The United States refused to maneuver in the Arctic, fearing breakage of the icebreaker

64
The US Coast Guard refused to study in the Arctic, fearing that the only icebreaker "Polar Star" will fail, and then you have to ask for help from the Russians, writes Business Insider.





The icebreaker is more than 40 years old, and it is still alive only due to the fact that there is a similar decommissioned vessel “supplying” spare parts for the Polar Star.

When the National Security Council asked the commander of the US Coast Guard to send an icebreaker through the Northern Sea Route to conduct maneuvers on freedom of navigation, he refused.

According to him, the military experts take spare parts for the icebreaker from the same type of decommissioned ship to "this thing worked." And there is no certainty that during the teachings he will not have serious technical failures. Then they would have had to turn to the Russians for help in helping them tow the ship to a safe place. “But now is not the time to do it,” the commander added.

When it was planned maneuvers, the publication does not specify. This became known in early December.

The material notes that the United States is experiencing difficulties in the struggle for the Arctic, primarily because of the lack of a full-scale icebreaker fleet. While Russia has dozens of icebreakers, the Americans cost two. However, only one of them belongs to the heavy class. This is the North Star.

The portal reminds that the icebreaker Polar Star was commissioned in 1976 year. Overhaul to extend the service life took place in 2012 year. The polar icebreaker of the same type was laid up in 2010 year due to repeated engine failures.

As the American media previously noted, after Donald Trump demanded to allocate $ 5 billion to build a wall along the Mexican border, you can forget about replenishing the US icebreaking fleet with new ships.
64 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +12
    17 December 2018 08: 29
    The US coast guard refused to study in the Arctic, fearing that the only icebreaker "Polar Star" would fail, and then they would have to ask for Russian help, writes Business Insider.
    Yeah, that would be a huge blow to the image. And why on Canadians of faith or what?
    1. +4
      17 December 2018 08: 33
      Then I would have had to turn to the Russians for help, so that they would help tow the ship to a safe place.

      And we are in response to sanctions! Yes
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. +7
      17 December 2018 08: 48
      Quote: svp67
      And why on Canadians of faith or what?

      Well, the Canadian "Amundsen" is also not new at all, 1979, and not the most outstanding.
    4. +2
      17 December 2018 08: 55
      Yeah, that would be a huge blow to the image. And why on Canadians of faith or what?

      Sergei. Really strange. They could calmly conduct joint maneuvers.
    5. +1
      17 December 2018 08: 59
      Or I don’t understand something, or Vovka Trump really has something to do with the FSB .. Well, they’ll print it to the icebreakers of candy wrappers — just spit ... And shipbuilding isn’t our couple there ..
      1. +4
        17 December 2018 09: 02
        Quote: 210ox
        Well, they’ll print on ice-breakers of candy wrappers — just spit ... Yes, and shipbuilding is not a couple to ours ..

        But not everything is so simple. You can't build an icebreaker in one night. Need projects, shipyards. And most importantly, steel, a special steel goes to the icebreaker’s hull. In general, they are already solving this issue.
        1. +7
          17 December 2018 09: 12
          Sergei ! hi
          Quote: svp67
          You can't build an icebreaker in one night. Need projects, shipyards. And most importantly, steel, a special steel goes to the icebreaker’s hull. In general, they are already solving this issue.

          But even if the United States abandons all forces and means to build icebreakers, they will not soon catch up with Russia (if they catch up at all). An icebreaker is not a destroyer, they cannot be sculpted in batches.
          1. +7
            17 December 2018 09: 17
            pasha hi
            Quote: bouncyhunter
            An icebreaker is not a destroyer, they cannot be sculpted in batches.

            Well, this is not about the United States, if they wish, they can, they have "such a fad"
            1. +4
              17 December 2018 09: 20
              Quote: svp67
              if they wish, they can, they have "such a fad"

              Of course, they have enough green candy wrappers - if the Fed prints something. What about resources? Will the "partners" be dispossessed again?
              1. +2
                17 December 2018 09: 21
                Quote: bouncyhunter
                Will the "partners" be dispossessed again?

                Well, HOW? Naive people want to get off cheap
                1. +3
                  17 December 2018 09: 26
                  Quote: svp67
                  Well, HOW?

