Military Review

American heavy icebreakers of the XXI century. One in construction, two in line, what's next?

217
American heavy icebreakers of the XXI century. One in construction, two in line, what's next?

While our "patriots" happily tell each other that the USA cannot build icebreakers, the first has already begun to do


A few days ago, Alexei Rakhmanov, head of the United Shipbuilding Corporation saidthat the United States will need at least 7-8 years to create powerful icebreakers, and they will cost three times more. This statement of his caused, as usual, the reaction of the patriotic public, which basically boiled down to joyful assertions that the Americans would not be able to build this icebreaker fleet at all.

The public will have to disappoint, and the words of Alexei Leonidovich be clarified. Americans can’t just build icebreakers. They have already begun to build them: one has already fully funded and started to build (while ordering accessories for the bookmark). Four years later, the United States will have one new icebreaker in operation, suitable also for military tasks, and there will be a second in completion, and the two existing ones will also be in operation. And this will be just the beginning.

We will analyze the specifics of American icebreaking.

American icebreaker issue


Unlike Russia, which has almost three hundred thousand inhabitants in Murmansk alone and which has a huge number of complex facilities and enterprises in the Arctic, developed commercial shipping and the most important sea communications line - the Northern Sea Route, the United States has nothing of the kind. In their largest settlement beyond the Arctic Circle, less than 5000 people live, and, in fact, there is no economy. No extraction of resources, no merchant shipping. The difference in approaches to the development of the Arctic is detailed in the article. "The Arctic Front. Regarding Russia's Northward Movement".

Therefore, the tasks of American icebreakers have always been extremely limited. Basically, they boiled down to escorting supply vessels to American research stations in Antarctica, on the other side of the Earth, and in the Arctic, to delivering research teams and rescue operations. It’s rare when they had to navigate through the ice a lonely ship in a hurry to bring something to a small village that they didn’t have time to bring there in the open water in the summer.

Also, in the case of military icebreakers, one of the secondary tasks was to carry out military provocations against our country on the Northern Sea Route: it usually had to be a passage through Soviet territorial waters in the Vilkitsky Strait under the cover of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (which the United States, by the way, did not ratified) the so-called right of peaceful passage, which in such circumstances was not applicable.

The Americans in the 60s tried to do this, but nature turned out to be stronger, and their weak military icebreakers could not overcome the ice.

In 1976 and 1978, the US Coast Guard included two “heavy” (according to the American classification) icebreakers: Polar Star (Polar Star) and Polar Sea (Polar Sea). From then until the end of the 90s, all of America’s icebreaking tasks were solved by them. Provocations were excluded from their list, since the Cold War made it possible to fight with the USSR somewhere on the periphery of world politics, they coped with the rest. The ships turned out successful and powerful, only the excessive complexity of their design failed.


Polar Star and Polar Sea Antarctica

In 2000, Khili entered service - a large icebreaker with a displacement of 16000 tons, but with a small thickness of ice to overcome - 1,6 meters, and therefore limited suitability. So, “Healy” does not go to Antarctica, and, due to the small thickness of the ice to be overcome, it is classified as “medium”, although the more “penetrating” “Polar Star” and “Polar Sea” are considered “heavy” with a displacement of 13200 tons. However, the Healy reached the North Pole when it became necessary in 2015, and without any problems.


Healy at the North Pole. September 9, 2015

And in 2011, due to a serious accident of the main power plant (GEM), Polar Sea was forever joked. Polar Star and Polar C were designed for 30 years of operation. In the early 2000s, these deadlines came out. But no one was going to change the ships. America began its gigantic war, the episodes of which were the entry of troops into Afghanistan and the capture of Iraq, and money was needed for more "important" things than icebreakers.

So began the epic of maintaining the Polar Star in working condition. Using the Polar Sea spare parts as a “donor,” the Coast Guard managed to operate a ship that exceeded all the operating periods in the critically important Antarctic direction. The Arctic was "held" by "Healy." There was no and no problem with the latter, the ship is not old, but Polar Star handed over more and more every year, and its repairs turned out to be more and more difficult. By the mid-2010s, Polar Star was a “living corpse” of the ship, the service on which was simply life-threatening.

In 2013, the Department of Homeland Security, which reports to the Coast Guard that understands that the days of the Polar Star is numbered, issued a special statement stating that the US urgently needs six new icebreakers: at least three heavy and three medium ones.

But there was no money. I had to keep it up, all the more so in the event of a critical breakdown, it was possible to hire some kind of icebreakers in Russia.

In 2014, this backup option became impossible, and the United States again remained with Polar Star. The ship at this moment was falling apart in the literal sense of the word.

The turning point was 2018. Firstly, the press got the details of how one of the recent icebreaker expeditions to the Antarctic went. After several breakdowns of the power plant, due to which the ship was on the verge of losing speed, a new emergency was added - a serious hull leak. The leak led to the flooding of the engine room, loss of speed and repair right at sea, during which it was necessary to wage a struggle for survivability, and brew a rotten case from old age. The Americans then managed to solve the problems due to the fact that they carried with them everything that could come in handy for repairs, and due to the extraordinary efforts of personnel who knew well where and what their ship could break. There was a threat that the icebreaker would soon be unable to provide Americans in Antarctica. And as a result, the risk of having to ask Russia, which the United States was then trying to put strong pressure on for help.

The second problem for the Coast Guard was the intention of the Navy to conduct a military provocation against Russia. The military intended to do with Polar Star what did not work out in the 60s: go through Russian territorial waters and show the Russians who is the master in the Arctic. But the “freedom of navigation exercises” had to be canceled: the then Coast Guard commander, Admiral Paul Zukunt, said that the icebreaker could break at any moment, and then Russia would have to turn to save it. It would be a political disaster, and the Americans retreated.

These two episodes did what the U.S. Coast Guard could not do for decades: they convinced Congress that it was time to solve the icebreaking problem. And Congress allocated money, immediately and without bargaining, paying for one icebreaker, repairing the Polar Star, and even allocating a small reserve to the Coast Guard to the Coast Guard.
Then there was a tender, and in 2019 the construction of a series of American icebreakers began.

American icebreaking program


Initially, long before the financing of the icebreakers became a reality, the Coast Guard was inclined toward an advance project of the Fincanteri Mariette Marine Corporation, which had long ago published its groundwork and proposals for a promising icebreaker. This company was supposed to be a construction contractor, but the tender for the construction was won by the VT Halter Marine shipyard. It was with her that a contract was signed for the construction of the lead ship of the series.


One of the images of the "Fincherter era"

According to the contract, the company must complete the design of the ship by the end of 2021, order and receive all the components that are necessary for laying the ship, make steel cutting and lay the ship.


And this is a picture from the "VT Halter era"

It is necessary to surrender it in 2024. This will be the year when the United States will have a new heavy icebreaker. In addition to the full payment for the construction of the ship, Congress allocated money for the so-called life extension program for the old man “Polar Star”: the ship will be very seriously repaired in several ways and will be able to serve at least until the construction of the second icebreaker in the United States of the new series. This work is already underway. By 2024, the United States will again have three icebreakers: a brand new heavy icebreaker, repaired by tens of millions of dollars, the Polar Star and Healy. Another ship will be under construction. After the second is completed, Polar Star will most likely be decommissioned. But by then, the United States will have two new heavy icebreakers and one medium Healy in service. If everything goes according to plan, then another ship will be under construction by that time.


Another render. So far without weapons. But the actual final appearance will be slightly different, perhaps just due to the weapon

In January 2019, the new commander Karl Schulz said in an interview that the minimum number of ships the Coast Guard needed were three icebreakers, and six ships would be sufficient. Taking into account the fact that Polar Star still does not pass for a long time, this meant that it was necessary to build five more, of which at that time only one was fully funded.

At the end of 2019, when the preparation of the budget for 2020 was ending, clouds began to gather over the second icebreaker in the series. Trump, who had previously personally launched the icebreaking program, needed to find funds for another project he had promised in the elections - a wall on the border with Mexico. Then there was talk of a serious reduction in a number of programs, among which it was proposed to re-equip the Coast Guard. But in the end it worked out, and Congress allocated a part of the money to the second ship.

Currently, $ 1,169 billion has been allocated and spent on the program. This is only $ 121 million less than needed to build two icebreakers, but without military equipment and weapons supplied under the control of the US government. And if you take into account all the costs, including even training the crew and preparing the location, it turns out that the first icebreaker has been paid in advance, and the second has been allocated 130 million, for which you can start ordering components. The reality of spending somewhere in the middle, we, figuratively speaking, can assume that the Americans have funded one and a half icebreakers, one of which is already under construction.

It is impossible to say exactly when the Americans actually lay the second ship, it will depend on funding, but in the financial plan of the program, the last tranche for it refers to 2024. Since, according to a published report by the US Congressional Research Service, the number of heavy icebreakers previously planned for construction is three, we can safely assume that in 2024 the Americans plan to finish financing the third icebreaker. And this means that they plan to build the entire three much earlier than this decade ends. Thus, by the end of the decade, the USA can safely guarantee that there are four icebreakers capable of going to, for example, the North Pole, of which only one, the Healy, will have restrictions on the thickness of the ice that can be overcome. The rest of the three can only be stopped by truly thick ice, presumably substantially thicker than two meters. American problems with icebreakers will be resolved.

The question of the second three is still open. We are exploring the option of building three medium-sized icebreakers plus three heavy ones in the first series, and, possibly, these will be simplified versions of heavy icebreakers (in order to save).

Technical specifics and differences from the Russian approach


For Russia, icebreakers are a tool for the development of their economy. American icebreakers are a tool to maintain American influence. This dictates significant differences in approaches to the design of ships. American ships are warships, and the cheerful red-and-white coloring of the Coast Guard should not mislead anyone.

Of the cost of an icebreaker, almost a third is various military equipment that will allow the ship to be used in the interests of the U.S. Navy, receive any intelligence information from any combat unit of the U.S. Navy, give the received intelligence to the U.S. Navy, ensure the use of weapons by other combat units and put various types of radio interference. While there is no precise clarity on weapons. The first studies from the Finkanteri included either an unarmed ship or a ship with 4 12,7 mm machine guns. But now, it seems, some system is heavier on the ship. The ship has a helicopter hangar, infrastructure for divers, the ability to equip a command post, possibly the ability to carry underwater vehicles and ensure their use. This is a completely different ship than our icebreakers.

In order to reduce infrastructure costs and universalize the ship, the Americans did not even consider its atomic version, but they do not need it, they are not going to drive any caravans of ships across the ice. At the same time, their ships promise to be quite heavy - 23400 tons. This is almost twice as much as the Polar Star, and only two thousand tons less than the standard displacement of our newest Arctic. For comparison: our icebreaking patrol ships of Project 23550 will have 9000 tons of displacement.

