Military Review

USA icebreaking suffering

55

USCGC Polar Star (WABG-10), hope and pillar of the American Antarctic program


The reader may remember that about two years have passed since the Americans, through the mouth of Secretary (Minister) of the Navy R. Spencer, promised to "make the passage along the Northern Sea Route by a group of ships", and without the notification and consent of Russia, because they "are for freedom of navigation "advocate. But time passed, and, apparently, prudent people (they are still found in American headquarters) explained to this minister how an attempt to break through the NSR without demand and support could end: the Arctic does not like jokes, and even in summer you can get yourself into trouble. That’s if the Russian Navy doesn’t explain that it’s not worth embarking on a path that runs through the territorial waters of Russia for a considerable length. In addition, the minister, apparently, was explained that there is nothing to walk on: the United States has only one and a half icebreakers in service, and without an icebreaker on the NSR there is almost always nothing to do.

"Icebreaker and a half"


One and a half icebreaker is a heavy (according to the US classification) USCGC Polar Star (WABG-10) icebreaker of the US Coast Guard (WABG-122), dimensions 25,4x9,4x13842 m, displacement up to 11 tons, with a diesel-gas turbine power plant, formally making it close in power Russian nuclear icebreakers of previous generations. True, in reality the situation is somewhat different. There is also the USCGC Polar Sea sistership (WABG-1976), but it has been out of service for ten years, is used to cannibalize parts for the sistership and will not return to service. "Polar Star" breaks down every other time, but it is stubbornly repaired, because there is no other support ship for the US Antarctic expedition. Moreover, the tendency to breakdowns is not due to age. The ship built in 3, of course, has a respectable age, if it is a nuclear icebreaker, it would have been put out long ago in our country, but there are many diesel-electric icebreakers of the same or older age in Russia, for example, the Ermak series. Finnish-built of 36 vessels with a capacity of 4 thousand hp. or a series "Captain Sorokin" of 22 vessels with a capacity of XNUMX thousand hp. It is simply obvious that a gas turbine power plant, with all its advantages (compactness, power), is not the best choice for an icebreaker. There are, apparently, drawbacks of the project itself, otherwise how to explain the periodic problems with the integrity of the hull of both ships?

But the US Coast Guard also has a medium icebreaker USCGC Healy (WABG-20), which in terms of a displacement of 16257 tons and dimensions of 128x25x8,9 m will be larger than the Polar Star, but it is average in its capabilities. It is able to move in ice only 1,4 m thick (of course, if it accelerates and piles on the ice, then more, of course), while the more powerful Polar Star - up to 1,8-2 m. But "Healy" is much younger and more modernly equipped: he is 21, the age for a non-nuclear icebreaker is generally youthful. And it's diesel, which is a much more adequate choice for an icebreaker. "Healy" does not go to Antarctica and works mainly in the Arctic. In particular, together with the German research icebreaker Polarstern in 2001, it became one of the first non-nuclear ships to reach the North Pole without a nuclear icebreaker. The first was the Polarstern itself in 1991, together with the Swedish icebreaker Odin (and the first surface vessel in general was our nuclear-powered Arktika in 1977). Diesel-electric ship "Polarstern" built in 1980, by the way, the ship is very famous and belongs to the Institute of Polar and Marine Research in Bremerhaven, named after Alfred Wegener - professor, creator of the theory of continental drift, polar explorer, who died in one of the expeditions to Greenland. The Germans have long been trying to create a replacement for him, but the matter is going almost as successfully as the epic with the legendary Berlin airport, with the only difference that the airport seems to have been almost completed, but no one started to build Polarstern II, only the next tender canceled this year, even before the pandemic.


USCGC Healy (WABG-20). September 7, 2015 at the North Pole, where the American icebreaker first reached alone, 38 years after the "Arctic"

Went to restrain the Russians and didn't get there


But back to Healy. The ship has a lot of scientific merits, it regularly carries scientists to the Arctic, however, most often it works somewhere not very far from Alaska. In 2015, she became the first American surface vessel to visit the North Pole unaccompanied by a foreign icebreaker. It is worth noting, however, that the abnormally warm weather of recent years also made such missions possible; in 1977, Healy would simply not have been able to reach the Pole. But in recent years, when Washington has embarked on a struggle against "Russian influence" in the Arctic, the Healy missions have been constantly trying to attach some political significance. Like "restraining Russia in the Arctic." To be honest, the author does not understand how an unarmed and very average icebreaker can hold back. But it is under this dressing that everything is served at briefings and in the media, obviously for their own man in the street, who, as the sharks of our show business rightly believe, "eat everything."