                  1. +3
                    17 December 2018 09: 32
                    Yes, not without it ...
          2. -5
            17 December 2018 11: 20
            the Americans sculpted aircraft carriers in 2MW, so if they want to, they will scribe ...
            1. +2
              17 December 2018 11: 26
              Where such confidence ? This is not a joke, but an obvious question.
              1. -3
                17 December 2018 11: 38
                From the example I cited above about aircraft carriers, dozens of heavy attack aircraft carriers for four years isn’t an indicator?
                1. +4
                  17 December 2018 11: 42
                  Quote: faiver
                  Dozens of heavy strike aircraft carriers in four years

                  ??? Do not worry about voicing a specific name?
                  1. 0
                    17 December 2018 11: 53
                    24 Essex-class strike carriers, three midway heavy aircraft carriers, plus light aircraft, plus a hundred escort carriers ...
                    1. 0
                      17 December 2018 11: 56
                      Quote: faiver
                      24 Essex-class strike carriers, three midway heavy aircraft carriers, plus light aircraft, plus a hundred escort carriers.

                      And this for 4 years? Here is the conveyor!
                      1. 0
                        17 December 2018 13: 55
                        and that's not counting the ships and ships of smaller tonnage ...
            2. +2
              17 December 2018 12: 26
              And boats, probably even more ...
              And how are the carriers in the ice? Why compare hot with wet?
              1. +1
                17 December 2018 13: 54
                I demonstrated the capabilities of industry and the US economy, it is foolish to deny these opportunities, but we must take it into account ...
                1. +1
                  17 December 2018 14: 48
                  the Americans sculpted aircraft carriers in 2MW, so if they want to, they will scribe ...

                  Andrey, the opportunities you have demonstrated have a very long history. Quite a lot has changed since 2MB. Below Vladimir painted in some detail.
                  1. -1
                    17 December 2018 15: 02
                    Quite a lot has changed since the days of 2MB
                    - Yes, much, the United States after 2MB has turned the dollar into a world reserve currency, if they want, then they will be built by the Koreans, or else they will be able to do it, this question is not fundamental, the main thing they can do.
                    But there is another aspect, the United States does not consider us a serious opponent, because at any moment they can take financially for the gills ...
                2. +2
                  17 December 2018 15: 08
                  They have power, no one denies this. Only these capacities do not guarantee anything. Do they have a project? And the experience of building modern icebreakers?
        2. 0
          17 December 2018 09: 53
          Yes, buy steel from someone who’s the main steelmaker, and there they’re selling everything to everyone.
      2. +2
        17 December 2018 12: 27
        Let’s explain. I was wondering, I once asked this question to specialists.

        1. The US Navy is a derivative of the civilian fleet, that is, they can really build a huge series of something because they have a developed shipbuilding industry.
        2. Icebreakers are very specific vessels, and heavy and especially heavy nuclear icebreakers are so specific that they are built only with us.
        3. Like any other industry in the United States, the shipbuilding industry is slowly degrading against the global background. Countries unknown to anyone in this area are becoming leaders. ATTENTION How much of the world market does China + South Korea occupy? Answer> 70% But there is also Japan, Germany ... And America is left with nothing ...

        What follows from this?
        To build a heavy nuclear-powered icebreaker, the United States should reverse the trend, actually raising the direction from scratch. They can do it, theoretically yes, but in order for the PRODUCT PRICE to be acceptable, a large series is needed. And here's the catch: there is nothing to substantiate a large series. Everything is finite ....
      3. +1
        17 December 2018 14: 13
        Quote: 210ox
        Well, they’ll print on ice-breakers of candy wrappers — just spit ... Yes, and shipbuilding is not a couple to ours ..


        So icebreakers do not print wrappers. Yes, and about shipbuilding is not a couple to ours, apparently also a misconception. The United States has been losing manufacturing technology for many years. They cannot build icebreakers, and they have problems with nuclear power and not only with them.
    6. 0
      17 December 2018 12: 45
      China ran into Canadians, now they are not up to amers request
  2. +5
    17 December 2018 08: 32
    They have some very strange icebreaker, judging by the photo. I wonder who the constructor is. I would cancel everything in their place too. Fifty years old
    1. +7
      17 December 2018 08: 41
      Quote: igorbrsv
      Fifty years old

      Polar Star (USCGC Polar Star) is an icebreaker built in the USA in 1976 and still operational. In terms of power characteristics, this icebreaker is comparable to nuclear-powered icebreakers of the Arctic type. The total capacity of its engines is 78 thousand liters. pp., including diesel engines (18 thousand hp) for movement in light ice, and three gas turbine units (60 thousand hp) for overcoming heavy ice. Polar Star is capable of sailing at a speed of 3 knots in ice 2 m thick and forcing melted ice up to 4 m thick. The icebreaker has a displacement of 12 thousand tons and a ship length of 122 m. Cruising range without refueling is 45 thousand km.
      There are THREE more. All of them are assigned to Seattle and are part of a detachment of military vessels of the SBO, in the official position of which it is written that the Coast Guard is "one of the branches of the US armed forces" and is part of the structure of the US Department of Homeland Security.

      The first is the coast guard icebreaker "Healy".
      The second icebreaker is the North Sea.
      The third icebreaker - Severnaya Zvezda - has been mothballed since 2006 and is in reserve.

