It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Air force considers building reactors on 2 bases

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 07:50 AM
link   
AF Mulls Nuke Reactors for Idaho, N.M.
Knight Ridder | March 13, 2008
The Air Force is considering plans to build a nuclear reactor at its base in Mountain Home, Idaho, or Cannon Air Force Base, N.M., Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne has told an online military news site.

Here is the link to the story:

www.military.com...


Why would the AF need to build reactors, do they know something we don't know. Are they worried about power grid failure. Any input from my fellow members.

And why these bases? I was an Army vet so I am not up on why they would pick these two bases.

Jason




posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 08:52 PM
link   
A nuclear reactor to power there underground installations of course. It's a good idea as the base itself would be self substaining, rather than relying on power from the grid. And perhaps they do know something we don't, it's their job.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 09:40 PM
link   
When you think about it the Military uses huge amounts of electricity. last year the USAF opened up a huge solar system in the Mojave desert to supply power to Nellis.

A reactor would reduce thier dependance on fossil fuel generation and as stated in the article provide power for the surrounding communities.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 01:51 PM
link   
I guess they could use the power, I just feel that there is more to this than just a pawer supply for base operations. I feel they want to keep their power consumption off the books.

But I have to woner what kind of units are stationed at these bases.

what AF base did the president go to after 911?

Jason



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 01:54 PM
link   
Mountain Home is an Air Expedition Wing (or whatever they're calling it now). Bombers, fighters, tankers. Cannon AFB is transferring over to a Special Ops unit. Neither base is particularly secret, or high tech, or however you want to put it.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Thank you for the info on the bases.

Jason



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 12:38 PM
link   
As a Naval Veteran I would point out to the USAF that the Navy has used Nuclear Reactors for a very long time and have some other reactors just sitting around in storage that could be used for their pet projects.

I would recommend a reactor like the D2G as it was used on nuclear cruisers. It is 2nd generation but puts out 150MW more than what the USAF needs and it can be housed in a unit that is built underground or heavily reinforced with steel and concrete.

Not only that it could also potentially power megawatt class beam weapons. Here is a link to some of the versions used by the Navy.

www.economicexpert.com...:States:Naval:reactor.htm

[edit on 27-3-2008 by asyzel]



posted on Mar, 28 2008 @ 01:16 PM
link   
This is a good idea considering how much the government pays for power no matter if the base has a lot of power using items. This is also good for reliability, if the AF owns it there is a less chance of losing power due to civilian mistakes



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 07:21 PM
link   
The reason that the Air Force is doing this is because their budget is in such bad shape due to the War on Terror. They have been laying off personnel by the tens of thousands since 2003 to pay for the F-22's. The cargo plane fleet has an average age of about 25 to 30 years old and many of these planes need to be replaced before they fall out of the sky. This decision is coming completely down to money. There's no conspiracy involved. The Air Force is broken and just trying to get itself back on it's feet. These bases are trying to cut costs to keep up with the operational tempo that they need to support global dominance in the 21st century.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join