The power of the ship’s power plant, built around giant Caterpillar diesel generators with engines, will be about 45000 hp, which, of course, does not reach nuclear ships, but is already quite close to them. This is enough for the Americans, they do not need either the speed of passage of the ice, or their most complete splitting, they can go around thick hummocks and look for places where the ice is thinner, because they will not be followed by a caravan of tankers and bulk carriers. The ship will be equipped with a variety of crane equipment and seats for the crew and passengers for a total of 186 people. This is a ship of presence in its pure form - and, in parallel with campaigns in the Antarctic, it will be used like that.

If you listen to the words of Admiral Schultz, it will become completely clear that the Americans are going to actively harm us on the Northern Sea Route with their icebreakers. Otherwise, it makes no sense to have six units, which the Coast Guard wants to have in the final. Even three for them would be a lot: two heavy and “Healy” would be enough. But the USA, having no opportunity to compete with us in the peaceful development of the Arctic region, is going to seriously complicate our economic activity with its provocations. And here is where every ship built is needed.

In addition to these icebreakers, the USA has three more small ships (no more than 6000 tons), which are used by scientific organizations for research in the Arctic. Together with them, the United States today has 5 icebreakers. There will be six in 2024.

So in a way, Americans are closer to the fleet icebreakers, rather than A. Rakhmanov said.

It remains for the sake of interest to clarify the issue of price.

The cost of building three new icebreakers for the United States is one billion eight hundred twenty-five million dollars. If you add military equipment and weapons, then two billion three hundred seventy-one million dollars. An average of $ 790 million per ship. In terms of rubles at the Central Bank rate, this is fifty-five billion three hundred million rubles per ship. For comparison: the "Arctic" costs fifty billion. She, of course, has a nuclear power plant. And the Americans have military electronics, which we cannot even imagine. Moreover, even recalculation of prices not according to the Central Bank exchange rate, but according to purchasing power parity, will not give a difference of seven or eight times.

This is how things really are with American icebreakers: there are only a few years left before the United States has new icebreakers. And before they appear on our coast - too. And this does not get up to the Americans in any fantastic way.

However, they can dramatically increase the scale of their program.

Trump Memorandum


On June 9, 2020, US President Donald Trump signed a memorandum that demonstrates the existence of much more serious intentions. First, according to Trump, the United States will nevertheless study the possibility of building an atomic icebreaker. Secondly, there are prospects of increasing the number of ships under construction.

The memorandum requires considering how many ships are really necessary for the Americans to fight for the Arctic, and requires expanding the capabilities of using ships “for national security purposes”.

In addition to the possible expansion of the icebreaking program, the memorandum requires exploring the possibility of equipping at least two bases in the Arctic, as well as deploying ships at bases in other countries.

Trump requires a powerful fleet of icebreakers by 2029. Given the already ongoing program, we can say that the first step the Americans have already taken.

A look ahead


And we need to prepare for the American provocations. Two patrol icebreakers of project 23550, which are now under construction, are very “out of place” and will be commissioned on time. Of course, these ships are significantly smaller than the American ones, and perhaps the Americans will even equip their icebreakers no worse or stronger than us (obviously, there will be no containers with Caliber on our patrol icebreakers, more details - here) But this is not a matter of principle, it is important for us that we can control them near our territorial waters, by attaching a patrol ship to them, and at a greater distance, with a greater thickness of ice, behind them and aviation can follow.


The icebreakers of project 23550 look impressive, but in size and capabilities there will be fewer American ships at times. Nevertheless, the ships “catch up” to the service on time. Just in time

The 97P border icebreakers will also be useful, which must be maintained in good working order.

And we also need a clear vision of how to respond to their provocations. For example, their icebreaker “cuts off” the path through neutral waters, passing several miles in ours. This is a typical scenario of American provocation under the guise of the right of peaceful passage. What to do in such a situation? Shoot? But this is a disproportionate answer, and the situation is, frankly, ambiguous from a legal point of view. In response to this do not shoot. To do nothing? But then such things will become the norm, and the Americans will do it every day.

Take a walk through their territorial waters in return? But the answer must be more or less immediately. All that is clear is that you need to worry about such things in advance.

But apparently, it’s not worthwhile to get involved in the increase in the construction of military icebreakers. Until the scale of the problems that the Americans can create for us with their ships is clear, it’s not worth it.

Given the timing of the entry of American icebreakers, we have time to prepare, and we must use it correctly: it will soon become very “hot” in the Arctic. New American icebreakers are direct evidence of this.
Author:
Photos used:
US Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Cory J. Mendenhall, Wikipedia commons, Technology Associated, Inc., www.navalarchitects.us, Fincanteri Mariette Marine, VT Halter Marine, United Shipbuilding Corporation
217 comments
Ad

Our projects are looking for authors in the news and analytical departments. Requirements for applicants: literacy, responsibility, efficiency, inexhaustible creative energy, experience in copywriting or journalism, the ability to quickly analyze text and check facts, write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. The work is paid. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. codetalker
    codetalker 4 July 2020 05: 41 New
    19
    Hmm, it’s strange ... When something is ordered / planned, they usually say: “wait until it appears in the troops (well, or somewhere else, depending on the object)”
    Here, too, they did not start building anything. Planned / funded, etc. I suggest to be consistent and wait for the result.
    1. Bashkirkhan
      Bashkirkhan 4 July 2020 09: 37 New
      +6
      The US has a powerful shipbuilding industry. If Congress allocates money, they will build it quickly and on time. Because they have a strong economy. By the way, the equipment for the LK-60Ya series of Arctic type icebreakers under construction was delivered and loaded using the Demag floating crane, which is still remembered by Comrade Stalin. The floating crane was delivered in 1940 to Leningrad without an arrow. And the towed arrow was flooded by the Germans in the Gulf of Finland. Nevertheless, throughout the war the German diesel power plant of the floating crane supplied the besieged Leningrad with electricity.
      In the photo he is in the background.
      1. Bashkirkhan
        Bashkirkhan 4 July 2020 10: 07 New
        +2
        The construction of a new icebreaker in the United States will be carried out at the shipyard in Pascagula (Mississippi), owned by Singapore Technologies Engineering, as well as VT Halter Marine itself. The laying of the hull is planned for 2021, and the completion of construction and the transfer of the icebreaker to the customer are expected in the second quarter of 2024. The provisions of the contract provide an option for the subsequent construction of two more ships of the same type with a delivery date of 2025 and 2027, respectively. The main power plant with Caterpillar diesel generators and Azipod azimuth engines will allow the icebreaker to reach a maximum speed of 20 knots in clean water, while it will be able to break ice up to 2 meters thick at a speed of 3 knots, as well as independently overcome hummocks up to 6 meters high.
        1. Narak-zempo
          Narak-zempo 4 July 2020 15: 50 New
          +5
          Quote: Bashkirkhan
          The main power plant with Caterpillar diesel generators and Azipod azimuth engines will allow the icebreaker to reach a maximum speed of 20 knots in clean water, while it will be able to break ice up to 2 meters thick at a speed of 3 knots, as well as independently overcome hummocks up to 6 meters high.

          Where can they compete with our latest icebreakers of the LK-60YA project, not to mention the LK-120Ya.
          1. timokhin-aa
            4 July 2020 17: 10 New
            +3
            Why should they compete? They are not going to.
            1. Machito
              Machito 9 July 2020 19: 39 New
              +2
              Given the overwhelming superiority of the US and NATO fleets and the division of the Russian fleet into the Black Sea, Baltic, Pacific and North, Russia is high time to start building armed icebreakers. We need to ensure the overwhelming military superiority of our fleet in the Arctic. Moreover, the path through the North Pole is the shortest to the USA, our sworn friend. This will allow our main opponent to check and checkmate.
        2. nickname7
          nickname7 30 August 2020 11: 08 New
          +2
          his statement, as usual, provoked a reaction from the patriotic public, mainly boiling down to joyful statements that the Americans would not be able to build this icebreaker fleet at all.

          This is how myths are created about stupid and really not able to sail Americans, implying that we can do better, this is how a "naked king's dress" is created, we are told that the dress has no analogues, but in fact our king is naked.
          1. Bashkirkhan
            Bashkirkhan 30 August 2020 15: 19 New
            -1
            Information needs to be assessed critically.
    2. timokhin-aa
      4 July 2020 12: 22 New
      -2
      C'mon, we’ve already drowned all American aircraft carriers “Daggers”, and the Poseidons blew up “New York”
      1. Looking for
        Looking for 4 July 2020 14: 24 New
        -1
        your avatar is so patriotic. but your essence is renegade.
        1. timokhin-aa
          4 July 2020 17: 14 New
          20
          Well, yes, a true patriot will never allow himself to properly assess the enemy, right?
          A true patriot will never want his country to recognize the threat in time and be ready for it, right?
          Here is an example of what traitors like me did in the past, entrenched in the Soviet Army.


          And if there were patriots, they would convince conscientious soldiers that the enemy could not fight without Coca-Cola, right?
        2. Grits
          Grits 5 July 2020 02: 26 New
          +7
          Quote: Seeker
          your avatar is so patriotic. but your essence is renegade.

          The patriotic essence is to honestly and objectively assess the situation and make appropriate analyzes. even given our backlog and problems.
          1. Maks7
            Maks7 6 July 2020 10: 19 New
            +2
            Do you know in general that Russia has the largest icebreaking fleet in the world ??? :)
            https://pikabu.ru/story/ledokolyi_vsekh_stran_1440720
            In addition to patrol icebreakers and project 22220 icebreakers. The construction of the Leader icebreakers begins.
          2. pmkemcity
            pmkemcity 6 July 2020 13: 26 New
            +2
            Quote: Gritsa
            make appropriate analyzes

        3. nickname7
          nickname7 30 August 2020 11: 11 New
          0
          your essence is renegade

          Renegades are those who work abroad, in which Timokhin is not noticed.
      2. Medved privet
        Medved privet 9 July 2020 04: 37 New
        -1
        from you, who is this?
        1. timokhin-aa
          9 July 2020 10: 22 New
          +2
          Well think a little bit
          1. Medved privet
            Medved privet 26 August 2020 11: 07 New
            0
            i thought you were delusional
            1. timokhin-aa
              26 August 2020 14: 55 New
              +3
              You can't seem to "think". Not given, apparently.
  2. mark1
    mark1 4 July 2020 06: 34 New
    +2
    At key entry points of the NSR in our territories (in the absence of strov), it is necessary to put stationary combat platforms, special or on the basis of industrial ones (then purchase and re-equipment is possible). T.O. control will be provided (AWACS and H) and, if necessary, counteraction (for example, in case of cutting, a helicopter from the nearest platform will be able to "correct" a misunderstanding). They can also be put in neutral waters.
    1. mark1
      mark1 4 July 2020 06: 46 New
      11
      By the way, on June 20, in my commentary I made the same conclusions as the author, but then the majority preferred the dance of fighting penguins with sabers.
    2. timokhin-aa
      4 July 2020 12: 29 New
      +1
      The game is not worth the candle, we will go broke.
      1. mark1
        mark1 4 July 2020 12: 48 New
        +1
        In fact, it is not so expensive (not an aircraft carrier), but it is very, very multifunctional and efficient.
        1. timokhin-aa
          4 July 2020 17: 15 New
          0
          It’s just not necessary, you can easily do without it.
          1. mark1
            mark1 4 July 2020 19: 15 New
            +1
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            you can easily do without it.