      Healy employs 140 people, including 85 crew members (31 officers and 54 sailors who are considered military personnel) and 35 civilian scientists and other personnel.
      The icebreaker has a displacement of 16 thousand tons, a propulsion system with a capacity of 30 thousand horsepower allows you to reach speeds of up to 17 knots.
      "Healy" is capable of breaking through ice up to 1,5 meters thick and pushing ice up to 2,5 meters thick with battering rams.
      According to the classification adopted in the USA, heavy vessels capable of operating in difficult polar conditions are considered to be special vessels that continuously crack ice up to 2 meters thick at a speed of 3 knots and have the ability to ram and break ice up to 7 meters thick.
      Moreover, such vessels are required to have a propulsion system with a capacity of at least 10 thousand horsepower and have a displacement of at least 6 thousand tons.
      1. +5
        17 December 2018 08: 47
        Thank you Yes . In the author’s photo, he looks very unfortunate. And it was too lazy to look about their icebreaker fleet. But ram up to 2,5m negative
        What is it like our light icebreaker?
      2. +2
        17 December 2018 10: 20
        Quote: svp67
        Quote: igorbrsv
        Fifty years old

        Polar Star (USCGC Polar Star) is an icebreaker built in the USA in 1976 and still operational. In terms of power characteristics, this icebreaker is comparable to nuclear-powered icebreakers of the Arctic type.
        There are THREE more.
        The first is the coast guard icebreaker "Healy".
        The second icebreaker is the North Sea.
        The third icebreaker - Severnaya Zvezda - has been mothballed since 2006 and is in reserve.

        Where does the information come from?
        The Americans themselves say:
        While Russia has dozens of icebreakers, the Americans are costing two. However, only one of them belongs to the heavy class. This is the North Star.
        The Polar Star icebreaker was commissioned in 1976. Overhaul in order to extend the service life was held in 2012. The same type of icebreaker "Polar Sea" was joked back in 2010 due to repeated engine failures.

        From which it follows that "Severnaya Zvezda" is the only operating heavy icebreaker. But, according to your information, it has been mothballed since 2006.
        The North Sea is a donor.
        There is no mention of "Healy" at all.
        Controversy however.
        1. +1
          17 December 2018 10: 25
          Quote: Every
          Controversy however.

          So you compare their tonnage. And everything will become clear.
          1. 0
            17 December 2018 11: 04
            Quote: svp67
            Quote: Every
            Controversy however.

            So you compare their tonnage. And everything will become clear.

            And where does the tonnage come from?
            It follows from your comment that the "Severnaya Zvezda" has been mothballed since 2006, but in fact it is the only OPERATING heavy-class icebreaker. This is what I meant when I spoke about the contradiction.
            1. +1
              17 December 2018 11: 28
              Quote: Every
              It follows from your comment that the "North Star" has been in conservation since 2006

              Sorry, but in their system the transfer of a ship, a tank, an airplane from one position is conservation, to another it is active, and, on the contrary, it passes very quickly. Then I was on preservation, I needed it
        2. 0
          17 December 2018 11: 49
          From which it follows that "Severnaya Zvezda" is the only operating heavy icebreaker. But, according to your information, it has been mothballed since 2006.


          We read carefully:
          - Northern star in conservation;
          - Polar single star Heavy acting;
          - The North Sea is a donor;
          - Healy - does not belong to the heavy class and is the second active icebreaker in the United States.

          While Russia has dozens of icebreakers, Americans cost two. In this case, lish one of which refers to severe class. This is "Polar Stars"
          1. +1
            17 December 2018 15: 22
            We read carefully:
            - North star in conservation;
            - North Star, the only heavy acting;
            - The North Sea is a donor;
            - Healy - does not belong to the heavy class and is the second active icebreaker in the United States.


            The USA has only 3 icebreakers (the first two are of the same type):
            Polar Star - active, from 2006 to 2013 was on conservation
            Polar Sea - not in operation since 2010 (he is now a donor)
            Healy - commissioned in 1999
  3. +9
    17 December 2018 08: 33
    And the exercises need to be carried out, and it is scary that in the end you will have to turn to the Russians for help. Well, sit still and do not twitch. In the Arctic, walking is not tweeting about America's power to write. Therefore, scratch your turnips and, by habit, look for a Russian trace in the absence of your icebreakers.
    1. +2
      17 December 2018 12: 51
      Exactly, it’s the Russians who chained the Arctic Ocean with ice, so that strangers would not climb lol
  4. +5
    17 December 2018 08: 33
    How good it would be if the American expedition would repeat the fate of the Chelyuskin, and our pilots would heroically save them.
    Just to bring down a little arrogance ...
    1. 0
      17 December 2018 08: 51
      Wish fulfilled Yes
    2. +3
      17 December 2018 08: 59
      It doesn’t work out, no arrogance will come of them, and it’s not worth risking the lives of Russian guys for the sake of these not good ones. A year will not pass, as they forget who they owe.
    3. +1
      17 December 2018 09: 10
      pull them out of the ice only when their icebreaker goes to the bottom already - with argument it didn’t work out before))))
    4. +1
      17 December 2018 09: 14
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      How good it would be if the American expedition would repeat the fate of the Chelyuskin, and our pilots would heroically save them.
      Just to bring down a little arrogance ...

