I’m in my 50’s, so may the youth forgive me, but there’s something about the way these pieces were made that makes them special. When I watch, I can instantly remember my youth. It’s the narration, everything always being backed by a orchestral piece. It’s very well done. These days, I can’t read a CNN story without seeing two or three typos. I hope some young journalists can watch these older videos and put a new twist on older excellence.
There can't have been any typos in a modern story. All the "thumb-wizards" have spell-check on their smart phones. Yeah, right. I guess some think it's fine that there are few great newspapers anymore, but at least those professionals could spell and properly choose which word to use.
What is most interesting is that a nuclear-powered ship pre-dates the container revolution. Although containers existed in 1964, the format wasn't standardized until 1968 and that is when things really took off.
@@whatisnuclear There actually is a nuclear-powered cargo ship (with ice-breaking capability) in active operation, the russian NS Sevmorput. Completed in 1988, taken out of service in 2007 but eventually refitted and refueled and returned to service in 2016.
@@whatisnuclear Also apparently there's at least two groups that recently started exploring the feasibility of (re)introducing nuclear propulsion for merchant ships: the NuProShip project of the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, and a South Korean coalition that includes several marine shipping companies and the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute.
You know the first occurance of Containerisation on a purpose built vessel happened in my hometown - Fremantle, Western Australia - on a Ship called 'Kooringa' in 1964
I was so tickled to see this video come up. My dad was an engineer that helped with the design and construction of her reactor, and he had a model of the Savannah. The model isn't in good condition now (he passed away a couple of years ago), but even with being familiar with the ship from his stories and model, they really didn't grasp how beautiful a ship the Savannah really was.
A little intresting sidenote. De Laval who made the Turbines for Svannah is a Swedish brand and was at the time the most renowned manufacturer of Turbines for industrial use, Infact most power plants around the world would have a De laval turbine in the age of Savannah. Also Sweden was during the same era more or less bulding the largest cargo and tanker ships in the world with Arendalsvarvet and Götaverken beeing the biggest and the city of Gothenburg (hometown of Volvo) beeing the centerpoint of the tonnage built.
when i was in the U S Coast Guard in the 1960s i boarded the NS Savannah when it entered New York Harbor a few times. it was a beautiful ship. when we went aboard it was so quiet no engine vibration at all , no diesel oil fumes, and she was a very clean ship. the problem with this ship was the fact that people were so afraid of nuclear power and i don't think it carried much cargo at all. when you see the way this ship was constructed and the care that went into it's construction it is amazing. this was supposed to be the start of a nuclear merchant marine. it's sad it didn't happen.i built a model of this ship after i left the Coast Guard and this model had a place on it so you could see the reactor. this was a fantastic ship.
I visited the Savannah when it called at Rotterdam in the 1960s on a goodwill visit. I remember it being clean and quiet, i.e. much different than most of the rickety old coasters and elderly RN warships that I also had the chance to visit there. I also was allowed to visit HMS Dreadnought, the RN's first nuclear sub, when it made a goodwill visit there; it was much cleaner, less smellier and more spacious than diesel subs. I may have been the world's only 9-year-old boy who's been on two prototype nuclear vessels. Fun times!
I got to walk through her as a kid when she was being decomissioned in the Houston area because of my Dad's role in the process. Makes me sad for the progress we haven't made but thought we would. :(
@@uku4171 a combination of things. She was a technology demonstrator and a hybrid freighter/passenger liner, which meant she wasn’t profitable at either (although the small contingent of passengers sounds wonderful compared to the floating anthills and stomach bug breeding grounds that cruise ships today are!). Worse, many ports wouldn’t let her dock. I’m honestly surprised that she’s still intact 50 years after I saw her, and I sure hope they preserve her somehow.
The amount of nuclear waste produced is actually very small compared to the waste produced by other power methods and the waste can be recycled and the chemistry and processes to do so were developed back in the 1960s before they learned how plentiful uranium was in the earth so they gave up the recycling in favor of cheaper mining operations. We could easily recycle the waste if it wasn't cheaper to just mine new uranium. We know how.
Thanks for bring this old video available again. Have bragging rights , I worked at different times at New York Ship My starting job was in the south yard working on two nucellar subs, I believe was the Pollack and the Haddock, I believe. The Kitty Hawk was there too. Left there to as my Father was a boilermaker to pursuer my craft. I returned to NYS as work was slow and spent a few months on SAVANNAH. and returned later to work on CAMDEN. Watching the backgrounds seeing the skyline of the bridge and Southwark station where My son and Grandson now work. Just great to stumble onto the video. Thank You!!
What a time to be alive. I served on the Hawk for a number of years, up to her decomm. Ships are such a marvel, and to serve on one is something else. I wasn’t alive back then to experience this beauty, (Savanna) but I’d love to see her, if she’s still around.
While in he Navy in 1964 I visited family in Wilmington, North Carolina and with my cousin we visited and toured the Savanna that was moored there. This was the first nuclear powered vessel I ever stepped aboard. I later served on a Nuclear submarine until 1968 when I left the service. I've since been aboard around a dozen vessels powered by a nuclear reactor.
I remember seeing this as a film at school. I think Dinky Toys made a model of it. I think there was resistance to having a nuclear ship in harbour in much the same way that Concord was resisted in later years. I must say the PPE of the construction operatives would not find acceptance today! Wonderful that you have reissued this film.
@@whatisnuclear What was the original format? It does look good. I accidentally threw away a lost episide from a series by Orson Welles that was on Cartrivision. My gpa worked for Avco; got a bunch of players, camera and tapes when the format failed. Orson made the series for Sears, to offer along with the players. Sears owned the rights and never put the series onto another format. I didn't find out the episode was lost until many years after I threw all that stuff away.
I saw this ship years ago in Virginia on the James river when it was kept in the US Navy mothball fleet. It was anchored with a bunch of mothballed ships.
Trust me you don't want to know. After years of ecological protesters, She was decommissioned. Later years, they talked about how she was not economical, ignoring that she was never designed to make a profit.
I got to take a tour of her numerous times in the early 90s when she was at Patriots Point Museum moored next to the USS Yorktown cv-10 in Charleston South Carolina
Imagine this, it was 1984ish, my mom dropped me off at Patriots Point in Charleston SC while she went shopping downtown. I was 12 at the time, it was a Tuesday maybe, not one single other soul was there that day. The Savannah had a single gangway going up the side, I had complete free reign of that ship, among others, that entire day. I vividly remember everything about it, it looked exactly as in this video, I went into every space I could get into. It was in pretty good condition at the time, all the furnishings, drapes, carpets, etc, were intact. I remember the bridge, and swear there was a big window into the control room. Given I’m working on my 3rd decade in the Merchant Marine I sure would love to have that day now. Sadly the Savannah has fallen into disrepair, most of its originality long gone. I have those memories, and a little glass dish that I found in a closet with the ships profile etched onto it. In retrospect, as an adult, I really wish I had interest at the time of the mountains of brochures, menus, just tons of that stuff that was stuffed in rooms and closets.
Nuclear powered merchant ships would have the same problem as the US Navy fast attack submarine in which I operated the nuclear power plant, the number of ports that was open for visits was limited. Many countries, including the US, ban something they do not understand.
