Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Navy Nuclear Power School Study Materials

navsea.navy.mil

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–57 of 57 posts

Re: US Navy Nuclear Power School Study Materials

#51

Post by brandmeyer »

pooloo1 wrote: post #12
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #9

What are the pre-requisite knowledge requirements?

High ASVAB scores really is about it, and even that is waivable. After they go through boot camp, they will generally get filtered out through attrition at their respective A-School (training school), which is why the requirements can be waived, and they go to a new job.

Very much unlike college admissions (where it's relatively hard to get in, and also hard to flunk out of), it is relatively easy to get into and and also easy to flunk out of the enlisted nuclear program. In my class, the failure rate was about 60% overall, and I think that's pretty typical. They start the failure process pretty early, too, starting with the first round of exams. The Navy is happy to find you another job that isn't quite as demanding. Most of the non-nuclear submariners I worked with were "failed" nukes. In college, it seems like folks are more likely to fail out completely then they are to fail into a less demanding degree that they could still succeed in.

Re: US Navy Nuclear Power School Study Materials

#52

Post by ChefDenominator »

This is not the material used in the enlisted program when I went through it.

I specifically recall reading about quarks and spin in the physics text book because they were not in the notes or TGOs even though they influence decay. Quarks are not in the linked page pdfs.

Re: US Navy Nuclear Power School Study Materials

#53

Post by normaljoe »

labrador wrote: post #11
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #9

What are the pre-requisite knowledge requirements?

Most nukes I knew were college dropouts with a math/science orientation. The only requirements in the early 80's when I qualified were high scores on Navy science and math aptitude tests. I dropped out of U.C.Berkeley after a year and a half of physics/math - couldn't pass English.

Nukes have been and probably will always be the best underachievers you have ever known.

Killed a scholarship, check. Didn't get the scholarship check.

They tend to be smart and marginally good. The thing is though going through that program tends to right ships and get them in the right place. I have seen this with so many of my friends and with my self. We get back on the right track and get everything else in order. I am now at a 6 figure income and support most of my family. I would never be there without the support of such a program. I can say I pissed away my upbringing, but in reality I learned to be the man I am with that help.

Re: US Navy Nuclear Power School Study Materials

#54

Post by solotronics »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #21
rdtsc wrote: post #13

In general how much does being in the Navy and working on Nuclear Powered vessels help with getting a job as a civilian Nuclear Engineer say at a power plant? I would imagine a full Engineering degree would be required, or is there some fast tracking option specifically geared for ex-Navy operators?

My dad was in the industry for ~35 years, but he wasn't a nuke. In the late 70s it was easy enough to get in with a 2 year degree (which is what he had), now an engineering degree is required. Many of my dad's coworkers were from the Navy, though at least one was a Seal rather than a nuke. From what I got from him, its not like many people are clamoring for these jobs, or have the necessary credentials. It seems like…

interestingly enough I consider rural living an advantage and would like to be able to move to the country

Re: US Navy Nuclear Power School Study Materials

#56

Post by seanmcdirmid »

solotronics wrote: post #54
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My dad was in the industry for ~35 years, but he wasn't a nuke. In the late 70s it was easy enough to get in with a 2 year degree (which is what he had), now an engineering degree is required. Many of my dad's coworkers were from the Navy, though at least one was a Seal rather than a nuke. From what I got from him, its not like many people are clamoring for these jobs, or have the necessary credentials. It seems like…

interestingly enough I consider rural living an advantage and would like to be able to move to the country

There are plenty of rural locations that aren't so nice: Monroe Michigan, Pennsville New Jersey, Port Gibson Mississippi, Baton Rouge (but nowhere near the city). Heck, the nicest place we lived was Tri Cities Washington, and that didn't last long (hanford is mostly a waste dump now, but there is at least one reactor still going I think).

Ah, that was the other thing: the industry was very boom and bust. Dad made bank contracting in the late 70s and early 80s, then they stopped making new plants and it was a scramble to find any job at all around 1985-6. He didn't really want me going into it, I think, so I got into computers instead.

Re: US Navy Nuclear Power School Study Materials

#57

Post by ayb »

normaljoe wrote: post #47
ayb wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ex Navy Submariner here. I know quite a few folks that got out (in the 2005-2010 range) and took jobs in the nuclear field. Some had degrees, some didn't. The Navy uses Pressurized Water reactors which seem to be a fairly common design in commercial use as well (according to Wikipedia, anyway). Which means a lot of how things work would be similar, and you'd just have to learn the specific systems for how that plant…

ex Reactor Operator from the mid 90s to early 2000s as well (enlisted). One of the things that was apparent is purpose. A commercial reactor is a profit making device whereas a Naval reactor is part of a war machine. In the former you end up with complexity designed to save cost, where the later favors simplicity and extra cost to ensure stability. That is not to say commercial is unsafe, but the motive behind design…

That's so interesting re: the number of startups and shutdowns. Makes perfect sense given the mission of "generating power" vs. getting somewhere or "poking holes in the ocean".
Post reply on HN