      write a letter with a wish to Santa Claus, and leave it on the balcony ... wink
  5. +3
    17 December 2018 08: 34
    Loud announcements, empty Wishlist, because there is no money, but let them do what they want, they can / can!
    And they have it, priorities, i.e. babosiks matter always and everywhere.
  6. +1
    17 December 2018 08: 37
    Well, it's in vain.
    We would have shown that we would have got the good crew, definitely!
  7. +13
    17 December 2018 08: 40
    I had to ask the Mask - he would have built some high-tech in a week ... As always in the 3D editor laughing But the whole sect of witnesses of the launch of the Teslamobile would suck the power of Ameryga and backward quilted jackets for another year, as usual
    1. 0
      17 December 2018 08: 53
      I still drink beer from a bottle am
    2. 0
      17 December 2018 09: 02
      Quote: Jerk
      I had to ask the Mask - he would have built some high-tech in a week ... As always in the 3D editor laughing

      Rescue tunnel in the ice.
  8. Cry
    0
    17 December 2018 09: 17
    The catch is that frost-resistant African-Americans did not breed for cannon fodder.
  9. 0
    17 December 2018 09: 32
    and this is good...
  10. 0
    17 December 2018 09: 33
    Ha ha ha, the Americans survived.
  11. 0
    17 December 2018 09: 33
    The "might of the greats" have problems. Very good, positive news. Arctic region of the Russian Federation.
  12. 0
    17 December 2018 09: 47
    Wrap everyone from the Mexican border, and give pickaxes to Yu’s hands, let the icebreaker work
  13. +1
    17 December 2018 10: 19
    When the National Security Council asked the US Coast Guard commander to send an icebreaker across the Northern Sea Route to maneuver freedom of navigation
    . And here the mattresses want to create tension. Well, why the hell are they climbing into our sphere of military and economic interests. Let them swim in northern Canada.
  14. +5
    17 December 2018 10: 45
    But what a beautiful program about "Polar Star" TV / c "Discovery" has released, you watch and begin to doubt the capabilities of our a / l, and diesel too. A simple man in the street probably accepts information.
    He described his daughter in a nutshell, what I think about this trash, and took him on an excursion to the a / l "Lenin". The case was 2 years ago. I myself have some relation to the a / l.
  15. 0
    17 December 2018 11: 03
    How, then, were they going to butt with us in the Arctic? Yeah, really.
    1. +2
      17 December 2018 11: 18
      In the next five years, no way !!!
      The money for the construction of icebreakers and ULC ships will be poured even tomorrow, but where to get the necessary industrial capacities, these are not disposable "Liberty" to be stamped (perhaps my comparison will seem incorrect to someone), but the construction of an icebreaker is not a matter of one year, even with a project KTD.
  16. +1
    17 December 2018 11: 24
    I'm glad for our "partners" bully
    1. 0
      17 December 2018 12: 36
      Join.
  17. The comment was deleted.
  18. +1
    17 December 2018 11: 48
    Russian mud, Arctic ice, Portuguese sand, and Ameragadian dullness - they will destroy the glorious and brave Yankees from the FSA !!!
  19. +1
    17 December 2018 12: 25
    Well and good ..
    The great American mosh from all over fell into reality, in the form of a decrepit trough which can no longer be released into the Arctic.
    Everything is natural ... By the way, what’s the situation in the intercontinental nuclear missiles, in navy, in airfors. Everything has decayed and is breathing its last.
  20. -3
    17 December 2018 12: 43
    I read the comments ... I read the article. Laughter, laughter ... But in this refusal, all the power of the United States and those especially having fun in comments have already been reminded of Chelyuskintsev. But it doesn’t even reach the Russian side, how can one refuse to show off if there is a danger of turning one's neck. The reasonable position of the United States caused laughter. But US-style comments are still amusing, forever behind our icebreaker fleet. Yes, now they look shitty, but the US has a strong economy and our exclamations cause more smiles than the US refusal to exercise.
  21. +1
    17 December 2018 14: 55
    It is interesting why ice pulls them to break through the ice. Is it really more difficult to push and crack ice on the other side of the joint venture?