The current deployment of Healy to the Arctic, called the Arctic Shield, was served under the same sauce. As part of the operation, he was supposed to patrol for twenty-six days in the Bering Sea, not very far from the border between our countries, for which on August 15 he took on board 11 scientists and equipment for research in Seward, Alaska. But already on August 18, 60 nautical miles from the coast of Alaska, a fire broke out on board from a short circuit in the power grid in the engine room. Fire Result: Right-hand diesel generator and right-hand main propulsion motor are not working. The mission, of course, was immediately canceled, the ship turned around and headed to its home port of Seattle for inspection and repair. Officially, there were no victims of the emergency.

“I thank the Healy team for their swift action to safely extinguish the fire,” said Linda Fagan, Vice Admiral, US Pacific Rim Commander. "This accident, however, means that the United States is limited in icebreaking capabilities until Healy is repaired, and this highlights the country's critical need for polar safety vessels." (Polar security cutter - this is the name of the US Bohr icebreakers.) Transferring from admiral to human, we find that the United States was left without the only icebreaker involved in operations in the Arctic, because Polar Star is involved in supplying the Antarctic expedition, and they are shaking over it and do not even hide it - he has no replacement. How long or not "Healy" broke down, we'll see.

Of course, fire is not uncommon on modern ships. And the failure of the propeller motor - too. Not so long ago, on the newest universal two-draft nuclear icebreaker of the LK-60Ya type (project 22220) Arktika, which is undergoing tests and is already finalizing them, one of the main electric motors also failed. And it requires replacement, which can only be carried out next year. But on this ships there are 5 more such engines, and the nuclear ship simply temporarily reduced its power on propellers from 60 MW (82 thousand hp) to 50 MW (67 thousand hp), which still makes it and the largest in the world and one of the most powerful in the world (it will concede only "50 years of Victory" and "Yamal" out of those operating with their 75 thousand hp) and has little effect on its capabilities, which are still unlikely in the first year of operation whether they would have been used to the fullest - the technique takes time to master. But Russia has about 40 non-nuclear and nuclear icebreakers, while the United States, one might say, had one and a half.

New icebreaker


Of course, Americans are well aware that this is not the case. And they are looking for various ways to solve the problem, up to attempts to buy orphan icebreakers in countries like Sweden or Finland (which is quite unlikely) or considering the possibility of ordering icebreakers from the Finns (which is also unlikely due to lobbying in the United States itself and the peculiarities of the legislation). In the meantime, the development and construction of its lead icebreaker has been ordered. Last year, the US Border Guard Service signed with the shipbuilding company VT Halter Marine Inc. a $ 745 million contract for the detailed design and construction of a next-generation heavy icebreaker.The US agency's fiscal 2021 budget requires $ 555 million to build a second heavy icebreaker and authorize the transfer of another 70 million from another program to continue funding the heavy icebreakers. In total, the contract includes an option to build 2 more icebreakers, for a total price of 1,94 billion dollars. True, during the journey the dog not only can, but must grow, and the price will surely rise. The first icebreaker should be completed in 2024, although the deadline is likely to be shifted and the coronavirus will be referred to.

USA icebreaking suffering

New American icebreaker (project)

What is this ship? Its dimensions are 138x26,4m, the total displacement is indicated at 22900 tons, the type of power plant is diesel-electric, the power is 45200 hp. (33 MW), the thickness of the ice, which he can pass - 1,8 m (in the normal mode of passage). If you look at the image of the ship posted on the website of the construction company (the project developer is different there - Teamed Associates, Inc.), you can see that the project is very conservative. There are no "fashionable" stem contours that look like the ram stems of old battleships and armored cruisers. There is no streamlined forecastle, merged together with the superstructure - such a solution is used on the now under construction "super icebreaker" - the domestic LK-120Ya "Leader" (project 10510), which will be laid on September 28 at the SSK "Zvezda" and will be called "Russia". The builder of the new American icebreaker himself explains the conservatism of the ship by the fact that it comes from the Polarstern II project, which has not yet begun to be built. The ship's capacity is 186 people and its autonomy is 90 days. The icebreaker will have Azipod propellers from ABB / Trident Marine, engines from Caterpillar, control system and automated control system - Raytheon, etc. In general, an icebreaker is like an icebreaker. He will not be the "King of the Arctic", but he looks quite decent in the project.