            It’s difficult without women, bread (meat) and wine, and the platform is not difficult, not expensive (relatively), and you can effectively manage without it just like without toilet paper (as soon as you apply for the first time and some views change radically)
        2. Lopatov
          Lopatov 4 July 2020 20: 17 New
          +4
          Quote: mark1
          In fact, it is not so expensive (not an aircraft carrier)

          Not a fact.
          Platforms for the Arctic are very, very expensive.
          1. mark1
            mark1 5 July 2020 06: 11 New
            +1
            The cost of the Varandey complex (the platform is also included there) is -1,1 billion dollars, the cost of the Ford aircraft carrier is a little more than 12 billion, the cost of a promising Russian carrier is 5 and then billion dollars
    3. Grits
      Grits 5 July 2020 02: 35 New
      -1
      Quote: mark1
      At key entry points of the NSR in our terrains (in the absence of strov), stationary combat platforms

      It also seems to me that in Chukotka, near the Cape Dezhnev, a small military base is being requested. With an airfield capable of accepting cargo for life, with a powerful power plant (maybe more than one), residential buildings, hangars, warehouses. Well and most importantly - an artillery battery (albeit old and stationary, if only long-range), "modest" anti-ship missiles, object air defense. Intelligence systems, communications, radar stations. Well, a little guard soldiers with mobile light vehicles.
      It turns out such a modest, but sickly defense object. Which controls the strategic strait, and, accordingly, the entire SPM.
      1. timokhin-aa
        5 July 2020 18: 42 New
        +1
        In wartime, a pointless thing. Better to develop patrol aviation.
  3. Mitroha
    Mitroha 4 July 2020 06: 35 New
    10
    Alexander, thanks for the interesting article, if it were not for spilling bile in the first, essentially superfluous, chapter, it would be just fine
  4. Sibguest
    Sibguest 4 July 2020 08: 10 New
    13
    "And the Americans have military electronics, which we cannot even imagine."
    Martians helped them?
    And on our military equipment means the electronic tube technology of the times of “King Peas”?
    1. svp67
      svp67 4 July 2020 08: 16 New
      +6
      Quote: Sibguest
      And on our military equipment means the electronic tube technology of the times of “King Peas”?

      Yes, even the "lamp" can be used to create SUCH equipment to which another still grow and grow ...
    2. timokhin-aa
      4 July 2020 12: 29 New
      +4
      They are significantly superior to us in electronics, it is strange that you have not heard about this.
      1. bk316
        bk316 8 July 2020 14: 47 New
        0
        They are significantly superior to us in electronics, it is strange that you have not heard about this.

        But does it not cause a dissonance for you that in electronics they are significantly superior to us and in air defense and, in particular, in air defense radars they are significantly inferior? But this is solid electronics ....
        1. timokhin-aa
          8 July 2020 16: 19 New
          +2
          Only in terrestrial systems.
          In the ship, everything is strictly the opposite. At the same time, we have a dependency on imported components.
          Then who invested in what ...
    3. Grits
      Grits 5 July 2020 02: 38 New
      +1
      Quote: Sibguest
      "And the Americans have military electronics, which we cannot even imagine."
      Martians helped them?

      I will not say about the Martians, but brains from all over the planet (including from our side) helped them a lot. It is no secret that in terms of electronics they are unattainable for us, like American ballet before Russian.
    4. Mikhail Alexandrov
      Mikhail Alexandrov 5 July 2020 15: 47 New
      -2
      even oddly, the Yugoslavs managed to bring down the "invisibility", the old Soviet complex S-125 "Neva"
      1. timokhin-aa
        5 July 2020 18: 45 New
        +1
        Once in a story.

        In general, this is the most vulnerable tactical aircraft ever fought.
  5. Indifferent
    Indifferent 4 July 2020 08: 17 New
    +4
    I just want to say to the author: "Don’t say gop until you jump over!" They have been bringing the last aircraft carrier to the mind for almost 20 years and spent money on the whole fleet, and he is not ready for military operations. The new icebreaker was not even laid. How they finance is known. Printed papers and here it is financing. That's when the new icebreaker will be able to break the ice with at least 2 meter thick, then we'll talk. And it will be .... They themselves do not know when.
    1. IS-80_RVGK2
      IS-80_RVGK2 4 July 2020 11: 40 New
      +6
      Are you an hour not one of those who yelled a little earlier that the Mask will not take off and the javelins will not be delivered to Ukraine?
      1. Local from the Volga
        Local from the Volga 4 July 2020 21: 06 New
        -6
        and what took off ?! calves pass Makar!
        1. IS-80_RVGK2
          IS-80_RVGK2 5 July 2020 15: 16 New
          0
          Do you have a hysteria from your chronic stupidity? Soothing accept.
    2. timokhin-aa
      4 July 2020 12: 32 New
      +2
      They are already the last aircraft carrier for almost 20 years


      Not 20 in the first place, and an icebreaker is easier in the second place.

      How they finance is known.


      It is known, and the article says how.

      That's when the new icebreaker will be able to break the ice with at least 2 meter thick, then we'll talk.


      But you will pretend that you haven’t written all this, you will also rub the comments.
      1. Sidor Amenpodestovich
        Sidor Amenpodestovich 4 July 2020 13: 37 New
        +2
        How do you get such peremptory confidence that the American icebreaker will be ready in 2024? You came from the future, and you know it for sure?
        1. timokhin-aa
          4 July 2020 17: 16 New
          +7
          And what can prevent them from building it? There, almost all the equipment is serial.
          1. Sidor Amenpodestovich
            Sidor Amenpodestovich 4 July 2020 17: 45 New
            +3
            All kinds of unforeseen circumstances. You will not deny that they are ways to sometimes make very significant changes to the original plans.
            I do not claim that the Americans will not be able to build an icebreaker by the year 2024, but presenting this as an almost accomplished fact is somewhat presumptuous, in my opinion.
            1. timokhin-aa
              4 July 2020 22: 47 New
              +2
              Unforeseen circumstances, of course, may be, but to stop this project they must have a monstrous scale.
              Otherwise, there may simply be a shift in timing.
              But this is not critical for them.
            2. Kapral Alphych
              Kapral Alphych 29 July 2020 03: 44 New
              0
              Well, let's sit and dangle our legs in the hope that it will carry over and some sort of another mortgage crisis will resolve everything by itself! Super effective! And how clever!
            3. Kapral Alphych
              Kapral Alphych 29 July 2020 03: 44 New
              0
              Well, let's sit and dangle our legs in the hope that it will carry over and some sort of another mortgage crisis will resolve everything by itself! Super effective! And how clever!
            4. nickname7
              nickname7 30 August 2020 11: 20 New
              0
              I am not saying that the Americans will not be able to build an icebreaker by 2024, but presenting this as an almost fait accompli is somewhat presumptuous.

              In the Western measure, there is everything, from any gas turbines, diesel engines and electronics, and their money is not measured, unlike us, where the programs got up because of the lack of turbines and the lack of money, withdrawal into American securities.
          2. nPuBaTuP
            nPuBaTuP 4 July 2020 20: 46 New
            0
            There, almost all the equipment is serial.
            how on a completely new ship (and for them a new class of ships) can there be serial equipment?
            So this is not an icebreaker ...
            1. Scaffold
              Scaffold 5 July 2020 09: 33 New
              +4
              And why is there non-serial? Only body contours. For example, the Azipod rotor columns mentioned in the text are serial. Get off the tree.
    3. kig
      kig 4 July 2020 14: 46 New
      -4
      Quote: indifferent
      I just want to say to the author: "Don’t say gop until you jump over!"


      Pascagoula, MS., May 7, 2019 - VT Halter Marine, Inc. (VT Halter Marine), a company of Vision Technologies Systems, Inc. (VT Systems), has announced the award of the Polar Security Cutter (PSC) by the US Department of the Navy on April 23, 2019. The US Department of the Navy has awarded VT Halter Marine of Pascagoula, Mississippi, as the prime contractor of a $ 745,940,860 fixed-price incentive-firm contract for the detail design and construction of the US Coast Guard (USCG) PSC (formerly the Heavy Polar Icebreaker). The PSC program is a multiple year Department of Homeland Security Level 1 investment and a USCG major system initiative to acquire up to three multi-mission PSCs to recapitalize the USCG's fleet of heavy icebreakers. This contract includes options which, if exercised, would bring the cumulative value of this contract to $ 1,942,812,266. The first ship delivery is scheduled to occur in 2024, the second in 2025 and the last delivering in early 2027.
      The Polar Security Cutter will fill a current, definitive need for the Coast Guard's statutory mission and provide support for other mission needs in the higher latitudes vital to the economic vitality, scientific inquiry and national interests of the United States. VT Halter Marine is teamed with Technology Associates, Inc. as the ship designer and, for over two years, has participated in the US Coast Guard's Heavy Polar Icebreaker Industry Study. The ship design is an evolution from the mature ”Polar Stern II” currently in design and construction; the team has worked rigorously to demonstrate its maturity and reliability. During the study, TAI incrementally adjusted the design and conducted a series of five ship model tank tests to optimize the design. The vessels are 460 feet in
      length with a beam of 88 feet overall, a full load displacement of approximately 22,900 long tons at delivery. The propulsion will be diesel electric at over 45,200 horse power and readily capable of breaking ice between six to eight feet thick. The vessel will accommodate 186 personnel comfortably for an extended endurance of 90 days.

      There are two more pages of text. Need a translation?
      1. nPuBaTuP
        nPuBaTuP 4 July 2020 20: 48 New
        0
        Required
        In Albanian we do not mean.
        1. kig
          kig 6 July 2020 06: 27 New
          +1
          I will not literally, but in general this is a press release from Halter Marine. They release them regularly and show off their achievements. Specifically, it states that the US Navy Department selected the company as the primary contractor for the design and construction of the icebreaker, which they call the Polar Security Cutter (PSC). The cost of the contract is indicated. The contract has an option, and if it comes into force, the total value will be almost two billion. The delivery of the first vessel is planned for 2024, the second to 2025 and the last to 2027. Next are brief characteristics.
      2. Grits
        Grits 5 July 2020 02: 40 New
        -2
        Quote: kig
        There are two more pages of text.

        Oh ... yaki scribbles .. Are you listening to the enemy voices? laughing
        1. kig
          kig 6 July 2020 01: 58 New
          +3
          [quoteEnglish voices listening? laughingquote] no, I read on the Internet. First I read this article, it became interesting what kind of Halter Marine it is. Found. Indeed, it has an order for the construction of icebreakers, information is confirmed from several sources. And as for the language ... I already did not imagine that English is such a wonder.
          1. Grits
            Grits 6 July 2020 15: 00 New
            0
            Quote: kig
            And as for the language ... I already did not assume that English is such a wonder.