@@whatisnuclearI see you are buying the bullshit CO2 nonsense. Any real scientist that is not seeking a grant, fellowship or afraid to tell the truth, they will tell you the CO2 scare tactics have no basis in fact. The whole scheme is to cut out most sources of energy. Energy is life and the plan has been since the early 1900s to reduce and control the global population. Do some research and look up the 1974 Kissinger Report on population. In 1974, they were saying they intend to reduce the population through famine, war and pestilence and if those measures do not work, they will use other means. Without energy or carbon products, food production will go to only a tiny fraction of today's output. The Oligarchy has been planning and wargaming how they will bring about a total Reset of civilization. They want a few worker bees and the remainder will be culled out of the herd. They want the world as their private game preserve. When they go to the Grand Canyon or Yosemite or Victoria Falls, they don't want to see some dimple ass woman and her calf tatted husband chasing after 3 excited children. The CO2 nonsense is to erase the existence of the vulgar, unwashed masses and that includes you.
Not much of a problem. Savannah went all over Europe, transit Panama Canal. There are half dozen posters here saying they saw Savannah as a kid in Rotterdam, Germany. Blocked in Australia, Japan, NZ. Today, Australia has bought its own nuclear US made subs. NZ is still nuts.
In my U.S. Navy days, 1976 to 82, I lived on the USS TRUXTUN (CGN-35) for four years. Not one incident or accidental release of reactor radio activity. She ended her years on the sea and was dismantled. Not for Savannah. She sits quietly in Charleston S.C., welcoming the public onto her decks as a reminder of what once was.
She’s no longer moored in Charleston. The patriots point fleet has shrunk in size significantly. The clamagore was scrapped because of her hull condition, the Ingham was moved to key west. The comanche is now an artificial reef and the NS savannah was moved to Baltimore and still serves as a museum ship.
@@whatisnuclear I'll have to check them out! there's so many of these neat films that can be brought to 'real life', so to speak. lots of ww2 and cold war training/educational films come to mind. all those really cool, high-production civilian/defense contractor selling films. exciting!
@@whatisnuclear also i think it's really interesting that a nuclear ship became Merchant Marine history. only one of four ships of it's type in the world ever, and they got it.
A big complaint about cruise ships that stop in areas such as European ports is that the whole port town smells like fuel, the commercial world took a big step backwards by not adopting nuclear powered ships. Maybe with the upcoming standardized micro reactors we could move from bunker oil to nuclear power in the near future.
@@whatisnuclearwait it still exists?? I assumed it would have been scrapped decades ago. Havent finished this video yet but now i have to look into this afterwards
If nuclear powered marine freight could travel twice as fast for nearly the same cost, then they could cut the number of ships in half, thus using less resources like steel etc.
They would have to build a ship much faster than 22 knots. Heck, WWII Battleship USS New Jersey once did 35 knots before they powered the ship back. It had more left in it to go faster according to sailors that day.
@@kman-mi7su All US nuclear navy surface >30 kts. I expect 40 kts for a nuclear cargo vessel is possible in regular seas. There’s no fuel savings concern so why not.
@@jhoncho4x4 yes, though 1000 ton tank of diesel is depleted one trip. Fuel rod lasts two years of operation at least, maybe 20 if right kind of fuel and reactor. So, running at high speed has negligible increased fuel cost.
I think they manufactured a “problem” that would soon need a solution. I’ve seen several documentaries on this ship. I don’t think she lasted too long. If I recall correctly, a lot of ports in the worlds didn’t want t nuclear ship pulling in. It was also a bit strange the way they crossed it between a freighter and passenger ship. Only 60 passengers. It seems they already had in mind that it “might not work out” as a passenger ship, so it could fall back 100% (with renovations) as a freighter. Very good video. I enjoyed this. Thank you.
I love looking into the past in niche areas. But this film is perfectly 1950s - 1960s informative television. I watched it once for actual watching, but it is also great to listen to in the background as it's calm and reminds me of something id see in a Fallout game.
Interesting to hear that the turbine was delivered by de Laval turbine company, a Swedish brand! Savanna visited Helsingborg, Sweden, in september 1964 and dad and I went onboard. The only thing I remember is that we could look down into the turbine room from the visitors gallery (@23:10). Probably we went up on the bridge as well, but I don't remember that. @26:58 If I remember correct the labor problem was that the chief for the nuclear plant was paid most, which upset others onboard. (But I could be wrong).
In the spring of 1989 while she was at Patriot's Point in Charleston SC I spent several hours exploring that ship, I found it quite fascinating that nuclear power never took off in cargo ships.
@@whatisnuclearhe loved that ship. I got to go on it with him back in 2011. He received an award for his time as chief engineer. He passed away in 2012.
It is very interesting and has a learning experience that I never knew. I see Her everyday day at the Port of Baltimore Baltimore, where she is docked as a museum. Always wanted to tour the ship but never have great video
15:58 Good God Someone needs to get his butt kicked and sent back to apprentice level rigging school. And on a nuclear project too. I am amazed that they actually showed this in a film.
@@whatisnuclear A shackle sideways like that depends on the strength of the threads on the pin, not the strength of the actual shackle and pin material. Even that "little control rod" dropping into the reactor core would damage things enough to cause the core to be damaged enough that it would have to be removed and disassembled for inspection or REPLACEMENT. When dealing with nuclear reactors, there is no such thing as a little damage. Stupid or unsafe riggers usually end up having accidents in the parking lot.
@@whatisnuclear If you really want to be wondering about it, there is another rigging fail at 16:12. Shoulder less eye bolts. That type of eye bolt is only to be used in a straight line pull, no side loading. At all. There should have been a spreader bar between the crane hook and rigging. You might want to try looking at a riggers handbook, all kinds of interesting stuff in them. Bobs Rigging and Crane Handbook is one of the best.
The story doesn’t end here. Savannah is presently in Baltimore. I and some friends are working on reactivating the control-room for display/educational purposes. Here’s a video of me pressing “Lamp Test” on a couple of the panels, after powering up the panel for the first time in half a century: ruclips.net/video/UMOFP8V8dLU/видео.html . Note that the filaments of many of the incandescent bulbs are broken. We will eventually replace them with LEDs. Our hope is to have a modern computer simulating the reactor, so the instruments respond to control-inputs realistically. (MELTDOWN - GAME OVER) Interfacing with the 1957-style high-voltage AC circuitry will be a challenge, but not as big a challenge as interfacing with the pneumatic controls. Several areas of the ship have been restored, and they even found enough original Naugahyde to reupholster the Purser’s Lounge. Savannah is open to the public one day a year, usually the third Sunday in May. Someday it may be open to the public year-round, once all the asbestos and PCBs are removed. ;-)
How much of the original electronics were vacuum tube? I’ve gotten a control room tour, but they didn’t pop the door to the instrumentation room behind it :(
@@philipnasadowski1060 Near as I can tell, EVERYTHING was originally vacuum tube, however instruments were swapped in and out, and some of the later instruments had digital displays and presumably solid-state electronics, but those components have been removed so there appears to be nothing solid-state there now. Various things were removed as souvenirs, as the ship has been passed around for half a century and rigorous records were not kept. Examining the control panel is sort of like doing an archaeological dig, as we find someplace where there used to be something installed, then removed and puttied-over, then something else installed, so holes with different outlines overlap. We’re studying photo of the control panel from different years to determine what order things were done in.
