The (Current year) General Political/Salma Hayek discussion Thread Part V

[KG1]

JFC listen to this babbling idiot...

Wut?

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.



Hahahahahahaha.


Ha.



What a joke. I had to look at that ugly ***** Kathy griffin holding trumps head up, listen to **** trump for 4 years, and after a weekend of football fans screaming **** Biden they wanna talk about criminal charges?!




Hahahahahahaha.



**** Biden.

 

[actaeon277]

It's almost like they stopped teaching the word "hypocrisy".

 

[printcraft]

 

[printcraft]

No more mean tweets... bidet will save us... America's back man.

 

[foszoe]

Has any president screwed up so much in so little time?

I think this guy has done more to tick me off in less than a year than Obama did in 8.

 

[KG1]

Has any president screwed up so much in so little time?

I think this guy has done more to tick me off in less than a year than Obama did in 8.

He's trying really hard.

 

[KLB]

He's trying really hard.

No he isn't. He doesn't have the mental facilities to try. It is those propping him up that are doing such a bang-up job.

Almost like this movie, except they haven't gotten a double for him. They just trot him out there in a daze.

 

[printcraft]

 

[printcraft]

No he isn't. He doesn't have the mental facilities to try. It is those propping him up that are doing such a bang-up job.

Almost like this movie, except they haven't gotten a double for him. They just trot him out there in a daze.

Has anyone ever seen him give an off the cuff speech? Like ever?
He ALWAYS has a teleprompter and ditches questions immediately after.
He doesn't write anything, he's just a meat puppet.
Even with a prompter he has trouble keeping it together.
This is a guy who has been a politician for 50 years and he still can't get it right.

 

[printcraft]

 

[BigRed]

Isn't "garrote" a word from old French?

 

[nonobaddog]

Isn't "garrote" a word from old French?

I think it is Spanish... and kind of adopted by the Italian mob.

 

[BigRed]

I think it is Spanish... and kind of adopted by the Italian mob.

Meh....Maybe the French can learn it.

 

[KG1]

"Schmucky" Schumer sneezes at a presser and his colleagues scramble to put their masks on. Freak'n hilarious.

 

[actaeon277]

I've been following the Australian Sub Debacle.
What a clusterf***
No wonder the Australians are dumping France. Granted, the Australians set themselves up the way they worked this out.

But... I'm not sure they are going the right way about it.
I'm glad that some Americans are going to get the contract and make some $$$
BUT... I'm not sure they're going to buy enough subs to make it worthwhile for them.
I'm thinking "infrastructure and support".
They're going to need a training and supply pipeline.
We've set that up. We've gotten pretty good about it.
But we also have a fair amount of subs, which brings the cost per sub down.
Australia is only going to buy so many.
But they will still have to have the schools and parts.

Personally, I think they'd have been better off maybe hitting up the Germans. They make some pretty good conventional subs.

 

[printcraft]

I've been following the Australian Sub Debacle.
What a clusterf***
No wonder the Australians are dumping France. Granted, the Australians set themselves up the way they worked this out.

But... I'm not sure they are going the right way about it.
I'm glad that some Americans are going to get the contract and make some $$$
BUT... I'm not sure they're going to buy enough subs to make it worthwhile for them.
I'm thinking "infrastructure and support".
They're going to need a training and supply pipeline.
We've set that up. We've gotten pretty good about it.
But we also have a fair amount of subs, which brings the cost per sub down.
Australia is only going to buy so many.
But they will still have to have the schools and parts.

Personally, I think they'd have been better off maybe hitting up the Germans. They make some pretty good conventional subs.

Are the nuke subs 25 yr fueled like the carriers?

 

[actaeon277]

Are the nuke subs 25 yr fueled like the carriers?

Well... it depends.
First, the 15 or 25 or 30 year estimate is.. an estimate. Like a gas tank, it depends on how you drive it. Only spend 10 percent of your time at sea, and only go "ahead 1/3" and your reactor will last a lot longer. Spend 50 percent of your time at sea, and spend 75 percent of your time at "ahead flank" and it won't last nearly as long.

Earlier subs, like the one I was on, used a S5W reactor. Supposedly a 15 year life. So with a 30 year sub, you'd have one refueling.
Technology was still new, and lots of breakthrough advances would make the technology obsolete too fast. But.. refueling is a copper plated ***** so you don't want to do it too often.
Now, the nuke technology changes are slower. So, because refueling sucks so much, they design the core to last longer. More like 30 years. A sub will generally be wore out in 30. A carrier will probably need to refuel once. After all, carriers don't wear out as fast, because they don't have repeated pressure compressing the hull, then releasing pressure when going shallow, over and over.

For fuel usage, and for damage to the plant to to neutron irradiation, they use EFPH, effective full power hours

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Well... it depends.
First, the 15 or 25 or 30 year estimate is.. an estimate. Like a gas tank, it depends on how you drive it. Only spend 10 percent of your time at sea, and only go "ahead 1/3" and your reactor will last a lot longer. Spend 50 percent of your time at sea, and spend 75 percent of your time at "ahead flank" and it won't last nearly as long.

Earlier subs, like the one I was on, used a S5W reactor. Supposedly a 15 year life. So with a 30 year sub, you'd have one refueling.
Technology was still new, and lots of breakthrough advances would make the technology obsolete too fast. But.. refueling is a copper plated ***** so you don't want to do it too often.
Now, the nuke technology changes are slower. So, because refueling sucks so much, they design the core to last longer. More like 30 years. A sub will generally be wore out in 30. A carrier will probably need to refuel once. After all, carriers don't wear out as fast, because they don't have repeated pressure compressing the hull, then releasing pressure when going shallow, over and over.

For fuel usage, and for damage to the plant to to neutron irradiation, they use EFPH, effective full power hours

 

[actaeon277]

View attachment 158990

Did I not break it down Barney style enough?