Talk:A1B reactor

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the A1B reactor article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Energy Start‑class Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Maritime / Technology / North America / United States Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Ships Start‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

United States: Military history Start‑class Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Design?

I could be wrong, but even though this is Betchel's first design, should it be the A5W? Or have I just gotten so used to Westinghouse plants that I've mistaken how it goes with other developers in the mix? Izuko 19:10, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The 'W' designated Westinghouse, but Bechtel bought out the Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory (BAPL) a few years ago. The 'B' actually stands for Bechtel and not Bettis. While it's essentially the same folks, the parent company is different. 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Ahhh, sorry... so used to dealing with their Bettis Labs division that I kind of forgot the rest of the company existed. Izuko 04:10, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

References

I've added a cite-needed here as part of the Short article clean-up project. I believe that the relevant cite is to Jane's International Defense Review, probably October 2006. Unfortunately I don't happen to have that periodical. If anyone out there does and can verify the citation, please drop it in. -- Courier 21:52, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure a cite needed is needed, although it does require reading between the lines a little. The text in the Bechtel reference already linked states "Earlier this year, the Navy announced that the reactor plant for its new class of aircraft carriers would be known as the A1B. The “B” stands for Bechtel—which operates the lead laboratory for the design of the plant—and the “1” denotes that this is Bechtel’s first design of a reactor plant for an aircraft carrier (represented by the “A”)." Since there is only one new class of carriers in development, it stands to reason that the Gerald R. Ford class is the class they are talking about. I could also just have someone take a picture of me wearing my spiffy golf jacket with the CVN78 and A1B logos to prove it, but that would be both original research and a COI, wouldn't it? :) 155.104.37.18 (talk) 19:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From Department of Energy Strategic Plan (May 2011)

Targeted Outcomes: • Provide the United States Navy with an A1B reactor plant by 2015 for nextgeneration aircraft carrier that increases core energy, provides nearly three times the electric plant generating capability, and requires half the number of reactor department sailors as compared to today’s aircraft carriers. • Provide the United States Navy by 2026 with a reactor plant that will extend core lifetime for the next-generation ballistic missile submarine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.254.147.8 (talk) 17:01, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Power?

The Stub lists that the reactor has 300MW of power. Is this electric or thermal power?--153.100.131.12 (talk) 10:00, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is electrical power, nowhere close to the output power or the core power. A4W was listed at 550 MW.