Sounds like my life doing work in water / wastewater. Sometimes you get an ancient plant where the wiring doesn’t match anything. I haven’t seen tube electronics in one, and I like tube stuff…
I seem to recall reading that there was a TV camera in the containment, and a TV in the lounge, so passengers could see the excitement of a nuclear reactor in action 🙄 No surprise the sound system was tube - no transistors back then could even do the power output required. I’d love to see what tge original tube instrument racks were like. At such an early time, there likely wasn’t much standardization, or regard to packaging. Even color broadcasting gear from the era looked more experimental than something RCA was trying to sell…
Spent fuel as removed in 1971. I'm not entirely sure where it is now, but very likely in dry cask storage somewhere, like the waste from our commercial fleet. It's destined for deep geologic repository once we get the politics worked out, similar to the Onkalo repository in Finland. See: whataboutthewaste.com
The first time I saw this ship was November 1965, tied to a pier in Bremerhaven Germany. The next time I saw her around 1975. She was in the mud on the Savannah river just west of I-95. Sadly she was listing to starboard.
@@justgotohm4775 it was in the mud. I was going north on I-95. The ship was on the left. On the port side of the ship marsh. I assume you driving in the car behind me. That how you know I am wrong,correct?
@@JohnRodriguesPhotographer The Savannah River is not navigable for ships above Port Wentworth, it never has been, I95 is several miles inland of there. If you were driving over a large bridge, seeing the Savannah on the left in the mud, it was north bound Hwy 17. I literally grew up in downtown Savannah, and ironically worked on the very river we are discussing for decades. It’s cool you saw it, I have a picture on my wall of when it was coming into Savannah.
Wonderful footage, I just watched a guy with rope wrapped around a metal thing lower the reactor components through a wooden block and tackle. What the hell happened to us? kids don't know if they are boys or girls and this legend built a nuclear reactor with a bit of rope and a wooden block and tackle.
@@obsidianjane4413 Like teaching kids boys can change into girls? Or that America is the most evil nation on earth? Or that "white supremacists" are lurking behind every tree? Or that climate change is destroying the planet? Yeah, no reason to be upset or angry. Just chew an edible and chill. btw What are you getting done being so young, smart, calm and everything?
I agree that modern diesels are very efficient. Sadly, they emit lots of particulate air pollution and greenhouse gas, and require a limited fossil resource. For those three reasons, we'll want to switch over to nuclear fuel for shipping.
@@whatisnuclear I remember back in the 70's the experts said we only had 100 years of oil reserves left. The found reserves of oil is greater now. After treatment of exhaust gases solves that problem. Just look at current diesel trucks. The simplicity of a diesel engine to produce, to maintain and to train personnel to operate it will never be beat. If nuclear powered freighters were viable it would have already happened. Savanna is 60 years in the past. It was the only one for a reason.
@@whatisnuclear upwards of 90%+ of diesel pollution can be captured by fairly simple and cheap exhaust treatment systems. the mining of uranium and its processing has had profound environmental impacts. which is worse, Im not sure anyone could definitively answer. nuclear is clearly not the end-all-be-all for numerous reasons
The costs were enormous and she was the only one because anti-nuclear activists made the program politically unpopular and made foreign ports closed to her in the 60s and 70s. It if had continued and a serial production type and plant had been developed, nuclear propulsion would have been cheaper over the lifetime of the vessel than oil fueled. And that is without considering the tens of thousands of tons of CO2 and other pollutants each ship produces.
It wasn't the only one. Germany, Japan and the USSR also built nuclear powered cargo ships. But the USSR was the only one to get the whole concept to work. Russia now has over a dozen nuclear merchant ships.
Mrs. Eisenhower was there for the launching after the ship was complete, but that scene is indeed Mrs. Nixon starting the laying of the keel using an atomic wand! ruclips.net/video/Bo14h9_DKVY/видео.html
Large majority of nations let her in. Went all over Europe, transit Panama Canal, Blocked in NZ Australia, Japan, as they did with US nuclear naval ships at the time. NZ still does. Now, Australia buying its own nuclear submarines, as they understand they have to defend themselves from China.
@@toomanyuseridsrefueling ? Theoretically half life of uranium 238 is 4.5 billion years. With all the state of the art engineering the ship will run for 20-30 years continuously.
@@BHARGAV_GAJJAR I suppose, we could build nuclear powered ships with 30 years operation without refueling. But the half life of uranium has nothing to do with it, since nuclear reactors don't utilize the natural decay of uranium.
@@701983 In a nuclear reactor engineering physics, "half-life" is used to determine how quickly a radioactive isotope within the reactor's fuel decays, which is crucial for calculating the reactor's power output, managing fuel burnup, and determining the appropriate time to replace fuel rods, as each radioactive isotope has a specific half-life, meaning the time it takes for half of the atoms in a sample to decay into another element; longer half-lives indicate slower decay rates and longer fuel life, while shorter half-lives mean faster decay and potentially higher heat generation in the reactor core
@@BHARGAV_GAJJAR The actual fuel in a normal nuclear reactor is not uranium 238, but uranium 235, with a much shorter half life. However, the "only" 700 million years half life of U-235 is practically irrelevant for "fuel life" as well. The practical "fuel life" and heat production doesn't depend on the natural decay of uranium, but on the amount/speed of "artificial" (induced) nuclear fission in the reactor.
Look again. Our mothballed fleet is now practically nonexistent. The only reason that we maintain naval superiority in today's world is that our most likely adversaries have crap ships and worse maintenance.
@@Kaspertube513Compare the tonnage... the US still has like four times the tonnage. China has a lot of small vessels that aren't designed for extended blue water deployment. Since WWII the USN has far and away out deployed virtually every nation on the planet in both amount and distance from home. China still has a hard row to hoe to actually catch up to the USN's capabilities. The USN has operated a globe spanning blue water navy for centuries we wrote the book on fleet carrier operations 80 years ago. China has yet to venture outside their third island chain. When was the last time the Chinese had a naval victory against a foreign power?
Our mothballed fleets of virtually everything would require months if not years to reactivate. This isn't Most of the vessels and planes in "boneyards" are there because they are used up and outdated. Most of the stuff at Davis - Monthan AFB isn't worth a wet fart in today's combat environment. If they were we'd be sending them to Ukraine. IIRC about 1% of the aircraft in mothball storage could be reactivated within 30 days. A large portion of the fleet has been cannibalized to some degree.
@@JoeBLOWFHB when was the last time the US won a war ? Because they got recked in Vietnam, Afghanistan...the proxy war in Ukraine they have lost already.. China would absolutely destroy the US in a war that is a fact.
@@46bovine It wasn't just a "60's thing". Even into the 90's, a bar without ashtrays soon went broke due to lack of customers. In the 80's you could walk through Safeway with a lit cig while grocery shopping and nobody said a word. Ashtrays were available. Sometime in the 80's was also when the concept of separate seating for smokers really came into play. Before that, if you didn't want to see an ashtray on the dinner table, you just didn't go out to eat. Spent many hours in '85-'86 smoking cigarettes and drinking coffee with my friends in a corner booth at Denny's.
@@UQRXD No, but it was so widely excepted, I really don’t have the experience to answer that. I smoked years ago and never smoked in my house, also never smoked around non smokers if I was the odd man out.
Idk what you are talking about, we have more than people in the past could have even dreamed about. All of knowledge at our fingertips. I personally think this is a better future, especially if you know your history and just how bad it was in the past 120 years. Not trying to rag on you and you're entitled to your opinion, but we have it easy now comparatively. If you are speaking specifically about nuclear energy, yeah we should be building more plants. But if you are talking in general, then I think you have some blinders on to the reality of the past. If you personally are having a hard time, I apologize, I'm not trying to be mean. I just think a lot of us don't realize just how bad life was respective to what we enjoy now. And for more unsolicited opinions, which I apologize for in advance, in the past when things were hard or difficult we dealt with it and tried to fix it.