            For me, a dark forest, to be honest. laughing
            1. nickname7
              nickname7 30 August 2020 11: 24 New
              0
              For me a dark forest, to be honest

              English is a world language, all the latest technology is written in it, it is stupid not to be able to translate through translators.
  6. svp67
    svp67 4 July 2020 08: 18 New
    +6
    The creation of a flotilla of US combat icebreakers proves once again their desire to capture part of the NSR in order to “cut” denyuzhku from it ... Otherwise, such a profitable project will pass by ... it’s an “insult” to Americans, " blood resentment "
    1. eklmn
      eklmn 5 July 2020 02: 16 New
      0
      “... Americans are going to actively harm us on the Northern Sea Route with their icebreakers”
      If you are going to race with their icebreakers like convoys in Syria, then look at your feet - they can set up the bandwagon! They will be very active in harming (the author has details - the ice will be repainted, the log slipped into wormwood, etc.)
  7. bar
    bar 4 July 2020 08: 38 New
    +2
    the US will have two new heavy icebreakers and one medium Healy in service.

    Yeah, "the public will have to disappoint."
    Needless to say, the stripes will wipe the nose of Russia with its miserable icebreaker fleet of 55 pieces, 4 of which are nuclear.
    Although, if we discard the bravura first paragraph, the article itself is interesting. Thanks to the author, read with pleasure. I am glad that VO begins to return to technology from politics.
    1. timokhin-aa
      4 July 2020 12: 33 New
      +4
      And they don’t even need a third of our quantity. To spoil our lives on the NSR, three are enough for them.
      1. bar
        bar 4 July 2020 13: 22 New
        0
        To spoil our lives and expensive icebreakers are not needed. With stripes and without icebreakers, everything works out. One free sanction is enough ..
        1. Narak-zempo
          Narak-zempo 4 July 2020 15: 57 New
          0
          Quote: bar
          One free sanction is enough

          Ah, don’t tell my Iskanders,
          Do not tell my Poplars ...

          After all, back in 2014 it was said that sanctions are a PR dish exclusively for intra-American consumption, and they cannot cause real damage.
          1. Kapral Alphych
            Kapral Alphych 29 July 2020 03: 48 New
            0
            That is what I think, why is buckwheat again at 100 rubles per kg! And it turns out that it is because of your laughter, and not from the sanctions!
            1. Narak-zempo
              Narak-zempo 29 July 2020 08: 28 New
              0
              Quote: Kapral Alphitch
              That is what I think, why is buckwheat again at 100 rubles per kg! And it turns out that it is because of your laughter, and not from the sanctions!

              I thought only "svidomye" measure everything with the prices of buckwheat.
              1. Kapral Alphych
                Kapral Alphych 3 August 2020 07: 41 New
                0
                I thought that smart people look at the surrounding reality with a more sober look, and not wave and giggle with checkers.
          2. Greenwood
            Greenwood 31 August 2020 07: 38 New
            +2
            Quote: Narak-zempo
            and they cannot inflict real harm.
            Only the dollar rose from 30 to 75. And along with it, gasoline, food and everything else. And since 2014, salaries have remained almost unchanged for many.
            1. Narak-zempo
              Narak-zempo 31 August 2020 08: 11 New
              -1
              Quote: Greenwood
              Quote: Narak-zempo
              and they cannot inflict real harm.
              Only the dollar rose from 30 to 75. And along with it, gasoline, food and everything else. And since 2014, salaries have remained almost unchanged for many.

              You don't pay for food and gasoline with dollars? Yes, and bread and potatoes, and oil with gasoline, we are not imported, thank Gd.
              On the contrary, as the President said, if the exchange rate has increased, it means that more rubles will go to the budget from each dollar for oil and gas.
              1. Greenwood
                Greenwood 1 September 2020 15: 13 New
                0
                Quote: Narak-zempo
                You don't pay for food and gasoline with dollars?
                I pay in rubles, only in 2014 I paid 2 times less. And as I said, salaries have not doubled during this time, a paradox.
                Quote: Narak-zempo
                as the President said
                Who is not responsible for his words? Why on earth should he believe?
                Quote: Narak-zempo
                for every dollar for oil and gas, more rubles will go to the budget.
                Has it become easier for an ordinary Russian to live? For some reason, his income has been falling for several years in a row. How did it happen that ah?
                1. Narak-zempo
                  Narak-zempo 1 September 2020 22: 25 New
                  0
                  Quote: Greenwood
                  Has it become easier for an ordinary Russian to live? For some reason, his income has been falling for several years in a row. How did it happen that ah?

                  So it is necessary, finally, to get out of the habit of receiving "pay" and start earning. Quit smoking goby, get up off the block and start working at last.
                  1. Greenwood
                    Greenwood 2 September 2020 14: 23 New
                    0
                    Ah, well, cool approach, something like that I expected. Are you not in business by any chance?
                    Why the hell do I need such a state and such a president, if I have to do everything absolutely myself, earn money myself, pay for everything myself, while constantly observing the rise in prices and the fall of the currency and simply receiving nothing from the state. Why do I pay taxes at all? Is it a welfare state or a banana republic? Include logic already.
                    Quote: Narak-zempo
                    start earning
                    Well, how do you earn a lot a month yourself? Do you pay taxes? Or is it all according to gray schemes and a salary in an envelope? lol
                    1. Narak-zempo
                      Narak-zempo 2 September 2020 18: 41 New
                      0
                      Quote: Greenwood
                      Why the hell do I need such a state and such a president, if I have to do everything absolutely myself, earn money myself, pay for everything myself, while constantly observing the rise in prices and the fall of the currency and simply receiving nothing from the state. Why do I pay taxes at all?

                      And who will give the debt to the Motherland?
                      1. Greenwood
                        Greenwood 4 September 2020 15: 37 New
                        +1
                        And I have no duty to the Motherland. I pay for everything, have you forgotten?
                      2. Narak-zempo
                        Narak-zempo 4 September 2020 15: 38 New
                        0
                        Quote: Greenwood
                        And I have no duty to the Motherland. I pay for everything, have you forgotten?

                        Born - owed life to the Motherland.
                      3. Greenwood
                        Greenwood 4 September 2020 15: 38 New
                        +1
                        Trollism is not appropriate. trolls sooner or later go to the ban. how many were already here.
    2. timokhin-aa
      4 July 2020 17: 17 New
      +3
      The question again is not this, but how to respond to their provocations on the NSR when they begin.
  • Observer2014
    Observer2014 4 July 2020 09: 28 New
    -9
    American heavy icebreakers of the XXI century. One in construction, two in line, what's next?
    And then, as they want, they will do so. And as long as necessary, they will do so. And you can puff up and push until tomorrow, and the Americans will want to compete with the Russian icebreaking fleet.
    1. TermNachTer
      TermNachTer 4 July 2020 10: 18 New
      +5
      In a couple of years, and even in 10, an icebreaking fleet, like in Russia, cannot be built. I'm not talking about the crews. Where will they get 10 ready-made crews for 10 new icebreakers? Russia has been building this for decades. Not everything is simple, in this world))))
      1. Thunderbringer
        Thunderbringer 4 July 2020 11: 36 New
        -1
        The main thing is to believe in the omnipotence of the United States, and in no case to believe in Russia.
        Therefore, they write about "as much as necessary, they will do so."
        1. Kapral Alphych
          Kapral Alphych 29 July 2020 03: 51 New
          0
          Underestimating the enemy is worse than overestimating. Better to be overstretched than not to be oversized - he sleeps more calmly and does not puff up.
        2. Kapral Alphych
          Kapral Alphych 29 July 2020 03: 51 New
          0
          Underestimating the enemy is worse than overestimating. Better to be overstretched than not to be oversized - he sleeps more calmly and does not puff up.
      2. timokhin-aa
        4 July 2020 12: 34 New
        -1
        The main thing is to think with your head before you write something.
        Why do they need the same amount? They do not even need a third of our quantity.
        1. Sidor Amenpodestovich
          Sidor Amenpodestovich 4 July 2020 13: 48 New
          0
          Again, why do you think that only those who share your point of view think with their heads, and those who are against, respectively, do not know how to think? Where does this pompous self-confidence come from?
          1. timokhin-aa
            4 July 2020 17: 21 New
            0
            What point of view do you mean?
            1. Sidor Amenpodestovich
              Sidor Amenpodestovich 4 July 2020 17: 46 New
              -2
              Different from yours.
              1. timokhin-aa
                4 July 2020 22: 48 New
                +2
                What specifically?
      3. Observer2014
        Observer2014 4 July 2020 13: 10 New
        -2
        Quote: TermNachTER
        In a couple of years, and even in 10, an icebreaking fleet, like in Russia, cannot be built. I'm not talking about the crews. Where will they get 10 ready-made crews for 10 new icebreakers? Russia has been building this for decades. Not everything is simple, in this world))))

        All the khan of the American Navy, we have the coolest icebreaker fleet in the world! Hooray! laughing I’ll say it again. You can scream cheers even tomorrow. But if necessary, the US military-industrial complex and civilian shipbuilding will give the Americans an icebreaker fleet as soon as possible. If they need it, they won’t need it. The Russian icebreaking fleet will be Namba van. And everyone will be happy.
        1. TermNachTer
          TermNachTer 4 July 2020 14: 44 New
          -2
          Boy, return to our harsh reality))) I can still believe that in 10 years they will build ten icebreakers, if they are very tense, but this is unlikely. But where will they get 10 polar captains? The polar captain is about 15 years old in high latitudes, has passed all the steps, in his own skin felt all the delights of the Far North. Or do you think this is the same as the captain of a pleasure boat from Lake Ontario?
          1. timokhin-aa
            4 July 2020 17: 22 New
            +7
            They now have 5 people commanding polar icebreakers and five starpoms, and the number of people who previously solved problems in Arkik is many dozens. What is the problem?
            1. TermNachTer
              TermNachTer 4 July 2020 18: 23 New
              0
              With two icebreakers that are on the move, where are the 5 captains and 5 start-ups? If you do not know, the ship (ship) must be commanded constantly. Breaks lead to loss of skills. If you just take a ship, I think that in the ice, it is even more tangible.
              1. timokhin-aa
                4 July 2020 23: 03 New
                +3
                What makes you think that they have only two icebreakers?
                1. TermNachTer
                  TermNachTer 5 July 2020 09: 15 New
                  -1
                  How much? This is not hard to track from open sources. The icebreaker is a very specific ship, their countries are easily listed on the fingers. Naturally, we take into account ice class vessels that can independently go through ice 50 cm thick.
                  1. timokhin-aa
                    5 July 2020 18: 50 New
                    +1
                    Naturally, we take into account ice class vessels that can independently go through ice 50 cm thick.


