Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Wednesday June 03, @05:34PM   Printer-friendly

https://www.slashgear.com/2184557/uss-supercarrier-gerald-r-ford-nuclear-power-plant/

The USS Gerald R. Ford, first deployed in late 2022, is a truly remarkable ship. It already earned the distinction of being the world's largest aircraft carrier and, as of May 2026, is on track to earn another impressive distinction. The over 1,100-foot-long supercarrier is being fitted to serve as a floating nuclear power plant for an on-land naval installation. The test is slated to take place at Naval Station Norfolk, located in Norfolk, Virginia, sometime in summer 2026.

The carrier and its twin A1B nuclear reactors — which were developed specifically for the Gerald R. Ford — will power the entire base. While the United States military has kept many specifics of the A1B under wraps, estimates suggest that a single A1B produces about 700 MWt; two of them, then, would generate 1,400 MWt. This is approximately 25% more power than the A4W reactors that powered Nimitz-class vessels. Of course, it's not just a matter of plugging it into the grid, and the U.S. Navy will conduct extensive research and testing to safely and effectively move power from the ship to land.

While this is a fascinating feat on paper, what exactly is the point of running a naval base off of a supercarrier's nuclear reactors? According to those involved with the effort, this project is all about preparedness.

Naturally, there is a point behind a test of this magnitude. The idea behind running a naval base off the USS Gerald R. Ford's nuclear reactors is to enhance the U.S. military's disaster response capabilities. Should a natural disaster or an enemy attack take out a region's power grid, these carriers could act as floating generators until the affected areas get back on their feet. As more Ford-class carriers — like the USS John F. Kennedy, set for arrival in 2027 – come online, the Navy could have a fleet of floating power stations ready to respond to multiple worst-case scenarios across the country.

The Navy is confident that this capability can help in military and civilian capacities alike. During a May 2026 House Armed Services Committee hearing, Acting Secretary of the Navy Hung Cao suggested that these vessels could also help provide electricity to repair military bases and supply fresh water to drought-stricken areas (via Nuclear Newswire). Of course, whether the USS Gerald R. Ford can actually do any of this depends on the results of this test.

The USS Gerald R. Ford might not be the most decorated U.S. Navy aircraft carrier in history, but there's no denying its place in the history books. In addition to being notably enormous, it could very well be the saving grace for disaster-stricken areas in need of electricity.


Original Submission

This discussion was created by janrinok (52) for logged-in users only. Log in and try again!
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2) by Barenflimski on Wednesday June 03, @06:05PM

    by Barenflimski (6836) on Wednesday June 03, @06:05PM (#1444382)

    Sounds like they're about to setup an AI cluster on base. Its certainly not cuz they're going "green."

  • (Score: 2, Troll) by Whoever on Wednesday June 03, @06:47PM (7 children)

    by Whoever (4524) on Wednesday June 03, @06:47PM (#1444386) Journal

    Article credibility reduced by using non-existent measurement.

    It's probably an AI hallucination.

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by istartedi on Wednesday June 03, @06:59PM

      by istartedi (123) on Wednesday June 03, @06:59PM (#1444387) Journal

      An "at" got chopped up and stuck in the cable. It happens a lot with these systems.

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
    • (Score: 4, Informative) by turgid on Wednesday June 03, @06:59PM

      by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday June 03, @06:59PM (#1444389) Journal
    • (Score: 5, Informative) by turgid on Wednesday June 03, @07:04PM (4 children)

      by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday June 03, @07:04PM (#1444391) Journal

      Yes, with nukular reactors, their power output is quoted in megawatts thermal (MWt). In a power station, you will also hear of the ouput in megawatts electrical (MWe). With a PWR (submarine/US Navy aircraft carrier power plant) you can expect a maximum efficiency of 30% on a very good day. So with 700MWt you can expect about 200-210MWe for powering the ship. The rest goes to heating up the sea. The fish are very appreciative.

      • (Score: 1, Troll) by Whoever on Wednesday June 03, @07:45PM (3 children)

        by Whoever (4524) on Wednesday June 03, @07:45PM (#1444395) Journal

        Thanks for this explanation. However, as you point out MWt is an irrelevant measurement for this article and MWe is the only important number.

        • (Score: 3, Touché) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday June 03, @08:13PM

          by JoeMerchant (3937) on Wednesday June 03, @08:13PM (#1444399)

          Is MWe the important number, or MWd - MegaWatts delivered? Because getting those megawatts off the ship and into the grid is going to be less than 100% efficient.

          --
          🌻🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
        • (Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 03, @08:20PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 03, @08:20PM (#1444400)
        • (Score: 2) by VLM on Friday June 05, @12:15PM

          by VLM (445) on Friday June 05, @12:15PM (#1444534)

          Neither matter because both are magic numbers presented without context.

          Your average USA person just going about the day uses about 1 KW continuously, so an aircraft carrier will power maybe 100K people. Which is great if, say, New Bedford in MA lost external power from a hurricane, but won't be even a drop in the bucket if LA lost all power.

          I propose a more likely use is emergency power in some kind of Fukushima event. Ya had a natural disaster and have no coolant pumps? Well the carrier can sail over in a week and become a fixed target to run the coolant pumps. Of course the plant will melt down in an hour... So its impractical but less impractical than trying to run NYC.

          A somewhat more realistic scenario is opfor takes out ONE transmission tower and the carrier can take up the slack for a couple hours until they fix it.

          Two problems: Carriers are dead if they can't move so being tied to a pier isn't going to help much when deployed. The power lines to carry a fraction of a GW are non-trivial, you can put a GW on a barge and park it next to a pier and technically the pier is rather unlikely to have a GW of power service either in or out.

          Possibly the military plan is for zero safe zone lifestyle, the carrier will never shut down completely and go on shore power, it'll always keep the CIWS and short range defense powered up. So you can't drone attack it when its not deployed because its internally powered off at least one reactor 24x365 for its entire working career as a carrier.

          Carriers are the modern equivalent of the WWII battleship... Expensive, impressive, legacy, ineffective.

  • (Score: 4, Funny) by turgid on Wednesday June 03, @07:00PM (7 children)

    by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday June 03, @07:00PM (#1444390) Journal

    Let's see what happens this Christmas. They might put a fairy on top of the mast.

    • (Score: 5, Funny) by Gaaark on Wednesday June 03, @08:53PM (5 children)

      by Gaaark (41) on Wednesday June 03, @08:53PM (#1444401) Journal

      I'm waiting for the USS Donald J. Dump that will be used as an Eco-toilet-porto-potty.

      It will travel all over the world so people of all types can show how they feel about him.

      It will, of course, be painted orange and have TACO stickers as hand-outs for the kiddies... especially the under-age girls...

      --
      --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
    • (Score: 4, Informative) by zocalo on Thursday June 04, @12:43PM

      by zocalo (302) on Thursday June 04, @12:43PM (#1444438)
      That might be about all it's realistically good for. It's an interesting idea, but natural disasters that take out power grids are not just limited to the coastline, and even less so those parts of it deep enough for something the size of the Gerald R. Ford to anchor alongside and string a few cables ashore.

      Meanwhile, the Chinese are looking into a more practical, and far more versatile, solution [interestingengineering.com] to a similar problem. One of these approaches will help somewhere like New Orleans when it next gets flooded, the other won't - or rather, if it's a viable power delivery solution then there's no longer any point...
      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(1)