@@alexcrouse then I agree with you, my mistake. Thought you were complaining about how awful the world is to live in right now. But even so, that would be your prerogative so maybe I was a little out of line. Mea culpa
@@FreejackVesaHow do you arrive at the notion “all our knowledge at our fingertips”? Do you imagine you can do brain surgery with a smart phone, or have any real idea what life is like in a Uighur concentration camp?
Cargo ship my ass Eisenhower just wanted his own Nuclear Powered Yacht! This looks nothing like a cargo ship in fact it has 100 hotel like suites each outfitted with it's own personal bathroom! I hope Eisenhower at least got to use this beauty for diplomatic missions like to meet other foreign leaders!
Man, did they ever get that wrong about nuclear being the future of cargo or cruise ships. She only carried passengers a few times, and wasn't set up very well for cargo or passengers being a proof of concept. The sailors who were on the nuclear side were paid significantly more than the ones on the turbine side of the propulsion which is what caused the labor troubles mentioned.
The proof-of-concept ship wasn't ever intended to be the economical commercial ship. This was stated up front. We'll get more nuclear-powered merchant ships yet. corepower.energy/
@@whatisnuclear It would have been a much better investment to make a straight cargo or even better for the reactor in the middle, straight cruise ship. Trying to be everything to everyone never works out well.
This happens in the civvy nuke business as well. Been on Navy nukes? You bringing a security clearance? You just scored. One of the costs associated with running a civilian nuke power plant is recruiting ex-Navy.
@@toomanyuserids that’s ok to have a couple ex navy nuke and pay them well. The problem is nrc insisting plant needs 500 staff to run a reactor, when 12 can run a same size gas plant in combo w a roving maintenance crew.
Nothing like this could get ANYWHERE these days. It was really just a technology demonstrator with minimal cargo capacity but the commercial refueling infrastructure they would have had to attract never materialized. Beautiful failure though. The four big ships I'd personally like to sail on, the SS United States, the Normandie, the RMS Mauretania, and this. The latter three definitely won't happen and the first is vanishingly unlikely absent a couple $billion. Fascinating to see them moving paper sketches around, today it'd be all CATIA and Solidworks...
I saw the ship when she called at San Francisco in 1962. Good idea but too early. A nuke reactor would be great for these modern 100,000 ton container ships in service now. But it also calls for smart seamen.
If you are going to crew the ship with a random collection of Third Worlders, no matter how good they are, (a) the US won't give them a security clearance and (b) there's no program to train them to Rickover standards even if they could.
There's only one cargo ship with nuclear propulsion left today: the Russian Sevmorput I hope civilian atom tech rises again with a new level of technology
Well yeah, but ships go down all the time. Need to get the pod motors and steam electric generators, make the nukes float and you have some better security
There are more than 2000 large cellular container ships whose diesel engines consume equivalently all the oil produced by Saudi Arabia every year. Nuclear powered ships, rated at 87 megawatts, could relieve the planet of all that CO2 pollution.
I’m in my 50’s, so may the youth forgive me, but there’s something about the way these pieces were made that makes them special. When I watch, I can instantly remember my youth. It’s the narration, everything always being backed by a orchestral piece. It’s very well done. These days, I can’t read a CNN story without seeing two or three typos. I hope some young journalists can watch these older videos and put a new twist on older excellence.
Yeah💯🎯👍 But please stop watching CNN it Rots the Brain! 😉
There can't have been any typos in a modern story. All the "thumb-wizards" have spell-check on their smart phones. Yeah, right. I guess some think it's fine that there are few great newspapers anymore, but at least those professionals could spell and properly choose which word to use.
Well, your first mistake is having anything to do with CNN.
Thats funny I thought the same exact thing and Im 50. Reminds me of cartoons from the late 70s early 80s
@@shelbyseelbach9568 yeah, kinda ruined the first part of his story for me when i saw that...
What is most interesting is that a nuclear-powered ship pre-dates the container revolution. Although containers existed in 1964, the format wasn't standardized until 1968 and that is when things really took off.
Time for a nuclear-powered container-ship design, I guess!
@@whatisnuclear There actually is a nuclear-powered cargo ship (with ice-breaking capability) in active operation, the russian NS Sevmorput. Completed in 1988, taken out of service in 2007 but eventually refitted and refueled and returned to service in 2016.
@@whatisnuclear Also apparently there's at least two groups that recently started exploring the feasibility of (re)introducing nuclear propulsion for merchant ships: the NuProShip project of the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, and a South Korean coalition that includes several marine shipping companies and the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute.
@@MatthijsvanDuin They only use it once or twice a year, you know for effect
You know the first occurance of Containerisation on a purpose built vessel happened in my hometown - Fremantle, Western Australia - on a Ship called 'Kooringa' in 1964
I was so tickled to see this video come up. My dad was an engineer that helped with the design and construction of her reactor, and he had a model of the Savannah. The model isn't in good condition now (he passed away a couple of years ago), but even with being familiar with the ship from his stories and model, they really didn't grasp how beautiful a ship the Savannah really was.
Support for your loss. I appreciate the work he and many others did. Engineering ant like it used to be.
Most sexy ship I ever saw⚛️♥️✌️
A little intresting sidenote.
De Laval who made the Turbines for Svannah is a Swedish brand and was at the time the most renowned manufacturer of Turbines for industrial use, Infact most power plants around the world would have a De laval turbine in the age of Savannah.
Also Sweden was during the same era more or less bulding the largest cargo and tanker ships in the world with Arendalsvarvet and Götaverken beeing the biggest and the city of Gothenburg (hometown of Volvo) beeing the centerpoint of the tonnage built.
when i was in the U S Coast Guard in the 1960s i boarded the NS Savannah when it entered New York Harbor a few times. it was a beautiful ship. when we went aboard it was so quiet no engine vibration at all , no diesel oil fumes, and she was a very clean ship. the problem with this ship was the fact that people were so afraid of nuclear power and i don't think it carried much cargo at all. when you see the way this ship was constructed and the care that went into it's construction it is amazing. this was supposed to be the start of a nuclear merchant marine. it's sad it didn't happen.i built a model of this ship after i left the Coast Guard and this model had a place on it so you could see the reactor. this was a fantastic ship.
I visited the Savannah when it called at Rotterdam in the 1960s on a goodwill visit. I remember it being clean and quiet, i.e. much different than most of the rickety old coasters and elderly RN warships that I also had the chance to visit there. I also was allowed to visit HMS Dreadnought, the RN's first nuclear sub, when it made a goodwill visit there; it was much cleaner, less smellier and more spacious than diesel subs. I may have been the world's only 9-year-old boy who's been on two prototype nuclear vessels. Fun times!
I got to walk through her as a kid when she was being decomissioned in the Houston area because of my Dad's role in the process. Makes me sad for the progress we haven't made but thought we would. :(
Very sad indeed. Why was it decommissioned?
@@uku4171 a combination of things. She was a technology demonstrator and a hybrid freighter/passenger liner, which meant she wasn’t profitable at either (although the small contingent of passengers sounds wonderful compared to the floating anthills and stomach bug breeding grounds that cruise ships today are!). Worse, many ports wouldn’t let her dock. I’m honestly surprised that she’s still intact 50 years after I saw her, and I sure hope they preserve her somehow.
@@stevelacker358 Did they refuse to let her dock because of the nuclear reactor? Thanks.
@@uku4171I’m pretty sure that’s why. With atomic bombs and ignorance they’re were scared to let her doc thinking it could explode.
@@quantummandavid just sad how it's still stuck in people's minds that nuclear is dangerous and not infinitely cleaner than fossil
I went on the Savannah when she was in San Francisco in the early 60's on a school field trip.
