The Naval Crisis In The Arctic That America Refuses To Fix

>>33018850
un-ironic cost saving from global warming.

wont need one soon.

Why retire it if it works? Why even bother having an icebreaker if Canada does it already? Global warming is already ensuring the icebreaker wont even be needed.

>>33018880
>global warming
>>33018886
>>33018886
Oh, this meme again

>>33018886

>"because its icebreaker fleet is not reliable"

It doesn't. By your logic, can we retire it now?

>>33018886
Because the Northwest Passage is in Canadian waters and sometimes they don't clear it and foreigners get mad because they can't use it.

Why not just ask Russia to do it? They have bases in the Arctic and also have Nuclear Ice Breakers like that multi track drifting one.

>>33018850

The only solution that I see would be a congressional mandate that the coast guard must maintain at least 4 icebreakers, sort of like how congress requires the navy to operate at least 11 aircraft carriers.

>>33018941
There's less ice. Is that ok to say?

child, do you know how loud an icebreaker is? Our subs shoot the loud after 2000 km detection then its worthless. Post guns if over 18 child.

icebreaker moves in arctic slowly breaking ice. A Virginia moves in and destroys it and its entire little group.

OP keeps collecting autism bucks to shitpost on /k

File: you'rearetard.jpg (30KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 480x360px

>>33020577
Top fucking kek.

>>33020742
>>33020716
Why would the US sink their own icebreakers?

could you trip so I can ignore you?

>>33020796
are you admitting this has nothing to do with Russian dominance in the arctic with their ice breakers meaning nothing to do with /k and should we report your shitty thread? This is obviously what you're impling you shitty troll.

>>33020833
Are you on speed or something?

>>33020852
pathetic attempt for attention on an anime image board?

File: Arthur M. Anderson.jpg (61KB, 1024x681px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1024x681px

Merchant mariner here. As someone whose job occasionally involves these things, I'd like to give my two cents.

They're pretty much useless.

They're pretty useful on the Great Lakes during the winter months, but at sea they're dubious. The Canadians and Russians need to have them, sure. They have some ports that need to be kept ice free. But the US doesn't, for the most part. There's already relatively little commercial traffic in areas where an icebreaker is actually needed. The reason barely any icebreakers have been built for the past 60 years is because merchant traffic is focusing more and more on a relatively small number of high-traffic ports rather than the break-bulk systems of old that involved stopping at tons of different ports.

Just my opinion. I can't comment on their usefulness from a naval standpoint, but in the merchant service, they really aren't needed anymore.

File: John W. Gates weathering a storm, 1940.jpg (205KB, 800x523px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 800x523px

>>33020881
When I say they have ports that need to be kept ice free, I mean shipping lanes leading into them. Actual ice breaking in ports is usually done by smaller tugs and whatnot.

>>33020577
>Why not just ask Russia
Because even asking Russia about how much time now, will be presented like grave treason by msm

>>33020833
>Russian dominance in the arctic
Fuck, half of Russia is Arctic, sure they will dominate it

>>33020599
but thats wrong, retard

USCG NUCLEAR PROGRAM WHEN

>>33021109
with memes, or will having some impenetrable barrier make it any easier for them with their sub part sub force? STFU and stop pathetically samefagging your own thread OP. The arctic is a sub battle, nothing more. Ice breakers are for commerce and once war breaks out, only subs matter. Guess who has the advantage here you drunk cunt? This is the last (you) and bump you get pathetic nigger.

>The Coast Guard’s proposed FY2017 budget requests $150 million in acquisition funding for a new polar icebreaker that the Coast Guard wants to begin building in FY2020. The Coast Guard’s FY2017-FY2021 five-year Capital Investment Plan (CIP) includes a total of $780 million in acquisition funding for a new polar icebreaker, including the $150 million requested for FY2017, $50 million projected for FY2019, $150 million projected forFY2020, and $430 million projected for FY2021. The total acquisition cost of a new polar icebreaker that begins construction in FY2020 has not been officially estimated but might be roughly $1 billion, including design costs.

>The project to acquire a new polar icebreaker was initiated in the Coast Guard’s FY2013 budget submission. The project has received about $15.6 million in acquisition funding through FY2016. The $150 million requested for FY2017 is the first major increment of acquisition funding requested for the ship, and would fund planning design activities required to begin production of the ship in FY2020.

it's coming, just give it some time

Over reliance on airpower.

We need at least 6 heavy nuclear powered ice breakers. Something that gives no fucks and can spend an entire winter at sea in the artic. Give it a hangar and a flight deck, and a compliment of 2 Osprey and 2 Seahawk.