But what they will do when they are built, and how this ship will conquer the Arctic, we will see in a few years. The main thing is not to accompany each exit to the sea with stories about the heroic confrontation of Russian aggression against freedom-loving polar bears and walruses, as they do every time the "injured" Healy leaves. Already tired of this circus.
Author:
Photos used:
VT Halter Marine Inc.
55 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Same lech
    Same lech 14 September 2020 11: 13 New
    0
    40 of our icebreakers against 2 American ... the score is in our favor and it must be used to its fullest ... not a single chance for the United States to dominate the Arctic should be given.
    1. Civil
      Civil 14 September 2020 12: 39 New
      +4
      against freedom-loving polar bears and walruses

      Polar bears are not politically correct laughing Arctic bears or colorless bears))
      1. Asad
        Asad 14 September 2020 18: 45 New
        +1
        Please tell me how we can not give chances?
      2. Reviews
        Reviews 14 September 2020 21: 10 New
        +1
        Quote: Civil
        against freedom-loving polar bears and walruses

        Polar bears are not politically correct laughing arcticbears

        Nearly. In English, a polar bear is originally a "polar bear". Even before any "political correctness". And in Latin, and in general - "Ursus maritimus", "sea bear".
      3. Shkworen
        Shkworen 15 September 2020 10: 07 New
        +2
        polar bears have blue skin, so they are more likely black bears with white fur :)
    2. antivirus
      antivirus 18 September 2020 21: 14 New
      0
      Navalny is against us and for the United States. score40: 20
  2. Mikhalych
    Mikhalych 14 September 2020 11: 22 New
    +5
    There is still a sister ship

    Is it possible to write something instead of "sistership" (sister of the ship) somehow in Russian. Tortured by these Anglomaniac Are parrots speaking human words perhaps smarter than other parrots? tongue
    1. pavelty
      pavelty 14 September 2020 12: 34 New
      +2
      This is a professional term, and this nonsense about Anglomaniacs, when you say a parachute, you won’t think about whose word it is?
    2. snake
      snake 15 September 2020 12: 21 New
      +4
      Quote: Mikhalych
      Is it possible to write something instead of "sistership" (sister of the ship) somehow in Russian. Tortured by these Anglomaniac Are parrots speaking human words perhaps smarter than other parrots?

      Use it for you, son of Mikhailov! Why, boyar, you are a friend of non-Russian words? Parrot is a French word, but in Russian it is a talker-bird.
  3. KVU-NSVD
    KVU-NSVD 14 September 2020 11: 34 New
    0
    Already tired of this circus.
    A circus, not a circus, but a couple of icebreakers will be built .. Enough to arrange provocations on the NSR and then turn the handle of the information organ to the full. And Burke will appear there regularly.
    1. Alien From
      Alien From 14 September 2020 11: 38 New
      0
      Exactly, exactly! The barrel organ in the hands of these "partners" is not sickly weapon.
    2. dzvero
      dzvero 14 September 2020 12: 22 New
      +1
      They will build something, they will build it, but the Berks to the east of New Land have nothing to do.
      “This is without addressing limitations for hull structures. There's sufficient power for the ship to move through up to 0.8 meters of ice; however, the structure would not withstand more than 0.3 meters of ice. ” [https://news.usni.org/2019/09/18/arleigh-burke-destroyers-are-most-viable-option-for-near-term-navy-presence-in-arctic]
      The engine power is theoretically enough to move through 0.8 m of ice, but the hull will withstand movement through ice up to 30 cm thick. And whether the skin will withstand the impact of the ice floe behind the icebreaker is also questionable. So their lot is the Barents Sea and - in the warm summer - the Kara, and the northern approach of the Bering Strait ...
      I wonder if the Americans will strengthen the Berks' corps before being sent to the Arctic outside the three-week summer, or only after losses in the ice? Perhaps he is like this everywhere, he will carry it, then no ...
    3. Hagen
      Hagen 14 September 2020 13: 38 New
      +2
      For the construction of an icebreaker fleet, it is necessary to have an intelligible economic task of using them. We have the NSR for this fleet. What do they have? Tourism to the North Pole? Large projects on their Arctic coastline are not particularly well known. How will they pay for their existence? This is probably why all their icebreaking ambitions are drowning in Congress. What is expected.
      1. KVU-NSVD
        KVU-NSVD 14 September 2020 13: 59 New
        +1
        From two to four, in any case, sooner or later they will build - the coast guard and Antarctica will not be canceled by the congress. Along the way, they will be the perpetrators of provocations on the NSR. Don't go to the fortuneteller.
        1. Simargl
          Simargl 14 September 2020 15: 03 New
          0
          Quote: KVU-NSVD
          Along the way, they will also be the executors of provocations on the NSR
          They will be overwritten in the ice.
          Quote: KVU-NSVD
          Do not go to a fortuneteller
        2. carstorm 11
          carstorm 11 14 September 2020 15: 04 New
          +2
          to perform a provocation against this?) I somehow hardly imagine it ... these guys shoot super video so that it would be clearly in 4 k
          you can certainly try, but what will it stop?)
      2. TermNachTer
        TermNachTer 14 September 2020 18: 10 New
        +1
        For such a number of icebreakers, an appropriate number of crews are needed. They cannot be riveted on the conveyor. And the training of polar captains takes years. Somewhere 12-15 years old. So all these are mattress tales from the field - I can do everything, but I don't want to))))
  4. rocket757
    rocket757 14 September 2020 11: 40 New
    0
    Events are developing, but for a long time. Again, boom wait and see.
  5. Sancho_SP
    Sancho_SP 14 September 2020 11: 50 New
    +6
    Well, America has no analogue of our Northern Sea Route. They just don't need to swim there. Only science and flag demonstration.
    1. Simargl
      Simargl 14 September 2020 15: 05 New
      0
      Quote: Sancho_SP
      They just don't need to swim there
      How will they find hundreds of oil and a bar of gold for their entire hole! And we will be fiercely jealous.
    2. Alex013
      Alex013 15 September 2020 07: 36 New
      0
      Northwest Passage. But there is practically no infrastructure there.
      1. Sancho_SP
        Sancho_SP 15 September 2020 10: 51 New
        0
        Without destinations in the Arctic itself, it is of little relevance. Unless, however, they find an oil puddle.
  6. Ru_Na
    Ru_Na 14 September 2020 11: 50 New
    +3
    The Arctic is not only icebreakers, it is also knowledge about it, its nature, we have been collecting and accumulating this knowledge for decades and largely thanks to them today we are leaders in the Arctic region! The United States did not deal with the Arctic as such, they have interests associated with it, but they lack knowledge, and in this regard they are far behind Russia. Well, the United States will have a couple of icebreakers, and what if they do not know where and how to use them, because there are enough places in the Arctic where even the most powerful icebreakers in the world should not get in!
  7. Doccor18
    Doccor18 14 September 2020 11: 57 New
    +4
    Once an American admiral said that even if we donate an aircraft carrier to the USSR, they will not have a full-fledged combat ship. We have been building and using them for several decades ... And the USSR will need to walk this path on its own ... (I beg your pardon for the inaccuracy, I write from memory).
    The same can be said about nuclear icebreakers. You can give the Americans this icebreaker, but this does not mean at all that they can easily pass the NSR .. This requires experience, crews and years of campaigns ...
    It is not enough just to build a series of icebreakers.
  8. Free wind
    Free wind 14 September 2020 12: 23 New
    -2
    They will need icebreakers, they will build it, and as much as necessary. They don't need them, they know how to count money. Probably they do not consider themselves rich to put money in the ass. The Northern Route around America is practically not navigable, you can climb, but they do not need, there are helicopters, there are winter roads, much cheaper. They need an icebreaker to explore Antarctica. And we have icebreakers for servicing Gazprom. There should be 20 gas carriers, for one gas carrier - 2 icebreakers, Gazprom is ours, and icebreakers are at the expense of the state, but why are we rich. Under the USSR, they knew how to count money, they got by with two or four icebreakers. Nobody will tell you how you can pass the Berengov Strait unnoticed, there is 50 km between our and the American coast. There they go on foot to visit America and back. The cool phrase "and in 77 Hilly would not have passed", so naturally, he will appear only after 20 years.
    1. Simargl
      Simargl 14 September 2020 15: 10 New
      +1
      Quote: Free Wind
      Under the USSR, they knew how to count money, they got by with two or four icebreakers.
      And RI 200 years ago and without icebreakers lived normally.