                    Oh, what a fellow you are.
                    Well then, four - Polar Star, Healy, Palmer, Sikiliak.
                    Lawrence M. Gould is limitedly suitable - it breaks only 30 cm.
                    Nevertheless, I see no reason to believe that he is not an icebreaker.

                    In general, return to reality already.
                    1. TermNachTer
                      TermNachTer 5 July 2020 19: 05 New
                      0
                      Can you read? What breaks 50 cm is not an icebreaker, but a miserable likeness. So, the icebreakers have 2 icebreakers on the move, which they themselves consider difficult, although our icebreakers have such expressions, causes polite smirks.
                      1. timokhin-aa
                        5 July 2020 19: 10 New
                        0
                        You do not change shoes in a jump.
                        50 cm was your criterion, not mine.
                        You don’t have to bust backwards, this is a man very much not to face.
                      2. TermNachTer
                        TermNachTer 5 July 2020 19: 51 New
                        0
                        I apologize for the mistake, I missed the "not." Do not find fault with trifles, I think you understood the meaning. And clinging to nonsense, a man is not to face.
                      3. timokhin-aa
                        5 July 2020 19: 59 New
                        -3
                        Very weak.
                        We would be interested in at least how the thickness of overcome ice at our icebreakers decreased over time.
                        However, there it is difficult for you.
        2. alstr
          alstr 5 July 2020 22: 49 New
          +3
          So to speak. Experience decides a lot.
          There was a film about the rescue in Antarctica of a foreign vessel. There they first rescued on their own, and then they called us. So, There was an episode when it was necessary to break through in a rapidly freezing channel. Could only by the method of our captain.
          Because the foreigners do not have such experience as ours. It’s just ordinary for us, but exotic for them, because they do not work in such conditions.
      4. Motorist
        Motorist 4 July 2020 22: 32 New
        0
        Quote: TermNachTER
        But where will they get 10 polar captains?

        The technique has a margin of safety, so recruiting people from the street [as practice shows] does not immediately lead to an accident.
        1. Polar Bear
          Polar Bear 8 July 2020 09: 34 New
          +2
          Firstly, they have 3 of their icebreakers, which means there is a lot of walking in the ice, which means there are manuals for captains and training programs. Secondly, they have scientific vessels, which conducted the study of the Arctic region, in addition, the study is conducted from satellites. Thirdly, their submarines since the 60s have been constantly grazing in the Arctic, they always have science on board, they are constantly measuring the thickness of ice in different areas and at different times and other hydrographic studies. Fourth, they must have long since been tearing at our place all of our programs, textbooks, and guidance documents for navigators sailing in the Arctic. Fifth, to the extremes, no one bothers them with inviting Russian polar captains who have lived on a small pension to work for good money, just like they invited our astronauts to NASA and pulled out all their experience on the space station from them. But I think the Americans do not need it, they can handle it.
      5. Observer2014
        Observer2014 4 July 2020 23: 26 New
        -3
        Boy, come back to shore. We are discussing the possibility of Americans building a piece of iron icebreakers in the article. But not your memories of the charms of the harsh climate of the Far North.
        It would be something to go to sea. And about the impossibility of the Americans to train a team. Yes, it's just funny to read. Until recently, did Russia have many gas carriers?
        1. TermNachTer
          TermNachTer 5 July 2020 09: 16 New
          -1
          Which sailor did you end up with? Which vessels, in what positions did he go?
  • your1970
    your1970 6 July 2020 07: 19 New
    0
    Quote: TermNachTER
    In a couple of years, and even in 10, an icebreaking fleet, like in Russia, cannot be built.

    The main thing is to remember the Liberty ... I agree, it was military time, but now they don’t need to launch a ship in a week ...
  • serezhasoldatow
    serezhasoldatow 4 July 2020 22: 57 New
    +1
    I searched about the icebreaker fleet of the usa in the entire history of its existence. Not impressive. Or maybe top secret information?
  • Suslin
    Suslin 4 July 2020 09: 32 New
    +4
    You should not wait for the weather near the sea. Provocations will and must be prepared for them. I suppose to push back the US icebreakers in the most “peaceful” way. And it’s time to notify the UN, NATO and all those “interested” that the lack of ratification of international treaties implies a harsh response to provocation. Something like this.
    1. Scaffold
      Scaffold 4 July 2020 10: 43 New
      +7
      "provocation" ... With this youth we step into the future.
      1. kartalovkolya
        kartalovkolya 4 July 2020 11: 31 New
        0
        We will not be strictly judged for one-piece, as we hear and write, and the meaning is even wow !!!
        1. Scaffold
          Scaffold 5 July 2020 09: 28 New
          0
          This is not a typo. This is a classic: does not know the native language; hence does not read anything; therefore, knows nothing and does not know how.
  • Doccor18
    Doccor18 4 July 2020 09: 50 New
    +1
    here, apparently, one should not get involved in the increase in the construction of military icebreakers. Until the scale of the problems is clear

    Maybe you should not get involved, but 2 patrol 23550 is clearly not enough.
    Problems always appear suddenly, and ships are built for a long time, and sometimes painfully long ...
    At least parity should be with the number of promising American icebreakers, that is, at least 6 units. And taking into account the fact that the Arctic has long become a Russian sphere of influence, it would be nice to have an overwhelming advantage here, so that for some people the scratch will go away once and for all ..
  • TermNachTer
    TermNachTer 4 July 2020 10: 12 New
    +5
    I am embarrassed to ask - they began to build, laid on the slipway, ordered materials? Can you be more specific? The ordering of materials suggests that the ship (ship) will someday begin to be built, but not necessarily tomorrow. The materials ordered for the construction of one ship can be used in the construction of another ship.))) If they had at least a couple of meters of keel on the slipway, we could talk about something. And the author for some reason is “ironically” sure that in 4 years the mattresses will have a new icebreaker. Well, how, any other virus will happen or a hurricane, or some other cataclysm?
    1. Thunderbringer
      Thunderbringer 4 July 2020 11: 39 New
      +1
      Quote: TermNachTER
      And the author for some reason is “ironically” sure that in 4 years the mattresses will have a new icebreaker.

      No wonder.
      This author is “sure” that Putin’s regime is about to fall.
      That they have such greetings from alternative reality in their heads.
      Enthusiastic bubbles about the power of the United States in half with a nagging "but here everything is bad again."
      1. timokhin-aa
        4 July 2020 12: 37 New
        -3
        [quote] This author is “sure” that Putin’s regime is about to fall.

        This author has consistently voted for Putin in the presidential election.

        [quote] This is their hello from the alternative reality in their heads. [/ quote]

        What do you know about reality? Judging by the comments, your reality is limited by the road from a wretched apartment to the attending physician and back. Well, read on how Poseidon blew up New York and toss the bonnet up a couple of times.
        1. serezhasoldatow
          serezhasoldatow 4 July 2020 23: 00 New
          0
          Achinea is easier to carry than a log. Do not know how to react correctly, do not write.
      2. TermNachTer
        TermNachTer 4 July 2020 14: 38 New
        -2
        The author is very poorly perceives our harsh reality)))) it happens)))
    2. timokhin-aa
      4 July 2020 12: 36 New
      -2
      Production of a power plant and a number of subsystems is ongoing, designing is being completed, laying in 2021, commissioning in 2024. Everything is written in the article.
      The delay can only be due to some force majeure and not for long.
      1. TermNachTer
        TermNachTer 4 July 2020 14: 39 New
        0
        How many year olds are they finishing the Ford? Although at first, there were no problems either.
        1. timokhin-aa
          4 July 2020 17: 23 New
          +8
          But nothing that Ford only finishers more complicated than the entire icebreaker as a whole?
          1. TermNachTer
            TermNachTer 4 July 2020 18: 19 New
            0
            If they are so complicated that the box for 11 lard bucks is still not operational, maybe something will go wrong with the icebreakers?
            1. timokhin-aa
              4 July 2020 22: 49 New
              +3
              Maybe it will, but on such a simple ship it is quite difficult to do something irreparably bad.
    3. Sergey39
      Sergey39 4 July 2020 13: 13 New
      0
      Quote: TermNachTER
      Well, how, any other virus will happen or a hurricane, or some other cataclysm?

      They still have not got out of this. And they won’t get out.
  • Night sniper
    Night sniper 4 July 2020 11: 44 New
    12
    I read the article with pleasure, the impression was ambiguous ..... On the one hand, I agree with the author, in the sense that it is not worthwhile to engage in cap-making in the Russian Federation, since it is possible to lose or win, but with excessive losses for yourself ... .. On the other hand, the article has a lot of inaccuracies. 1) The United States is still conducting business and mining operations beyond the Arctic Circle in Alaska. Mostly ice roads and heavy trucks are used for this, which does not allow to have a year-round connection with these objects. People and relatively small loads can still be delivered by helicopter, but this is a little expensive compared to shipping by sea vessels, and the delivery of large-tonnage, bulky goods by helicopters is generally questionable .... 2) In addition, a series of icebreakers such as Polar C can hardly be called successful. So, with these two icebreakers, the Yankees were forced to seek help from the Russian Federation to make their way to their Antarctic station, one of the US icebreakers received severe damage and went to repair, and the second lost the propeller. The Russians helped the Yankees by sending the Krasin diesel icebreaker to help . In a similar situation, the Chinese, at their Polar Dragon icebreaker, also could not fulfill the assigned task, the icebreaker itself was damaged .... Conclusion - it’s not enough to build an icebreaker, it needs to be built with high quality and an experienced crew put on it, and with this the Yankees and the Chinese, for now, have problems. Of course, if the Kremlin starts popping their ears and resting on their laurels, the Russian Federation may be behind both the Yankees and the Chinese, so Russia needs to seriously upgrade its own icebreaker fleet.
    1. timokhin-aa
      4 July 2020 12: 40 New
      -2
      The United States does business and mining beyond the Arctic Circle in Alaska.


      This is nothing against the background of the Russian Federation.

      In addition, a series of icebreakers such as Polar C is hardly successful. So, having these two icebreakers, the Yankees were forced to seek help from the Russian Federation in order to make their way to their Antarctic station, and one of the US icebreakers received severe damage and went for repair, and the second lost the propeller.


      We climbed onto the ice, which was too thick for them.
      New icebreakers will be twice as heavy
      1. Night sniper
        Night sniper 4 July 2020 13: 01 New
        +8
        How successful the new US icebreakers will be, time will tell. The maneuverability of a large ship in ice is a complicated thing, the pressure of ice on a large bow projection will also not be small, and this is not with the most powerful power plant. To avoid thick ice, say, through cracks, is not an easy task, since there may not be cracks. There are many examples of this, here is the drift of the Soviet Mikhail Somov sandwiched in the ice of Antarctica, and German Magdalena Oldendorf sandwiched in the ice of the Arctic.
        1. timokhin-aa
          4 July 2020 17: 24 New
          -1
          No, well, failure cannot be denied, here I do not argue, but on the other hand, their chances of success are many times higher, nevertheless.
          Healy was built, and not so long ago.
    2. Sergey39
      Sergey39 4 July 2020 13: 16 New
      -1
      Quote: Night Sniper
      so Russia needs to seriously upgrade its icebreaker fleet.