No way! What was it like?
I was only 8 years old so I don't remember much. It was the first large ship I had ever been on. I thought it was very cool.
Do you glow at night like Homer Simpson??
My dad took me to see her when she was at the pier in san francisco. Small world..
😄 I remember when the Savannah was the cover story in our "Weekly Reader" newsletter! For some reason I had difficulty pronouncing "Savannah." 😎✌️
It's a real shame this didn't catch on modern pod motors and reactors would be a life changer on the pollution produced using heavy oils
yea you onli need like 11000 nuclear reactors
I didn't know deep-diving nukeboats had 11000 reactors 🤯🤯
@@anuvisraa5786still less pollution than all these ships spewing exhaust fumes
@@daszieher what are you going to do with the nuclear waste?
The amount of nuclear waste produced is actually very small compared to the waste produced by other power methods and the waste can be recycled and the chemistry and processes to do so were developed back in the 1960s before they learned how plentiful uranium was in the earth so they gave up the recycling in favor of cheaper mining operations. We could easily recycle the waste if it wasn't cheaper to just mine new uranium. We know how.
Thanks for bring this old video available again. Have bragging rights , I worked at different times at New York Ship My starting job was in the south yard working on two nucellar subs, I believe was the Pollack and the Haddock, I believe. The Kitty Hawk was there too. Left there to as my Father was a boilermaker to pursuer my craft. I returned to NYS as work was slow and spent a few months on SAVANNAH. and returned later to work on CAMDEN. Watching the backgrounds seeing the skyline of the bridge and Southwark station where My son and Grandson now work. Just great to stumble onto the video. Thank You!!
Those are some good bragging rights! Thanks for sharing. Glad you found the video.
What a time to be alive. I served on the Hawk for a number of years, up to her decomm. Ships are such a marvel, and to serve on one is something else. I wasn’t alive back then to experience this beauty, (Savanna) but I’d love to see her, if she’s still around.
While in he Navy in 1964 I visited family in Wilmington, North Carolina and with my cousin we visited and toured the Savanna that was moored there. This was the first nuclear powered vessel I ever stepped aboard. I later served on a Nuclear submarine until 1968 when I left the service. I've since been aboard around a dozen vessels powered by a nuclear reactor.
Nice. Which one of those was your favorite?
I remember seeing this as a film at school. I think Dinky Toys made a model of it. I think there was resistance to having a nuclear ship in harbour in much the same way that Concord was resisted in later years. I must say the PPE of the construction operatives would not find acceptance today! Wonderful that you have reissued this film.
In an era when there was much hope in the world .
You've done a terrific job with all of these digitizations - they look great 👍
Thanks!
No doubt a hi-def transfer machine. Filmed on 35mm, but was this copy a 16mm reduction print? It is certainly sharp as a tack. Great stuff! 😊
@@whatisnuclear
What was the original format?
It does look good.
I accidentally threw away a lost episide from a series by Orson Welles that was on Cartrivision.
My gpa worked for Avco; got a bunch of players, camera and tapes when the format failed. Orson made the series for Sears, to offer along with the players.
Sears owned the rights and never put the series onto another format.
I didn't find out the episode was lost until many years after I threw all that stuff away.
I am so excited. My step dad was the First Officer during its sea trials out of Galveston in 1964.
Great video! I took a tour of her when she was at Patriots Point in Charleston, SC.
I saw this ship years ago in Virginia on the James river when it was kept in the US Navy mothball fleet. It was anchored with a bunch of mothballed ships.
Awesome film. Thanks alot.
Amazing work digitising this
As a former Navy Line Officer,I enjoyed this. I'll have to see what happened to Savannah.
Trust me you don't want to know. After years of ecological protesters, She was decommissioned. Later years, they talked about how she was not economical, ignoring that she was never designed to make a profit.
I got to take a tour of her numerous times in the early 90s when she was at Patriots Point Museum moored next to the USS Yorktown cv-10 in Charleston South Carolina
I've gotta get on a tour of this ship myself. Sounds fun.
Absolutely awesome. Thanks for sharing.
Nothing can come close to old Documentaries
I had a model of the Savannah in the 60's. The future looked good back then.
Imagine this, it was 1984ish, my mom dropped me off at Patriots Point in Charleston SC while she went shopping downtown. I was 12 at the time, it was a Tuesday maybe, not one single other soul was there that day. The Savannah had a single gangway going up the side, I had complete free reign of that ship, among others, that entire day.
I vividly remember everything about it, it looked exactly as in this video, I went into every space I could get into.
It was in pretty good condition at the time, all the furnishings, drapes, carpets, etc, were intact. I remember the bridge, and swear there was a big window into the control room.
Given I’m working on my 3rd decade in the Merchant Marine I sure would love to have that day now. Sadly the Savannah has fallen into disrepair, most of its originality long gone.
I have those memories, and a little glass dish that I found in a closet with the ships profile etched onto it. In retrospect, as an adult, I really wish I had interest at the time of the mountains of brochures, menus, just tons of that stuff that was stuffed in rooms and closets.
She visited Rotterdam in 1966 and I, as a 13 year old had the chance to tour her. Never forgotten.
What a sweet ship !
Nuclear powered merchant ships would have the same problem as the US Navy fast attack submarine in which I operated the nuclear power plant, the number of ports that was open for visits was limited. Many countries, including the US, ban something they do not understand.
That can be changed as people learn that nuclear plants are far safer and have no particulate or CO₂ emissions.
@@whatisnuclearI see you are buying the bullshit CO2 nonsense. Any real scientist that is not seeking a grant, fellowship or afraid to tell the truth, they will tell you the CO2 scare tactics have no basis in fact.
The whole scheme is to cut out most sources of energy. Energy is life and the plan has been since the early 1900s to reduce and control the global population. Do some research and look up the 1974 Kissinger Report on population. In 1974, they were saying they intend to reduce the population through famine, war and pestilence and if those measures do not work, they will use other means.
Without energy or carbon products, food production will go to only a tiny fraction of today's output. The Oligarchy has been planning and wargaming how they will bring about a total Reset of civilization. They want a few worker bees and the remainder will be culled out of the herd. They want the world as their private game preserve. When they go to the Grand Canyon or Yosemite or Victoria Falls, they don't want to see some dimple ass woman and her calf tatted husband chasing after 3 excited children.
The CO2 nonsense is to erase the existence of the vulgar, unwashed masses and that includes you.
Not much of a problem. Savannah went all over Europe, transit Panama Canal. There are half dozen posters here saying they saw Savannah as a kid in Rotterdam, Germany.
Blocked in Australia, Japan, NZ. Today, Australia has bought its own nuclear US made subs. NZ is still nuts.
Its sad that people became so afraid of this type of power, it could have been a great boon to mankind.
GEE WAHLIE THIS SHIP SHURE IS SWELL! ISN'T SHE DREAMY?
Had no idea about this ship. Thanks!
In my U.S. Navy days, 1976 to 82, I lived on the USS TRUXTUN (CGN-35) for four years. Not one incident or accidental release of reactor radio activity. She ended her years on the sea and was dismantled.
Not for Savannah. She sits quietly in Charleston S.C., welcoming the public onto her decks as a reminder of what once was.
She’s no longer moored in Charleston. The patriots point fleet has shrunk in size significantly. The clamagore was scrapped because of her hull condition, the Ingham was moved to key west. The comanche is now an artificial reef and the NS savannah was moved to Baltimore and still serves as a museum ship.
my god this is the best scan of an vintage informative film i've *ever* seen. feels like im standing there with the dude on the bridge
Yeah I've been super happy with the scanning contractor. They're called ColorLab.
