated too. 1st appears defunct.
It has long intrigued me why the name Long Beach, CGN 9 was selected for the 1st US nuclear cruiser especially as it is a name with no previous naval history.
US cruisers had traditionally been named to honour Cities and Towns, which Long Beach certainly is, but seems rather obscure, certainly to non Americans...


...as are Quincy, Tuscaloosa & Astoria, I would imagine. :wink:

...so who or what influenced this choice.


Actually, as a major west-coast seaport and location of a significant naval station (battleships were home-ported there), I am somewhat surprised there wasn't a USS Long Beach before CGN-9.
Just because it's stupid, futile and doomed to failure, that doesn't mean some officer won't try it.
-- R. Rather

User avatar
tommy303
Senior Member
Posts: 1526
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:19 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: USN nuclear powered surface units

Postby tommy303 » Mon May 06, 2013 7:38 am

It is somewhat surprising that she was the first to be named Long Beach. As you say, it was an important west coast facility. I suppose it might have been due to the name changes from Roosevelt Base US Naval Dry Docks in 1945 to Terminal Island Naval Shipyard and then only to Long Beach Naval Shipyard in 1948, just eight years prior to USS Long Beach being ordered.

Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
They stood and Earth's foundations stay;
What God abandoned these defended;
And saved the sum of things for pay.


Return to “Naval History Post-1945”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest