Nuclear Propulsion for Naval Surface Vessels: Hearings Before the Committee ... Eighty-eighth Congress, First Session, Oct. 31, 31 and Nov. 13, 1963

Pirmais vāks

No grāmatas satura

Lietotāju komentāri - Rakstīt atsauksmi

Ierastajās vietās neesam atraduši nevienu atsauksmi.

Atlasītās lappuses

Bieži izmantoti vārdi un frāzes

Populāri fragmenti

231. lappuse - ASW escort be provided in the conventional manner. or should it envision added emphasis on nuclear submarines? How is replenishment of aviation fuel and ordnance to be accomplished ? Should the underway replenishment ships also be nuclear? How should the Navy be d"eployed around the world ? Would nuclear power speak for a modification of the present concept of the 1st, 2d, 6th, and 7th Fleets? Realizing that we will have a large number of conventionally powered surface vessels in the inventory for...
v. lappuse - The joint committee shall make continuing studies of the activities of the Atomic Energy Commission and of problems relating to the development, use, and control of atomic energy.
246. lappuse - If I can be of further assistance to you in this matter, please do not hesitate to call on me. Sincerely yours, CB JONES, Rear Admiral, US Navy, Chief of Legislative Affairs. Costs of nuclear propulsion in the "Enterprise...
99. lappuse - It is quite natural for the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Chief of Naval Operations to be concerned about what the future of the Navy should be.
iv. lappuse - That the United States adopt the policy of utilizing nuclear propulsion in all future major surface warships; and "3. That a vigorous research and development program for surface warship nuclear propulsion be continued.
167. lappuse - Nuclear propulsion has the fundamental advantage of permitting our warships to go anywhere in the world, to deliver their combat load and to return — all without logistic support. Oil-fired warships must be refueled every few days. This requires a vulnerable, worldwide distribution system to provide fuel oil for conventional ships.
167. lappuse - Certain cost effectiveness comparisons were made within the Defense Department and cited to support the contention that the advantages of nuclear propulsion in surface warships are not particularly significant. These studies, however, contain a fundamental weakness that, in the opinion of the Joint Committee, negates their validity. The comparisons cited were based on the assumption that in wartime, logistic support forces will be able to operate unhampered and without losses as they do in peacetime.
4. lappuse - JOHN O. PASTORE, Chairman, Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your letter to Secretary McNamara of October 9, 1963. Contrary to reports in the press, final decision with respect to the type of propulsion to be installed in the aircraft carrier authorized by Congress in fiscal year 1963 has not yet been made. As soon as we are in a position to do so, we will inform you of our action with respect to this matter. We shall, of course, be happy to cooperate in the...
64. lappuse - ... propaganda. Many times we have spent large sums only to achieve illusory gains that weren't really there. More than once a whole program has slipped into nothing after vast expenditures. I have learned that you have got to push on with those technical advancements which show true military advantages even though the new hardware which does more also costs more. Further. I have learned, often through bitter experience, that real improvements in our hardware are only made through building and evaluating...
245. lappuse - As a general guide, I am interested in achieving the most efficient possible naval forces, defining efficiency as achieving the most beneficial military results for a given expenditure. If nuclear propulsion permits an increase in this efficiency, then advantage should be taken of it.

Bibliogrāfiskā informācija