@@whatisnuclear I'll have to check them out! there's so many of these neat films that can be brought to 'real life', so to speak. lots of ww2 and cold war training/educational films come to mind. all those really cool, high-production civilian/defense contractor selling films. exciting!
@@whatisnuclear also i think it's really interesting that a nuclear ship became Merchant Marine history. only one of four ships of it's type in the world ever, and they got it.
A big complaint about cruise ships that stop in areas such as European ports is that the whole port town smells like fuel, the commercial world took a big step backwards by not adopting nuclear powered ships.
Maybe with the upcoming standardized micro reactors we could move from bunker oil to nuclear power in the near future.
just have to make it not convertible to a dirty bomb by some pirates.
MAkes me want to visit her in Baltimore.
Is the Savannah now a Museum ship?
yes she is@@ingocernohorsky
Thank you for posting this
My pleasure!
I'm just happy this ship still exist because technically we could build a new version if we wanted to, one that improves on the surviving design
More efficient maybe but the👀is perfection ⚛️✌️
THANKS FOR SHARING!
Really excellent scan! The Savannah is truly a gorgeous ship, I would love a chance to see it for myself.
Thanks! Yeah I need to hop on a tour one of these days while it's still an option.
@@whatisnuclearwait it still exists?? I assumed it would have been scrapped decades ago. Havent finished this video yet but now i have to look into this afterwards
@@jblob5764 been in Baltimore port since 2008, tho fall 2022 the reactor was decommissioned
@@MrRacerhacker Hope thats not baltimore maryland,the city is a nuke free zone, its says!!
She was one hell of a ship!!!!!
If nuclear powered marine freight could travel twice as fast for nearly the same cost, then they could cut the number of ships in half, thus using less resources like steel etc.
except that you lose 45 to 30 percent of the time in wait line to enter the port, and steel is cheap
They would have to build a ship much faster than 22 knots. Heck, WWII Battleship USS New Jersey once did 35 knots before they powered the ship back. It had more left in it to go faster according to sailors that day.
@@kman-mi7su All US nuclear navy surface >30 kts. I expect 40 kts for a nuclear cargo vessel is possible in regular seas. There’s no fuel savings concern so why not.
Fuel rods do wear out; X size fuel rod, will generate X amount of steam and then be depleted.
@@jhoncho4x4 yes, though 1000 ton tank of diesel is depleted one trip. Fuel rod lasts two years of operation at least, maybe 20 if right kind of fuel and reactor. So, running at high speed has negligible increased fuel cost.
I think they manufactured a “problem” that would soon need a solution. I’ve seen several documentaries on this ship. I don’t think she lasted too long. If I recall correctly, a lot of ports in the worlds didn’t want t nuclear ship pulling in.
It was also a bit strange the way they crossed it between a freighter and passenger ship. Only 60 passengers. It seems they already had in mind that it “might not work out” as a passenger ship, so it could fall back 100% (with renovations) as a freighter.
Very good video. I enjoyed this. Thank you.
It isn't too unusual for a freighter to have some passenger cabins.
I love looking into the past in niche areas. But this film is perfectly 1950s - 1960s informative television. I watched it once for actual watching, but it is also great to listen to in the background as it's calm and reminds me of something id see in a Fallout game.
Interesting to hear that the turbine was delivered by de Laval turbine company, a Swedish brand!
Savanna visited Helsingborg, Sweden, in september 1964 and dad and I went onboard. The only thing I remember is that we could look down into the turbine room from the visitors gallery (@23:10). Probably we went up on the bridge as well, but I don't remember that.
@26:58 If I remember correct the labor problem was that the chief for the nuclear plant was paid most, which upset others onboard. (But I could be wrong).
My God why wasn't she the first of many? We should have replicated this amazing feat many times over already
One of the most beautiful ships in my opinion
In the spring of 1989 while she was at Patriot's Point in Charleston SC I spent several hours exploring that ship, I found it quite fascinating that nuclear power never took off in cargo ships.
I think that will be happening soon to decarbonize the shipping industry.
I'm 72 now ,as a kid in Camden N.J. I saw this ship launched at the New York Shipyard 🤠
That is incredible. I bet that left an impression?
I also saw the Kitty Hawk launched!,that I remember more because of its size !
My grandfather is at 20:22
Amazing! He looks like he's having fun.
@@whatisnuclearhe loved that ship. I got to go on it with him back in 2011. He received an award for his time as chief engineer. He passed away in 2012.
Glad she was preserved.
It is very interesting and has a learning experience that I never knew. I see Her everyday day at the Port of Baltimore Baltimore, where she is docked as a museum. Always wanted to tour the ship but never have great video
22:57 ...stand by to deliver ships power to the Popsicle freezers!
and ice cream machines!
I swear if you pause it at 22:57 you will see the "navigator" looking into a radar scope while holding a popsicle... @@rearspeaker6364
15:58 Good God Someone needs to get his butt kicked and sent back to apprentice level rigging school. And on a nuclear project too. I am amazed that they actually showed this in a film.
I see what you mean! Not exactly kosher rigging. Good pick-up! 😊
It's not supposed to be sideways like that? Even for a lightweight little control rod, Weighing at least 1/10th the weight of the fuel assemblies?
@@whatisnuclear A shackle sideways like that depends on the strength of the threads on the pin, not the strength of the actual shackle and pin material. Even that "little control rod" dropping into the reactor core would damage things enough to cause the core to be damaged enough that it would have to be removed and disassembled for inspection or REPLACEMENT. When dealing with nuclear reactors, there is no such thing as a little damage. Stupid or unsafe riggers usually end up having accidents in the parking lot.
@@brianmuhlingBUM 15 year retired crane inspector. Journeyman Boilermaker 1976. Done a little rigging in my day.
@@whatisnuclear If you really want to be wondering about it, there is another rigging fail at 16:12. Shoulder less eye bolts. That type of eye bolt is only to be used in a straight line pull, no side loading. At all. There should have been a spreader bar between the crane hook and rigging. You might want to try looking at a riggers handbook, all kinds of interesting stuff in them. Bobs Rigging and Crane Handbook is one of the best.
Ламповое видео , с надеждой на будущее адекватное человечество.
A ship would suit an SMR's output just fine.
I remember when this ship was on display at Patriots Point in Charleston, S.C.
I can never forget the voice of this person when I was young! Do you know the name of this narrator? Thanks!
you had me at color tv
Why isn't this the standard today. Imagine how much fuel would be saved. We should totally revisit this
Nuclear is just basically a fancy steam engine in essence.. This ship only had a single screw though if I'm not mistaken, which I see as a limitation?
I remember her being berthed at Patriots Point in Charleston SC...
I remember as to having a model of this also, Revell I think
Wow, I have never seen the passenger areas before. They look really nice.
Steam power in a whole new way
The story doesn’t end here. Savannah is presently in Baltimore. I and some friends are working on reactivating the control-room for display/educational purposes. Here’s a video of me pressing “Lamp Test” on a couple of the panels, after powering up the panel for the first time in half a century: ruclips.net/video/UMOFP8V8dLU/видео.html . Note that the filaments of many of the incandescent bulbs are broken. We will eventually replace them with LEDs.
Our hope is to have a modern computer simulating the reactor, so the instruments respond to control-inputs realistically. (MELTDOWN - GAME OVER) Interfacing with the 1957-style high-voltage AC circuitry will be a challenge, but not as big a challenge as interfacing with the pneumatic controls.