      Upgrade nuclear-powered icebreakers under construction?
      1. Night sniper
        Night sniper 4 July 2020 13: 41 New
        +3
        To update Soviet-built icebreakers in service by adequately replacing them with new ships, at least not inferior to them in capabilities.
        1. Sergey39
          Sergey39 4 July 2020 14: 46 New
          +2
          What is happening now on a scale to which the United States will never reach.
          1. timokhin-aa
            4 July 2020 23: 02 New
            +2
            Do they need it? The article refers to another, and in another very eloquent comparison of what and how we do in the Arctic and what the United States does. With pictures, for clarity.
            They don’t need as many icebreakers as we do, they are not going to work in the Arctic, they are going to shit in it.
            1. Sergey39
              Sergey39 5 July 2020 00: 52 New
              +1
              That the USA needs new icebreakers, I did not say. And they will not be able to spoil us with these planned icebreakers. It is possible to pass the NSR without entering the ter.ter.water only through the North Pole. The designed American icebreakers will not be able to do this.
              1. timokhin-aa
                5 July 2020 18: 52 New
                +2
                It is possible to pass the NSR without entering the Russian ter. Water only through the North Pole


                You generally get into the habit of reading articles that you comment on.
  • kot-begemot
    kot-begemot 4 July 2020 12: 19 New
    10
    A couple of thoughts out loud.
    Financing for one and laying the second, and not for 3 icebreakers. Accordingly, the figure of costs by the author was calculated incorrectly.
    An ice thickness of 2 meters is not grandiose. Fuel autonomy in the northern latitudes is still important. And here the atom steers.
    Weapons are a separate topic, but I think that our icebreakers also have not only the captain’s PM. This ship is not a barge in Odessa's air defense estuaries, plo, chemical smoke, nuclear scientists, etc.
    Ice-class nuclear-powered vessels are built under the control of mo and Rosatom, I think they are of dual-use by definition, and they’ll throw them at the last hitch and pick up the sick and wounded and load ammunition, because apart from reactors, bioprotection and latrine on board, how much space (volume) )
    What about electronics from the adversary - I like the intimidation of the capabilities of ships for which they have only allocated money - we do not know the technical characteristics, weapons, crew, but we are firmly convinced that the Americans have everything "the best" .TS, and what do you know about avionics of the modern Navy Radar, sonars, weapon control systems, communication systems, intercepts, jammers?
    While there are no usnavy icebreakers in the iron, you can guess, suppose, but not quite correctly make thoughtful conclusions that everything was gone.
    Over the years, either the Sultan will die or the donkey will die.
    1. Bashkirkhan
      Bashkirkhan 4 July 2020 16: 08 New
      0
      Quote: kot-begemot
      After all, with their sizes, in addition to reactors, bioprotection and latrine on board, how much space (volume) is fucking.

      In the setting of the LK-60YA, in addition to the cabins and other crew accommodation (dining room, pantries, galley, conference room, pool, sauna, gym, dispensary, buffet, ship bench, etc., etc.) there is a lot of technological equipment. Deaerator, emergency diesel generators, equalization tanks for feed water and tanks for emergency cooling systems, a lot of fans, gyro, etc. Reactor compartment, separation of the main turbogenerators, separation of propeller motors, separation of auxiliary equipment. Ice boxes and flows. A pile of ballast tanks and stock tanks of feed water, fresh water, diesel fuel, turbine oil.
    2. timokhin-aa
      4 July 2020 17: 27 New
      +1
      What about electronics from the adversary - I like the intimidation of the capabilities of ships for which they have only allocated money - we do not know the technical characteristics, weapons, crew, but we are firmly convinced that the Americans have everything "the best" .TS, and what do you know about avionics of the modern Navy Radar, sonars, weapon control systems, communication systems, intercepts, jammers?


      Avionics - in aircraft, on the ships REV and VTV. I know a lot of things, down to things that cannot be said out loud.
      And the Americans will have a lot of such systems on the ship, this is a settled issue.

      While there are no usnavy icebreakers in the iron, you can guess, suppose, but not quite correctly make thoughtful conclusions that everything was gone.
      Over the years, either the Sultan will die or the donkey will die.


      In usnavy and it is not planned to have any icebreakers, you read what you comment.
      1. Roman_vh
        Roman_vh 6 July 2020 03: 07 New
        +3
        Your snobbery is terrible. Why are you kipish? Americans have qualified for the construction of an icebreaker? Flag in their hands. We will not be able to influence this in any way. And what they will do with them, here we will see. Until the age of 24 is still far away, they would survive the presidential election without pogroms.
        1. timokhin-aa
          6 July 2020 13: 51 New
          +2
          We must not "look", we must foresee their moves and be prepared for them.
  • Ersh
    Ersh 4 July 2020 12: 38 New
    +5
    I support those colleagues who note that from the beginning of financing to the delivery of the icebreaker to the fleet, a fleet of three or four years is not enough. An icebreaker is a very difficult thing! You won’t get the competencies so quickly, both engineers and ordinary hard workers are needed to implement even the most remarkable project in hardware.
    About crew training is also correct. The right people in crowds do not go to the states.
    One more thing. For some reason, everyone believes that the NSR is the one that runs along the coast of Russia. Have you looked at the globe for a long time? That piece of the ocean that Canada has is also an NSR. Icebreakers can come in handy there too.
    But wait for the success of the United States, remembering that "it was smooth on paper, but forgot about the ravines"
    1. timokhin-aa
      4 July 2020 17: 28 New
      -2
      I support those colleagues who note that from the beginning of financing to the delivery of the icebreaker to the fleet, a fleet of three or four years is not enough. An icebreaker is a very difficult thing!


      What do you write in 2024?

      One more thing. For some reason, everyone believes that the NSR is the one that runs along the coast of Russia. Have you looked at the globe for a long time? That piece of the ocean that Canada has is also an NSR.


      No, the fact that off the coast of Canada is the NWP. The Americans, by the way, have a dispute over the status of this route with Canada, and there they will also appear apparently.
      But first, to us.
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 4 July 2020 13: 15 New
    +5
    The author just loves America very much ... he is "the best" and that’s it. One diesel-electric icebreaker will both get on the NSR and cover this direction ... well, one and a half ... We need our icebreakers for WORK. And for what? And there are still our land bases, and airfields ... And the "Northern latitudinal railway" is slowly returning ... to implementation. And what can two whole icebreakers be able to do this over a 5000 km long track? No matter what the super-duper electronics charge them.
    1. timokhin-aa
      4 July 2020 17: 30 New
      -4
      The author just loves America very much ... he is "the best" and that's it


      Why do you think so?

      And what can two whole icebreakers be able to do this over a 5000 km long track?


      Once on a Chinese bulk carrier to land for inspection. All, goodbye hopes for international transit after that.
      This is one of hundreds of examples.
      1. Mountain shooter
        Mountain shooter 4 July 2020 17: 42 New
        +2
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        The author just loves America very much ... he is "the best" and that's it


        Why do you think so?

        And what can two whole icebreakers be able to do this over a 5000 km long track?


        Once on a Chinese bulk carrier to land for inspection. All, goodbye hopes for international transit after that.
        This is one of hundreds of examples.

        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Once on a Chinese bulk carrier to land for inspection.

        Are you seriously? Will an American icebreaker approach a caravan to land on someone? WHAT OUR ICE BREAKERS LEAD? So, "pirate"? And where will he be based? Bunker? Tortuga will open on New Earth?
        1. nPuBaTuP
          nPuBaTuP 4 July 2020 22: 25 New
          +3
          This Timokhin is already doing science fiction here :)))
        2. timokhin-aa
          4 July 2020 22: 56 New
          +2
          Are you seriously? Will an American icebreaker approach a caravan to land on someone? WHAT OUR ICE BREAKERS LEAD


          It’s true that they say that a bird can be seen by flight, a good fellow by snot, and a fermented patriot by the way he knows the subject under discussion.
          In August, the NSR fully opens and becomes passable for ships without icebreaking assistance.
          The Chinese then drive their bulk carriers to Europe mainly, so it turns out to be cheaper.
          And no icebreakers accompany them.
          On the other hand, no icebreaker does not interfere with landing an inspection lot from a helicopter.

          And where will he be based? Bunker? Tortuga will open on New Earth?


          There, the range is set at least 10000 km, and most likely more. The Americans have a fundamental condition for icebreakers - the transition from Seattle to the ports of South Australia and New Zealand without refueling. They conduct ice shipments to Antarctica, and the Bokhr cannot usually bunker, all of their ships have a huge range.
          So the answer is to be based in Seattle with a possible call to Norway after voyages along the NSR.
          Before entering the Bering Sea, they will take fuel “to the eyeballs” in open water, and forward.
          1. Mountain shooter
            Mountain shooter 4 July 2020 23: 14 New
            +3
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            It’s true that they say that a bird can be seen by flight, a good fellow by snot, and a fermented patriot by the way he knows the subject under discussion.

            Why then an icebreaker? By free water? About the German raiders of WWII time? Where is the logic? Poke an icebreaker in free water alone for what? Pirate raid? This is not a nip to Venezuela, this is Russia. And a bulk carrier like Chinese? Why would he do this? Will it be difficult to land an inspection group on him? Not an aircraft carrier, tea?
            Do we have ANYTHING in the North? Neither aviation nor coastal bases?
            1. nPuBaTuP
              nPuBaTuP 5 July 2020 10: 40 New
              +2
              horror caught up with Comrade Timokhin ..... he probably came from some sort of parallel reality .....
            2. timokhin-aa
              5 July 2020 18: 55 New
              0
              The icebreaker then, to ensure freedom of maneuver, open water is a narrow strip along our coasts, especially in the Chukotka Sea.
              A little north is already ice.

              Do we have ANYTHING in the North? Neither aviation nor coastal bases?


              There is. but what will we do with them? Sobem helicopter American Bohr over neutral waters?
              Let's bomb an icebreaker that cuts 3 miles through our thermal guides? But nothing that we have ratified the Convention on the Law of the Sea? Together with the "right of peaceful passage"?
  • tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 4 July 2020 14: 26 New
    +2
    When they’ll build it and look at the final cost. They consider the NSR free for shipping, that’s what we will probably have a problem with these icebreakers.
    1. Sergey39
      Sergey39 4 July 2020 14: 51 New
      0
      They can count anything. And they will have problems with these ice drifts.
      1. tralflot1832
        tralflot1832 4 July 2020 15: 04 New
        +1
        I hope so. And let it be as you said.
        1. antchar
          antchar 4 July 2020 15: 37 New
          0
          Well you all are puffing up! The United States has China as its main adversary! And here the icebreakers! They have not yet fully realized this and the rod by inertia!
      2. timokhin-aa
        4 July 2020 17: 31 New
        +1
        If there are problems there, then with the head one, on the next they will be corrected in any case.
    2. Mountain shooter
      Mountain shooter 4 July 2020 17: 47 New
      +2
      Quote: tralflot1832
      They consider the NSR free for shipping, and this is probably where we will have a problem with these icebreakers.