>>33021109
They will dominate it because it is their landmass

>>33020577
>Multi track drifting

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwe0MHRaqhA

GAS GAS GAS

>>33018850
Your information is inaccurate. The Healy is currently the largest and newest military ice breaker in inventory.

>>33020577
Because Americans will be forced to listen this for all time of trip.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVtDX46cTJQ

>America letting the icebreaker fleet dwindle to one

WTF? Where was /k/ on this before?!

>>33018941
>>33021190
Kill yourself you fucking communist.

File: 1451915621003.jpg (25KB, 403x413px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 403x413px

>>33023642
>using "communist" as insult in 2017
Top kek.

>>33023684
Go back to leftypol, commie cuck and take your wife's son with you

The Coast Guard has two heavy icebreakers. Russia has over 40 - inclduing nuclear ones - and keeps building more.

The US has no ice-hardened surface vessels. Russia's entire northern fleet was designed for the Arctic.

US has no deepwater ports in the Arctic. Russia has 16.

Additionally, US media and academia are dominated by totalitarian sect of global warming cultists, whose disastrous influence on public consciousness you can wintess in this very thread >>33018886

File: 1486611734207.jpg (16KB, 201x240px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 201x240px

>>33023684
COMMUNISM IS A DISEASE

>>33023684
> I subscribe to an ideology based on an emotionally unstable german cuck that has been tried and failed innumerable times!
If you know anything about Karl Marx's actual theories you know how autistic they are. He genuinely believed that people clean toilets and work registers because it enriches them.

Isn't the USCG polar ice breaker used primarily to support artic research vessels? Is it even used for military or commercial fleets?

File: 7242016155516.jpg (531KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

531KB, 1920x1080px

>>33020881

McMurdo Fire here, I'd like to add with this guy:

Really their biggest use is keeping shipping lanes free of ice. In 2013 (IIRC), the Hutson bay filled with a record amount of ice and a breaker had to be redirected from its mission-going to Antarctica-to assist in ice clearing ops. The US instead contracted another nations icebreaker.

Icebreakers are difficult and their military purposes are limited to basically four nations: Canada, Russia, Norway and the US. The US feels it no longer has significant need for it-probably because they genuinely feel their role in national security is no more. The most they're used for now is clearing the way for ships going to extreme polar and Antarctic regions.

I was aboard one for three months-theyre amazingly fun ships to be on and they really are Titans of engineering-but their practicality just isn't there as much anymore.

>>33021926
>Over reliance on airpower
You have no idea how much easier it is to bring things in my air to places like McMurdo than by ship.

And that's saying a lot since it's super fucking hard.

>>33023775
Like every other intellectual who's never done a days work in his life.

>>33023809

I should clarify: ocean going icebreaker. Plenty of nations need icebreakers to keep ice in check in port, but these rarely need to be the 30-120 day endurance or nuclear powered monsters of Russian or American persuasion. Argentina, for example, has a single major ocean-going breaker and dozens of small breakers that are operated by local companies. Austria has some for their rivers. Finland has ten, with an endurance of about 20 days with full crew, and the UK has three major ocean going, one armed, and probably a few dozen for in and around the islands, again mostly operated by the coasties, local governments or private companies.

File: yamal & louis s. st-laurent & wagb-11 polar sea.jpg (215KB, 1772x1188px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 1772x1188px

>>33018850
Arctic is Russian. America dares not to challenge Russian arctic supremacy.

File: 22120 purga ps-824.jpg (445KB, 1680x1085px) Image search: [Google]

445KB, 1680x1085px

>>33023809
>probably because they genuinely feel their role in national security is no more
That feel when no other coast guard icebreakers to play with in international waters.

>>33018850
>gawker site

The Arctic is the domain of subs for good reason.

>>33018850
Do you really need ice breakers for the 12 people that inhabit above the polar circle? Even the antarctic bases aren't covered by ice breakers.

>>33021190
No that's true, at least in the Alps where the glaciers are disappearing.

File: 10520 yamal (3).jpg (132KB, 640x927px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 640x927px

>>33024154
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_shipping_routes

>>33024167
I'm not sure that the USA are benefiting of this route... Let the Canadians do the job.

>>33023809
>>33023832

You're sort of wrong on the UK, at the military level they have one armed major icebreaker, HMS Protector that does pretty extensive deployments totalling up 330 days a year patrolling the Antarctic.

and then there's one survey vessel, HMS Scott that rotates between the Antarctic and the rest of the world, also doing nine months deployments.

>>33024232
>Let the Canadians do the job.
hahaha...
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

File: sea_and_star.jpg (28KB, 480x359px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 480x359px

>>33020881
If they were useless then why don't they retire the Polar Star?

Would seem reasonable to at least built two to replace Polar Star and Polar Sea.