Several areas of the ship have been restored, and they even found enough original Naugahyde to reupholster the Purser’s Lounge.
Savannah is open to the public one day a year, usually the third Sunday in May. Someday it may be open to the public year-round, once all the asbestos and PCBs are removed. ;-)
How much of the original electronics were vacuum tube? I’ve gotten a control room tour, but they didn’t pop the door to the instrumentation room behind it :(
@@philipnasadowski1060 Near as I can tell, EVERYTHING was originally vacuum tube, however instruments were swapped in and out, and some of the later instruments had digital displays and presumably solid-state electronics, but those components have been removed so there appears to be nothing solid-state there now.
Various things were removed as souvenirs, as the ship has been passed around for half a century and rigorous records were not kept.
Examining the control panel is sort of like doing an archaeological dig, as we find someplace where there used to be something installed, then removed and puttied-over, then something else installed, so holes with different outlines overlap.
We’re studying photo of the control panel from different years to determine what order things were done in.
Sounds like my life doing work in water / wastewater. Sometimes you get an ancient plant where the wiring doesn’t match anything. I haven’t seen tube electronics in one, and I like tube stuff…
@@philipnasadowski1060 Bob Adams recently got the sound system aboard Savannah working. It’s 100% tubes. There’s also a small B&W RCS TV studio.
I seem to recall reading that there was a TV camera in the containment, and a TV in the lounge, so passengers could see the excitement of a nuclear reactor in action 🙄
No surprise the sound system was tube - no transistors back then could even do the power output required. I’d love to see what tge original tube instrument racks were like. At such an early time, there likely wasn’t much standardization, or regard to packaging. Even color broadcasting gear from the era looked more experimental than something RCA was trying to sell…
23:34 ...prepare to fire a warning shot across her nose.
...I said across her nose! Not up it!
So what happens with the spent fuel and the reactor at the end of it's life
Spent fuel as removed in 1971. I'm not entirely sure where it is now, but very likely in dry cask storage somewhere, like the waste from our commercial fleet. It's destined for deep geologic repository once we get the politics worked out, similar to the Onkalo repository in Finland. See: whataboutthewaste.com
12:55 So that's where DEVO got their start..
Lol you're probably right!
It was at Patriots Point in South Carolina in 1986. I do not know what happened to it.
April 14, 1962. A rather interesting anniversary.
I've been aboard her when she was in Charleston in 92
The first time I saw this ship was November 1965, tied to a pier in Bremerhaven Germany. The next time I saw her around 1975. She was in the mud on the Savannah river just west of I-95. Sadly she was listing to starboard.
And?
Having worked for a decade in Savannah docking ships I assure you it was not west of I95. Maybe west of 17 at Ocean Terminal.
@@justgotohm4775 it was in the mud. I was going north on I-95. The ship was on the left. On the port side of the ship marsh. I assume you driving in the car behind me. That how you know I am wrong,correct?
@@JohnRodriguesPhotographer The Savannah River is not navigable for ships above Port Wentworth, it never has been, I95 is several miles inland of there. If you were driving over a large bridge, seeing the Savannah on the left in the mud, it was north bound Hwy 17.
I literally grew up in downtown Savannah, and ironically worked on the very river we are discussing for decades.
It’s cool you saw it, I have a picture on my wall of when it was coming into Savannah.
Wonderful footage, I just watched a guy with rope wrapped around a metal thing lower the reactor components through a wooden block and tackle. What the hell happened to us? kids don't know if they are boys or girls and this legend built a nuclear reactor with a bit of rope and a wooden block and tackle.
Perhaps its because old people are so busy being angry about what other people are doing that we can't get anything done?
But it was a very nice rope and tackle. Mere peasants can't buy those.
@@obsidianjane4413 Like teaching kids boys can change into girls? Or that America is the most evil nation on earth? Or that "white supremacists" are lurking behind every tree? Or that climate change is destroying the planet? Yeah, no reason to be upset or angry. Just chew an edible and chill. btw What are you getting done being so young, smart, calm and everything?
Low rpm direct drive diesels will power commercial ships forever. Very efficient.
I agree that modern diesels are very efficient. Sadly, they emit lots of particulate air pollution and greenhouse gas, and require a limited fossil resource. For those three reasons, we'll want to switch over to nuclear fuel for shipping.
@@whatisnuclear I remember back in the 70's the experts said we only had 100 years of oil reserves left. The found reserves of oil is greater now. After treatment of exhaust gases solves that problem. Just look at current diesel trucks. The simplicity of a diesel engine to produce, to maintain and to train personnel to operate it will never be beat. If nuclear powered freighters were viable it would have already happened. Savanna is 60 years in the past. It was the only one for a reason.
@@whatisnuclear upwards of 90%+ of diesel pollution can be captured by fairly simple and cheap exhaust treatment systems. the mining of uranium and its processing has had profound environmental impacts. which is worse, Im not sure anyone could definitively answer. nuclear is clearly not the end-all-be-all for numerous reasons
@@whatisnuclear May as well go back to sails.
@@perrycnnno, can’t catch the CO2. It has to stop
The enormous cost of a reactor far outweighed any profit from passengers or cargo. She was the only one.
The costs were enormous and she was the only one because anti-nuclear activists made the program politically unpopular and made foreign ports closed to her in the 60s and 70s.
It if had continued and a serial production type and plant had been developed, nuclear propulsion would have been cheaper over the lifetime of the vessel than oil fueled. And that is without considering the tens of thousands of tons of CO2 and other pollutants each ship produces.
@@obsidianjane4413 The people voted no. So it shall be.
It wasn't the only one.
Germany, Japan and the USSR also built nuclear powered cargo ships. But the USSR was the only one to get the whole concept to work.
Russia now has over a dozen nuclear merchant ships.
@@obsidianjane4413 You mean the liberal "woke" types who screw up anything good.
“They don’t build’em like that anymore!” SIC
Wow, when Americans dressed elegantly, and our Country was on the forefront of technology.
7:12 That's supposed to be First Lady Mamie Eisenhower. However it looks like Richard Nixon's wife, Patricia.
Mrs. Eisenhower was there for the launching after the ship was complete, but that scene is indeed Mrs. Nixon starting the laying of the keel using an atomic wand! ruclips.net/video/Bo14h9_DKVY/видео.html
Had a tour round her at Patriots Point, Charleston in the 80's, a shame she was uneconomical to opperate and very few nations would let her in.
Large majority of nations let her in. Went all over Europe, transit Panama Canal, Blocked in NZ Australia, Japan, as they did with US nuclear naval ships at the time. NZ still does. Now, Australia buying its own nuclear submarines, as they understand they have to defend themselves from China.
A nuclear ship or submarine can be virtually energy independent and that in itself is a big deal.
For a while. But even nukes need refueling and it'd be cripplingly expensive in the commercial world.
@@toomanyuseridsrefueling ? Theoretically half life of uranium 238 is 4.5 billion years. With all the state of the art engineering the ship will run for 20-30 years continuously.
@@BHARGAV_GAJJAR I suppose, we could build nuclear powered ships with 30 years operation without refueling.
But the half life of uranium has nothing to do with it, since nuclear reactors don't utilize the natural decay of uranium.