      Have you noticed that they consider the whole planet their fiefdom? Although most streak-ears are most likely not strong in geography and do not know that the earth is not flat ...
  • basal
    basal 4 July 2020 15: 13 New
    +2
    Amers will not take away the ability to build good ships. But even better they know how to cut money. The author is delighted that Congress has already paid for one and a half icebreakers, although it is further mentioned that there is not even a finished project, but it turns out that components are already being ordered. What is it like? The answer is simple. Money received, urgently spending what comes out - it will be seen. Like with Zumvolt. They spread it all over the world and calmed down. The ship is not only incompetent, it turns out no one really understands why it is needed at all. And how many billions sawn? five? ten? By the way, the correct thought briefly flashed in the article - for amers, the icebreaker fleet is clean show-offs. All the tasks are handled by those that are. Yes, they need to be repaired, modernized, replaced with new ones, but that’s all.
    1. tralflot1832
      tralflot1832 4 July 2020 15: 19 New
      +1
      They bake warships like pies, they cannot be taken away from them. An icebreaker is almost like a civilian. We will see what they can do.
    2. timokhin-aa
      4 July 2020 17: 32 New
      0
      the truth is further mentioned that there is not even a finished project yet, but it turns out that components are already being ordered. What is it like?


      Easy. There are already completed parts of the project that will not change, and those components that definitely will not change when the design is completed, for example, a diesel engine.
    3. Scaffold
      Scaffold 5 July 2020 09: 44 New
      0
      There is such a discipline - "system engineering". It allows you to have complete clarity about the components of the project long before its completion. In the West, they are very good at system engineering, believe me. In Russia, in this respect, we are basting cabbage soup, to our great regret.
  • alsoclean
    alsoclean 4 July 2020 16: 36 New
    +3
    Do not "fry"! Russian icebreakers are an infrastructure for economic development (albeit with a certain bias in the Navy). American - this is purely the Navy! That is the difference. The Americans understand this.
    And further. Shit in the Arctic must be able to. To do this, you need to train - this is not a simple matter .... Russia trained even in the most liberal-perestroika years. It is more difficult for the Americans to see this ... Of course, you should not relax. But ashes sprinkle head too ....
    1. timokhin-aa
      4 July 2020 17: 33 New
      -1
      And further. Shit in the Arctic must be able to. To do this, you need to train - this is not a simple matter .... Russia trained even in the most liberal-perestroika years. It’s more difficult with the Americans ...


      They will have the opportunity to practice before shitting.
      1. alsoclean
        alsoclean 4 July 2020 17: 40 New
        0
        Well, let a couple of AB "cut into nails." To start... lol Perhaps the opportunity will appear .. Here, after all, we are talking about priorities. For example: can it be practiced in the East China Sea or in the Persian Gulf? There it is somehow more interesting for global interests. Don't you think?
      2. Gust
        Gust 4 July 2020 23: 01 New
        +3
        Good article. BUT:
        - caravans are accompanied by an icebreaker (with a helicopter), it’s impossible to secretly approach;
        - icebreakers are never stealth; you can graze at the exit from the base;
        - simply a “peaceful passage” is one thing, an attempt to “land” in our bodies is an act of aggression;
        - AUG in case of trouble does not help;
        - methods of struggle are well-established; bulk with partial recoil of the anchor;)))
        1. timokhin-aa
          5 July 2020 18: 59 New
          +1
          Well, they’ll jerk on the caravan, rather, on a lonely Chinese, passing in August in open water.

          - methods of struggle are well-established; bulk with partial recoil of the anchor;)))


          But is it necessary? Maybe in response Aleut should be festered? I am writing to this - you must be prepared in advance.
  • tralmaster
    tralmaster 4 July 2020 17: 53 New
    +1
    Once again, everything was gone!
  • nikant
    nikant 4 July 2020 18: 45 New
    -1
    here they’re overcrowded ... if these icebreakers are put into operation. then they will immediately become steeper and more powerful than all Russian, not nuclear! shipbuilding? engine building? electronics? here are unanswered questions ... could this be done in the last 20 years? Of course you can’t: there are still so many yachts to be built by the lake cooperative!
  • dgonni
    dgonni 4 July 2020 19: 53 New
    -3
    Timokhin respect. Explanatory article!
    In fact, a kind of reconnaissance ship with non-acidic capabilities as well as a control point for weapons of external carriers. At the same time, given the energy sector and electronic warfare, there will be no children there. And given the presence of underwater vehicles, then aid and sonar there will also settle down.
    So they will drink a lot of nerves in SF.
    1. agond
      agond 4 July 2020 20: 26 New
      +1
      There were assumptions that the Yankees would violate our territorial waters in the Arctic, and with what we should be told, such as you can’t shoot, mine the ice at the border, it’s also impossible (although it’s interesting to freeze small charges for fear in the ice), but let’s say artificial ice floes of increased size of thickness under the pretext of creating drifting stations, you can probably, or just pour liquid nitrogen into the ship dozens of cubes at a time to get a “micro iceberg” from the ship, it will be unpleasant to find it and it’s difficult to find it and it’s awkward to go around it in the ice.
      1. timokhin-aa
        4 July 2020 22: 59 New
        +3
        I personally think it should be so. Did their icebreaker go north to the Bering Strait? Our detachment of warships from the Pacific Fleet went east to the Aleutians.
        They will climb in our guards, hiding behind the right of a peaceful passage, we will immediately do the same in their response.

        Something like that.
        1. agond
          agond 4 July 2020 23: 08 New
          +1
          We have a weak Pacific Fleet
          1. timokhin-aa
            5 July 2020 19: 00 New
            -1
            It makes no difference, this is not war.
            One ship is enough, even MRK
          2. Vadim237
            Vadim237 5 July 2020 21: 27 New
            +1
            But there are many anti-ship missiles and their land and air-based carriers.
            1. timokhin-aa
              5 July 2020 22: 21 New
              +1
              You can’t just name them.
              I once thought it to the accuracy of one rocket, but you do not let up.
        2. K298rtm
          K298rtm 5 July 2020 13: 34 New
          +1
          1. The article is interesting, informative. Thanks to the author.
          2. Why do you consider the "right of peaceful passage" a provocation?
          3. Why do we act "mirror"? Maybe it is better to observe (closely monitor) the actions of partners?
          4. I believe (this is from the series “who’s talking about something, but lousy about the bathhouse”) that one of the tasks of the US icebreaker fleet will be the maintenance of FOSS, which can be created (deployed) in areas constantly covered with ice (it seems to me that it is technically quite possible).
          1. timokhin-aa
            5 July 2020 19: 03 New
            +1
            2. The fact is that, in the spirit of the Convention, a warship has the right to a peaceful passage when its route to its destination passes through thermal waters.
            But the Americans themselves have their own water destination - this is the end point and purpose of their route.
            As a result, it has different interpretations and incidents such as Caron and Yorktown in the Crimea.
            My vision of the question is - if they do, then they don’t even need to present a separate note for the passage, they just need to spin in their ter.water exactly the same.

            3. These guys are like that - letting them put their foot in the door, they will kick you out of the house, and then they will shoot you in the back. You can’t let them do it with impunity.

            4. Absolutely, it is, and FOSS, and ISEX will serve, for which there is a place for underwater vehicles, and cranes and diving equipment will be.

            But at least we can follow the icebreaker, so let them work on FOSS. They broke our atoll toys at the bottom, we will also break them.
            1. Storekeeper
              Storekeeper 8 July 2020 10: 36 New
              0
              And what kind of landmine of the time of the Second World War will by chance not be able to surface under the bourgeois icebreaker? Over the past 75 years, the Baltic Sea brought the Bering Strait to the Bering Strait? repeat
              1. timokhin-aa
                8 July 2020 10: 56 New
                +1
                So under our ships, something will come up then.
                The rules are known to everyone, they are not violated.
                Do you think in vain, with the Turks, they will either bring down a bomber to us, or we will cover them with a control in Idlib, and from the USA - only shouts? Do not even fight at a meeting?
                Everyone understands WHAT escalation can lead to.
                1. Storekeeper
                  Storekeeper 8 July 2020 13: 25 New
                  +1
                  Clear. And if in response we walk alongside the Alleutian islands, our partners will not escalate the conflict? And who will we inspect there if they offend the Chinese at our NSR? There are many questions. But mine agree is not an option.
                  1. timokhin-aa
                    8 July 2020 16: 16 New
                    +1
                    If we go through their thermal waters in full compliance with the Convention, their opinion will be very valuable to us.
                    And it is possible to watch not Aleut and other forces in general, border guards for example.

                    The sea is big, it’s impossible to block everything, not to protect, even to them.
  • Angelo Provolone
    Angelo Provolone 5 July 2020 00: 27 New
    +1
    Respect and respect to the author. normal article with a selection of interesting facts.

    The author’s reference to “that the icebreaker is built around a power plant” is very appropriate. Indeed, this is the 2nd, along with a solid hull, a condition for overcoming thick ice. Amer has complete order with engine building, which cannot be said about us.

    In addition to the problems revealed by the author: significantly lower construction costs, the availability of powerful electronics for US icebreakers, I note the following from myself.
    The problem is in Russian shipbuilding. We do not know how to build ships quickly and cheaply. Our shipyards and factories work the old fashioned way. We do not have qualified personnel. We do not even expect them. The problem is in high school education, and even in school.

    against this background, the “trampoline” attacks of the head of the USC look ridiculous and presumptuous. Because of such short-sighted figures, we are in full swing to meet the new Tsushima.

