Realised that most modern submarines (and some aircraft carriers) use nuclear power, but destroyers and frigates don’t. I don’t imagine it’s a size thing, so I’m not sure what else it could be.
In: Engineering
The USN actually used to operate several nuclear powered non sub or carrier ships, famously the CGN-9 Long Beach. These got phased out due to costs, the amount of money for building and up keeping that many surface ships with reactors was not cost effective. Putting reactors on carriers (flagships) and submarines (which need to stay underwater for a long time without visiting port) was more worthwhile, especially due to budget cuts following the end of the Cold War.
The USSR, inherited by the Russian Federation, had/have a series of Heavy Missile Cruisers and Ice Breakers that are/were nuclear power.
* [Kirov-class battlecruiser](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirov-class_battlecruiser?wprov=sfla1)
* [Lenin Ice Breaker, 1957](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin_%281957_icebreaker%29?wprov=sfla1)
Just curious, who told you that there weren’t any surface nuclear powered vessels other than aircraft carriers?
They are not common because the cost for civilian use is prohibitively expensive, and only major military powers are able to afford to maintain them.
The Kirov was designed to be a Carrier Strike Group killer, and were considered one of the most powerful surface combat ships built.
Side note: On paper, they are scary. In reality, knowing how Russia maintains their equipment, it might be a glass cannon if it’s weapons systems even are functional
What is the ultimate limiting factor for submarines to stay under? Would it be food for the crew?
OP should note that in 1970s the US navy also operated nuclear powered cruisers, the last of which was decommissioned in 1980. There was a move for entirely nuclear powered carrier battle groups but the advent of the Arliegh Burk class of missile destroyers became cost prohibitive for nuclear power.
As a general rule of thumb, the answer to “Why don’t we use nuclear for…?” is always because it is prohibitively expensive to do so.
The USS Long Beach was a nuclear powered cruiser but the US Navy found her too expensive to operate so future reactors were limited to subs and aircraft carriers.
It’s not needed on most surface ships as they refuel at sea. Submarines need the stealth. Aircraft carriers would require too much fuel and are huge so a reactor makes sense.
They used to have nuclear powered cruisers and they were extremely expensive.
It’s mostly the U.S. navy that use’s nuclear power because they need the long range and endurance to stay underwater for a very long time. Especially nuclear ballistic missile submarines, they basically sneak to some secret spots in the ocean and either sit on the ocean floor (if shallow enough) or go to a depth where they can hide under a layer of different temperature water or salinity. And drift with the ocean currents.
Diesel engines are cheaper to build operate and maintain. So a lot of nations use those, with the understanding they have to surface periodically. Where surfacing often means rising to a depth where they can extend a snorkel and draw air to run the engines and recharge the batteries.
Newer diesel engine submarines are incredibly quiet, and can be quieter than a nuke which has to run the pumps to cool the reactors. Technologies such as using sterling engines, liquid oxygen and others can be quieter than a nuke
Thanks to everyone that also chimed in with the other very valid reasons that I failed to include.
Nuclear powered ships are incredibly expensive to operate. It conveys extensive operational advantages many others have already explained, but it comes at the cost of needing to spend extremely large amounts of money to develop those technologies to the point that you can realize the full potential of the technology, keep trained crews that can operate and maintain it safely and effectively, and to build, maintain, and refuel those platforms. This makes it an option only for those vessels where the application makes the technology mandatory because of the advantage it conveys. If even the US Navy has to be selective in how it applies the technology because of budgets, you know it’s very expensive.
Nuclear power for ships also has tremendous disadvantages in some circumstances. A nuclear powered vessel cannot just be fired up with the turn of a key, nor can it be shut down in minutes without severely impacting operational readiness. A gas turbine powered destroyer can be fired up like your car and be ready to go in minutes. It can be shut down just the same. There are other compromises that nuclear power comes with like this as well.
Latest Answers