Westwall, about that St.Petersburg Wedding:
Was it something like this:
You must have the same Bavarian beer "drinking problem" the Siamese Cat accused me of.
Perhaps it is because you characters are clogging up this thread with storage-space wasting pictures which are totally irrelevant to the topic of the thread!
I don't need to make that amount of effort about something so very well-known.
[emphases added]
They have quite deliberately denied patent facts -- or not even acknowledged them. They have just repeated foolishness over and over again.
I`m not in the habit to read hate-mail, "..pervy stalker, gay stalkers".. but now that I`ve seen it I`ll answer.
Did you ?
There are none on naval reactors because they at sea and use liquid inter coolers but all reactor personnel, the US Navy included got trained on land based Westinghouse reactors that do use cooling towers.
P.S. Upernavik is smack along the WARM Nares Strait route where the Vikings built a settlement during the 13th century. As far as I know Vikings did not have ice-breakers.
As if any picture posted would be stored by the usmessageboard.com server. The only thing the server stores is the text and the user settings and the rest appears from the sources that archived a picture. In this case it was guardian.co.uk/film/2010/oct/22/psycho-horror-hitchcock.
Norman you can complain to the admin how I "deliberately used up their memory space" by posting this picture...and have no doubt that you have no idea what it`s got to do with the completely imbecilic claim you made..A theoretical plate in many separation processes is a hypothetical zone or stage in which two phases, such as the liquid and vapor phases of a substance, establish an equilibrium with each other. Such equilibrium stages may also be referred to as an equilibrium stage, ideal stage, or a theoretical tray. The performance of many separation processes depends on having a series of equilibrium stages and is enhanced by providing more such stages. In other words, having more theoretical plates increases the efficacy of the separation process be it either a distillation, absorption, chromatographic, adsorption or similar process
So the fact I can run an "IL-2 Sturmavik" simulator on my computer means that the WWII Sturmaviks were computerized, right? At least that's what your logic claims.
Yep. That's exactly how it was, as anyone with actual experience in the field would tell you. Naturally, you avoid anyone with actual experience in the field.
That's not the control room (EOS). That's the equipment room behind EOS. I forget the name of it, as it's been 20 years. If you turned off that machine with the display, it wouldn't affect the reactor at all, as it's some sort of test gear.
What's more, S9G (not SG9) isn't particularly relevant, given it's a 2000 design, and I'm referring to D2G, a 1960 design. Could you tell us what computers were running the reactor software in 1960?
Now _this_ is a reproduction of a navy reactor control room. (The teletype and TV have been added, and do not exist in an actual EOS.)
That's from a submarine, as I can tell from the ring bus on the Electrical Control Panel, but the EOS on a cruiser looked very similar. Replace the teletype with a desk, and that's where I sat. I knew what every gauge, light and switch was, what it was supposed to read, what the alarms meant and how to respond, as did the 3 operators at their stations. That would be why no software was necessary. We had people, and people don't crash like software does.
Also a 1960-era design, meaning no software.
Again, no software. Software crashes. Software crash on nuclear reactor, very bad. I can't tell you what the brand new ships are using now, but in 1990, it's for damn sure no reactors were depending on some MS-DOS based control software. And checking up on the Iconics Genesis plant control software, I find no mention from any source of it ever being used with Nuclear Power anywhere.
I went through OCS in Newport RI, yes. However, that link is incomplete, since one could also be commissioned through the Naval Academy, ROTC or ECP. Plus there was the rare O-5 aviator who was on the command track for an aircraft carrier, and thus had to become reactor qualified.
Correct, but that's not what I asked. I asked what the cooling tower does at a nuclear plant.
Both GE and Westinghouse reactors. And they're moving away from land-based. In South Carolina, they have 2 decommissioned boomer boats that are permanently tied to the pier and used for training. Missile tubes filled with concrete to comply with SALT II, and propellers replaced with water brakes.
Seems to me that you are stalking me...lurking 24/7 refreshing the screen if somebody you don`t like posted something.
So the fact I can run an "IL-2 Sturmavik" simulator on my computer means that the WWII Sturmaviks were computerized, right? At least that's what your logic claims.
Yep. That's exactly how it was, as anyone with actual experience in the field would tell you. Naturally, you avoid anyone with actual experience in the field.
That's not the control room (EOS). That's the equipment room behind EOS. I forget the name of it, as it's been 20 years. If you turned off that machine with the display, it wouldn't affect the reactor at all, as it's some sort of test gear.
What's more, S9G (not SG9) isn't particularly relevant, given it's a 2000 design, and I'm referring to D2G, a 1960 design. Could you tell us what computers were running the reactor software in 1960?
Now _this_ is a reproduction of a navy reactor control room. (The teletype and TV have been added, and do not exist in an actual EOS.)
That's from a submarine, as I can tell from the ring bus on the Electrical Control Panel, but the EOS on a cruiser looked very similar. Replace the teletype with a desk, and that's where I sat. I knew what every gauge, light and switch was, what it was supposed to read, what the alarms meant and how to respond, as did the 3 operators at their stations. That would be why no software was necessary. We had people, and people don't crash like software does.
Also a 1960-era design, meaning no software.
Again, no software. Software crashes. Software crash on nuclear reactor, very bad. I can't tell you what the brand new ships are using now, but in 1990, it's for damn sure no reactors were depending on some MS-DOS based control software. And checking up on the Iconics Genesis plant control software, I find no mention from any source of it ever being used with Nuclear Power anywhere.
I went through OCS in Newport RI, yes. However, that link is incomplete, since one could also be commissioned through the Naval Academy, ROTC or ECP. Plus there was the rare O-5 aviator who was on the command track for an aircraft carrier, and thus had to become reactor qualified.
Correct, but that's not what I asked. I asked what the cooling tower does at a nuclear plant.
Both GE and Westinghouse reactors. And they're moving away from land-based. In South Carolina, they have 2 decommissioned boomer boats that are permanently tied to the pier and used for training. Missile tubes filled with concrete to comply with SALT II, and propellers replaced with water brakes.
Well, at least we now know your level of ability. Sturmovik computer game expert you may be (though you can't seem to spell it correctly)....engineering officer in the USN you ain't.