    I would like more articles on the problems of Russian shipbuilding and engine building.
    1. max702
      max702 7 July 2020 08: 25 New
      0
      Duc at a price ALREADY more expensive! And these are just the drawings they make .. the final product of the razik will become three more expensive ..
      And the problems in Russian shipbuilding come directly from the holy 90s. The fleet is a project with tremendous inertia. And by the way, just the same, the “Ozerovsky” cooperative restored everything and started .. Shipyards are clogged with orders; new ones are being built; technologies are being developed and competencies are being restored
  • Russian America
    Russian America 5 July 2020 02: 19 New
    -4
    Reading the review and I get the feeling that the editorial staff is working for the USA and not for Russia
    1. timokhin-aa
      5 July 2020 19: 06 New
      0
      And how was it necessary to write this article so that you have a different feeling?
  • exo
    exo 5 July 2020 16: 19 New
    0
    America proves once again that if it doesn’t do something, it is by no means from what it cannot. But, if necessary: ​​it will do it faster and better than that of competitors. The best scientific school and production base.
    A very clear example. And also the replacement of Russian engines for launch vehicles, in the near future and the launch of a manned spacecraft.
    I'm afraid that neither Russia nor China can compete with the United States. Unless, of course, internal contradictions destroy her. Like the Soviet Union, at one time.
    1. timokhin-aa
      5 July 2020 19: 07 New
      0
      We won’t be able to compete, but to develop despite their pressure, and if there is an urgent need to move them forward with their feet (I understand what a risk this is, but nonetheless) we could. Resources allow.
      1. Maks7
        Maks7 6 July 2020 09: 59 New
        0
        And why can’t we compete with it ??? What kind of decadent mood ??? :) Do you know in general that Russia has the largest icebreaking fleet in the world ??? :)
        https://pikabu.ru/story/ledokolyi_vsekh_stran_1440720
        In addition to patrol icebreakers and project 22220 icebreakers. The construction of the Leader icebreakers begins.
        1. timokhin-aa
          6 July 2020 13: 52 New
          -1
          I, in general, and not about icebreakers.
          We need to understand the difference in potentials correctly, our people do not catch up with how much power America has in the world.
  • Blackgrifon
    Blackgrifon 5 July 2020 20: 25 New
    0
    Good article. Arguably and clearly.
    Still, Alexander Timokhin’s subject about the fleet is an order of magnitude better and more objective than attempts to present his view of geopolitics (as in the case of China) and ground forces (as, for example, with the statement about the role of piran-like armored personnel carriers in the US Armed Forces).
  • Alien From
    Alien From 5 July 2020 21: 40 New
    +1
    Since the days of the Union, we have a great deal in this matter. The main thing is not to lose the acquired competencies !!!
  • Undecim
    Undecim 5 July 2020 22: 46 New
    +1
    As always, the author has excellent material on the subject of the Polar Security Cutter program, spoiled by fantasies about future "provocations."
    1. timokhin-aa
      6 July 2020 14: 48 New
      0
      So they themselves heel in the chest beat on this topic.
  • Licanat
    Licanat 6 July 2020 09: 02 New
    0
    The Americans are able to build a powerful icebreaker fleet, no doubt. Russia's task is to push them away from their sphere of interests. Let them lay an alternative Northern Sea Route along the shores of Alaska, Canada and Greenland.
  • Syroitel_nik
    Syroitel_nik 6 July 2020 13: 42 New
    -3
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    Well, yes, a true patriot will never allow himself to properly assess the enemy, right?
    A true patriot will never want his country to recognize the threat in time and be ready for it, right?
    Here is an example of what traitors like me did in the past, entrenched in the Soviet Army.


    And if there were patriots, they would convince conscientious soldiers that the enemy could not fight without Coca-Cola, right?

    Hear, patriot of America, you don’t dress in Russian. Nick in Latin, mattress thoughts. Yes, and foul posts.
    And don’t scare people. 10 people standing, protected the tavern from three thousand. Or is it a fake? Of course they have men ....... But we do not slurp cabbage soup. Last war showed !!!!! Nothing that the kids are different yet. Still to come !!!
    1. timokhin-aa
      6 July 2020 13: 53 New
      +2
      Are you out of your mind? State your thoughts better, please.
      1. Storekeeper
        Storekeeper 8 July 2020 13: 28 New
        0
        "Friend" your Leonidl disappeared, but new ones appeared. laughing:
        1. timokhin-aa
          8 July 2020 16: 18 New
          +1
          A number of citizens are still listed in the Church of Mikhail Zadornov of recent days. The news that everything is not as it seems to them causes shock.
          Leonidl did not disappear, he will soon be released from the cage again. Not for long.
  • Syroitel_nik
    Syroitel_nik 6 July 2020 13: 43 New
    -1
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    And how was it necessary to write this article so that you have a different feeling?

    #all the guard.
    1. timokhin-aa
      6 July 2020 13: 53 New
      +1
      I understand that no, on the contrary, it was necessary to write that our tanks enter Washington tomorrow, as the shelling of the city ends.
      That would be patriotic.
      And here is some kind of real world, fu ...
  • Tugarin
    Tugarin 6 July 2020 18: 49 New
    +8
    This year they planned 2 pcs. project 23550 to order, for border guards
    1. timokhin-aa
      6 July 2020 21: 52 New
      0
      I heard about such plans, but now, it seems, a lot will be corrected.
  • DIM (a)
    DIM (a) 6 July 2020 23: 12 New
    0
    Prepare for war should be in advance, and the period of 30-40s of the last century, this clearly confirms.
  • Amborlakatay
    Amborlakatay 7 July 2020 00: 53 New
    0
    Nothing yet, not at all. In addition to the trough itself, experience and best practices are needed. Our stuck icebreaker was pulled out by ours, although the Americans tried to command, in the end they gave the command of the operation to our captain. Experience and experience in the Arctic are all the more important. The exercises that tried to conduct, showed the complete unavailability of ships, equipment and crews. You can’t fix it in one fell swoop - huge money will not even help. The Americans themselves are well aware of this, and therefore they make a lot of noise. They can introduce something in 7-8 years, but we also do not chew snot.
  • Foxmara
    Foxmara 7 July 2020 06: 40 New
    0
    Prevention methods have long been known. A training zone is announced. Mattresses entering the zone can be bombarded with electronic warfare, if an ordinary military vessel is washed ashore after a GPS violation, one thing, and in the Arctic the same will have dramatic consequences. God forbid they will ask for help, but there’s nobody else, that’s a disgrace instead of provocation ..
    1. agond
      agond 7 July 2020 13: 52 New
      0
      However, the Bering Strait is interesting, it’s common, any country can go along it, only where and how, depths of 50 m stretch for hundreds of kilometers from our coasts practically throughout
    2. timokhin-aa
      7 July 2020 21: 02 New
      0
      They won’t go ashore without GPS, the Coast Guard has much better training than the US Navy, oddly enough, and there will definitely be inertial navigation systems plus satellite ones, so this will not happen.

      But the rest is yes, it will be necessary to show the "partners". But then again - this must be prepared in advance.
  • dobromir
    dobromir 7 July 2020 19: 19 New
    0
    Sorry, maybe I read it inattentively. I did not find in the description of the American ships how long they can be in the raid. It seems to me that for the presence in the conditions of both the Arctic and Antarctic this is almost of key importance. With nuclear ships it is more or less clear their resource of time is great but diesel))) Just got closer, broke the ice and dried out)))?
    1. timokhin-aa
      7 July 2020 20: 48 New
      0
      The old men Polar Star and Polar Si have a range of 30 kilometers.
      These will have the same or more.
      The Americans are driving their icebreakers to Antarctica, and according to their status and budget, the RBHR cannot bunker along the way. Coming out of Seattle, they first call at a port in southern New Zealand.
      Then a few months on the transport wiring to Antarctica.
      Everything will be fine there with autonomy.
  • Antipatr
    Antipatr 7 July 2020 20: 26 New
    0
    Quote: indifferent
    How they finance is known. Printed papers and here it is financing.

    Then why do they still not make bricks of gold? Or didn't they build the death star space cruiser on a photon engine?
    You have problems with logical thinking. The author describes the entire article by how difficult it was to get funding from Congress to build icebreakers. How many projects were buried for this reason? Have you ever thought about it? No, as soon as the cheer patriot opens his mouth, he begins to speak with beaten propaganda cliches from the repertoire of Kisel and Nightingale.
  • Polar Bear
    Polar Bear 8 July 2020 09: 16 New
    +1
    Only the full ones could make an effort with the US side, like macaques, believing that they were not able to build icebreakers, they say they have no experience. US shipbuilding was much more powerful and modern than the USSR, and even more powerful at times than in the Russian Federation. The Americans will need it and they will build an atomic icebreaker in half as much time as ours.
    1. timokhin-aa
      8 July 2020 10: 56 New
      0
      In general, yes, but for a very long time they did not have a single serious reason for this.
  • Storekeeper
    Storekeeper 8 July 2020 11: 15 New
    0
    The article is interesting informative! Any trouble must be prepared in advance, especially if it can be predicted. We still have time, we must not miss it.
    The bourgeois will build icebreakers anyway. And hooliganism will come to us in this is actually their goal. We must meet them with dignity. Grandfathers in 1943 near Kursk met the Nazis with dignity, and we should not blunder. We have more time for preparation. We can handle it.
  • nikant
    nikant 8 July 2020 20: 39 New
    0
    how many want to "fuck" amerikosov - eyes run wide! I repeat: where is shipbuilding, where is engine building, where is electronics, etc.? everything goes to yachts to the oligarchs - the lake cooperative must not be touched! the Yankees, when the icebreakers are built, will go anywhere and anyway: as now their boats are driven in full under the ice of the Arctic ... but everyone is modestly silent about China, about how they build icebreakers and how many there will be ... first test series ...and then...
  • alexmach
    alexmach 9 July 2020 08: 18 New
    0
    Am I mistaken or did the author criticize the construction of Project 23550 Icebreakers in recent articles?
    1. agond
      agond 9 July 2020 10: 24 New
      +1
      Quote: nikant
      with the built icebreakers, the Yankees will go anywhere and anytime

      Bypassing our islands from the north, they can be anywhere, but let's say it will be far from everywhere between the islands and the mainland.
    2. timokhin-aa
      9 July 2020 10: 24 New
      +1
      Yes, it didn’t seem to be
  • Boa kaa
    Boa kaa 11 July 2020 13: 22 New
    +1
    Alexander, hi
    Very sensible article.
    It seems to me that to stop provocations with a “peaceful passage” of the Yankees icebreakers through the Vilkitsky Strait should be managed by the MLM. Moreover, a warning to mariners should be sent in advance that the area - wide-holes - is dangerous from mines. And let them try the strength of their bodies! And he popped up and blew himself up!
    And on the legal side, everything is “abgemacht”, because no one prohibits such activities in their bodies.
    Sincerely, Boa.
    1. agond
      agond 13 July 2020 10: 13 New
      0
      That's right, and in the Kara Gate regular exercises to conduct on the topic of how to prevent the landing.
  • Sergey Yakovlev
    Sergey Yakovlev 29 July 2020 21: 16 New
    0
    In Murmansk, the sea does not freeze and there is a base for icebreakers, in addition, many ports have been built along the Northern Sea Route. If the Americans build an icebreaker fleet, how and for what will they use it? The states know how to count money and will not waste it. Without a base and infrastructure, it will be very costly.
  • uav80
    uav80 31 August 2020 15: 09 New
    0
    Finishing the design and starting construction are a little different things, how the bookmark will be done and you can say what will happen with the "koro" ...

    By the way, "Healy" unikh burned down recently, and left for repairs, they say for about half a year, WAGB-10 "Polar Star" last year also burned a little ...

    PS: Fire on ship matters