@@701983 In a nuclear reactor engineering physics, "half-life" is used to determine how quickly a radioactive isotope within the reactor's fuel decays, which is crucial for calculating the reactor's power output, managing fuel burnup, and determining the appropriate time to replace fuel rods, as each radioactive isotope has a specific half-life, meaning the time it takes for half of the atoms in a sample to decay into another element; longer half-lives indicate slower decay rates and longer fuel life, while shorter half-lives mean faster decay and potentially higher heat generation in the reactor core
@@BHARGAV_GAJJAR The actual fuel in a normal nuclear reactor is not uranium 238, but uranium 235, with a much shorter half life. However, the "only" 700 million years half life of U-235 is practically irrelevant for "fuel life" as well.
The practical "fuel life" and heat production doesn't depend on the natural decay of uranium, but on the amount/speed of "artificial" (induced) nuclear fission in the reactor.
Our militarys moth balled fleet of ships and planes is enormous ❤And could be reinstated in no time
Look again. Our mothballed fleet is now practically nonexistent. The only reason that we maintain naval superiority in today's world is that our most likely adversaries have crap ships and worse maintenance.
@@kevincrosby1760China has the biggest navy with most ships, the us is no longer the country it was in the 1990s
@@Kaspertube513Compare the tonnage... the US still has like four times the tonnage. China has a lot of small vessels that aren't designed for extended blue water deployment.
Since WWII the USN has far and away out deployed virtually every nation on the planet in both amount and distance from home. China still has a hard row to hoe to actually catch up to the USN's capabilities.
The USN has operated a globe spanning blue water navy for centuries we wrote the book on fleet carrier operations 80 years ago.
China has yet to venture outside their third island chain. When was the last time the Chinese had a naval victory against a foreign power?
Our mothballed fleets of virtually everything would require months if not years to reactivate. This isn't Most of the vessels and planes in "boneyards" are there because they are used up and outdated.
Most of the stuff at Davis - Monthan AFB isn't worth a wet fart in today's combat environment. If they were we'd be sending them to Ukraine. IIRC about 1% of the aircraft in mothball storage could be reactivated within 30 days. A large portion of the fleet has been cannibalized to some degree.
@@JoeBLOWFHB when was the last time the US won a war ? Because they got recked in Vietnam, Afghanistan...the proxy war in Ukraine they have lost already.. China would absolutely destroy the US in a war that is a fact.
21:48 Smoking and drinking in lounge, with kids present.
That was in the ‘60’s no one gave a $hit about it then!
@@46bovine It wasn't just a "60's thing". Even into the 90's, a bar without ashtrays soon went broke due to lack of customers. In the 80's you could walk through Safeway with a lit cig while grocery shopping and nobody said a word. Ashtrays were available.
Sometime in the 80's was also when the concept of separate seating for smokers really came into play. Before that, if you didn't want to see an ashtray on the dinner table, you just didn't go out to eat. Spent many hours in '85-'86 smoking cigarettes and drinking coffee with my friends in a corner booth at Denny's.
Umm, I’m 51 and remember folks smoking in the hospital, grocery stores, and commercial flights.
@@justgotohm4775 But was if fair to non smokers?
@@UQRXD No, but it was so widely excepted, I really don’t have the experience to answer that. I smoked years ago and never smoked in my house, also never smoked around non smokers if I was the odd man out.
It's depressing that even then we knew how to have better future, and we just didn't. Man, this ship was awesome!
Idk what you are talking about, we have more than people in the past could have even dreamed about. All of knowledge at our fingertips. I personally think this is a better future, especially if you know your history and just how bad it was in the past 120 years. Not trying to rag on you and you're entitled to your opinion, but we have it easy now comparatively. If you are speaking specifically about nuclear energy, yeah we should be building more plants. But if you are talking in general, then I think you have some blinders on to the reality of the past. If you personally are having a hard time, I apologize, I'm not trying to be mean. I just think a lot of us don't realize just how bad life was respective to what we enjoy now. And for more unsolicited opinions, which I apologize for in advance, in the past when things were hard or difficult we dealt with it and tried to fix it.
@@FreejackVesa yeah, you completely missed the point and projected hardcore. I'm talking about nuclear power. Atoms for Peace.
@@alexcrouse then I agree with you, my mistake. Thought you were complaining about how awful the world is to live in right now. But even so, that would be your prerogative so maybe I was a little out of line. Mea culpa
@@FreejackVesaHow do you arrive at the notion “all our knowledge at our fingertips”? Do you imagine you can do brain surgery with a smart phone, or have any real idea what life is like in a Uighur concentration camp?
25:25 Let me guess: The sedan is powered by a turbine?
Cargo ship my ass Eisenhower just wanted his own Nuclear Powered Yacht! This looks nothing like a cargo ship in fact it has 100 hotel like suites each outfitted with it's own personal bathroom! I hope Eisenhower at least got to use this beauty for diplomatic missions like to meet other foreign leaders!
Man, did they ever get that wrong about nuclear being the future of cargo or cruise ships. She only carried passengers a few times, and wasn't set up very well for cargo or passengers being a proof of concept. The sailors who were on the nuclear side were paid significantly more than the ones on the turbine side of the propulsion which is what caused the labor troubles mentioned.
Nuclear is the future of cargo ships. It’s inevitable, despite the current protests. They can’t keep plowing up the ocean on bunker fuel.
The proof-of-concept ship wasn't ever intended to be the economical commercial ship. This was stated up front. We'll get more nuclear-powered merchant ships yet. corepower.energy/
@@whatisnuclear It would have been a much better investment to make a straight cargo or even better for the reactor in the middle, straight cruise ship. Trying to be everything to everyone never works out well.
This happens in the civvy nuke business as well. Been on Navy nukes? You bringing a security clearance? You just scored.
One of the costs associated with running a civilian nuke power plant is recruiting ex-Navy.
@@toomanyuserids that’s ok to have a couple ex navy nuke and pay them well. The problem is nrc insisting plant needs 500 staff to run a reactor, when 12 can run a same size gas plant in combo w a roving maintenance crew.
"Great Video !!!"
Nothing like this could get ANYWHERE these days. It was really just a technology demonstrator with minimal cargo capacity but the commercial refueling infrastructure they would have had to attract never materialized.
Beautiful failure though. The four big ships I'd personally like to sail on, the SS United States, the Normandie, the RMS Mauretania, and this. The latter three definitely won't happen and the first is vanishingly unlikely absent a couple $billion.
Fascinating to see them moving paper sketches around, today it'd be all CATIA and Solidworks...
if a ship can be sexy... its this one
2:29
Did visit vessel tour in Rotterdam 1963....? When i was young & handsome😉😆Engine room with windows
Man.. the future used to look so cool
21:57 ... I think he's had a few too many "aperitifs" before heading to the dining room.
I saw the ship when she called at San Francisco in 1962. Good idea but too early. A nuke reactor would be great for these modern 100,000 ton container ships in service now. But it also calls for smart seamen.
If you are going to crew the ship with a random collection of Third Worlders, no matter how good they are, (a) the US won't give them a security clearance and (b) there's no program to train them to Rickover standards even if they could.
Problem is that a majority of ports around the world wouldn't allow it to dock.
There's only one cargo ship with nuclear propulsion left today: the Russian Sevmorput
I hope civilian atom tech rises again with a new level of technology
Интересно! Не знал, думал что, гражданские ,атомоходы делали тольков СССР.
Cool. I've never seen the whole thing.
Well yeah, but ships go down all the time. Need to get the pod motors and steam electric generators, make the nukes float and you have some better security
There are more than 2000 large cellular container ships whose diesel engines consume equivalently all the oil produced by Saudi Arabia every year. Nuclear powered ships, rated at 87 megawatts, could relieve the planet of all that CO2 pollution.
Yes. So count Saudi as the behind the scenes opposition.
2000 dirty nuke bombs too!!
Man is she gorgeous