      Quote: Free Wind
      between our and the American coast 50 km.
      Less than 4 km.
      Quote: Free Wind
      The cool phrase "but in 77 Hilly would not have passed", so naturally, it will appear only after 20 years.
      Even if it had been built in 1977, it would not have passed. And in 2000 it would not have passed.
      1. Free wind
        Free wind 14 September 2020 15: 44 New
        -1
        Small Deomid Island is bypassed from Alaska, Bolshoi, respectively, from our side. Well, would they have achieved it or not, and what did it give to whom?
  9. APASUS
    APASUS 14 September 2020 12: 42 New
    -1
    A Singapore-owned shipyard has been awarded a contract worth up to US $ 1.9 billion (S $ 2.6 billion) by the US Navy to build ships that can cut through ice in the Arctic and Antarctic.
    The work will be done by VT Halter Marine, which is fully owned by Singapore Technologies Engineering (ST Engineering) and based in Pascagoula, Mississippi.
    https://www.tnp.sg/news/business/st-engineering-lands-26b-us-navy-contract
    So I would not have succeeded if the contract was won by the Swedes whether the Finns, and here is the company from Singapore, and they have experience in building icebreakers?
  10. Undecim
    Undecim 14 September 2020 12: 42 New
    0
    Another issue of agitprop from site propagandists.
    Media publications on Arctic shipping immediately bring to mind the famous anecdote about the elusive Joe. Only among propagandists of different degrees in the role of this very Joe is the Northern Sea Route.

    Screenshot from Vesselfinder.com for illustration.
    There is a wealth of research on the prospects for commercial shipping in the Arctic. With the current dynamics of ice melting, according to the most optimistic forecasts, the meaning of such will appear in the next forty years.
    At this stage, the cost of building ships for operation along the NSR is at least 30% higher, operating costs are much higher, the cost of navigating one ship is from $ 400, the cost of insurance is twice as high, unpredictable weather and seasonality - all this negates the gain in the distance.
    But the Vyatkins are constantly escalating the situation.
    And the fact that the Americans do not have icebreakers - they simply do not need them.
    Russia has no aircraft carriers, but there is not a word about "Russia's aircraft carrier suffering" in the American media.
    Maybe they don't have Vyatkin?
    1. APASUS
      APASUS 14 September 2020 13: 29 New
      0
      Quote: Undecim
      Another issue of agitprop from site propagandists.
      Media publications on Arctic shipping immediately bring to mind the famous anecdote about the elusive Joe. Only among propagandists of different degrees in the role of this very Joe is the Northern Sea Route.

      Screenshot from Vesselfinder.com for illustration.
      There is a wealth of research on the prospects for commercial shipping in the Arctic. With the current dynamics of ice melting, according to the most optimistic forecasts, the meaning of such will appear in the next forty years.
      At this stage, the cost of building ships for operation along the NSR is at least 30% higher, operating costs are much higher, the cost of navigating one ship is from $ 400, the cost of insurance is twice as high, unpredictable weather and seasonality - all this negates the gain in the distance.
      But the Vyatkins are constantly escalating the situation.
      And the fact that the Americans do not have icebreakers - they simply do not need them.
      Russia has no aircraft carriers, but there is not a word about "Russia's aircraft carrier suffering" in the American media.
      Maybe they don't have Vyatkin?

      And what is your map laid out on 09.04.19/XNUMX/XNUMX before the start of navigation? Who do you want to convince with such a slapstick?
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 14 September 2020 13: 40 New
        +1
        For whom the slapstick, and for those who do not think about TV, an illustration of the fact that navigation is seasonal in nature.
        And I'm not going to convince anyone. Let the hamsters be dissuaded by the one who convinced them.
      2. Undecim
        Undecim 14 September 2020 13: 57 New
        +2

        This is the screen for now. Are you going to say that the navigation is over?
        1. APASUS
          APASUS 14 September 2020 15: 13 New
          -2
          [quote = Undecim]


          This is the screen for now. Are you going to say that the navigation has already ended? [/ Quote]
          I will argue that it is not over yet! Learn materiel dear

          [quote] According to Semyon Korkin, head of the Department of Water and Railway Transport of the Ministry of Transport of Yakutia, in the Arctic zone and on the Vilyui River, the navigational situation has already been removed. On the central rivers, navigation is planned to be closed on October 10-22, including on the Lena River at the Aldan - Yakutsk estuary - October 16, on the Yakutsk - Sinsk section - October 18, on the Aldan River - from October 4 to 12.
          Source © Yakutia-Daily.ru [/ quote]

          This is for 2019, a decision has not yet been made for this year, although ferries are closed from October 20, 2020

          [quote] According to the head of the Department of Water and Railway Transport of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), the completion of the ferry crossing the Lena River in the Yakutsk - Nizhny Bestyakh area is scheduled for October 20-25. Actual closing date will be subject to weather conditions

          [quote = Undecim]. Let the hamsters be dissuaded by the one who convinced them. [/ Quote]
          If you want to convince someone of the opposite, then at least do not sculpt a humpback yourself. And then the slapstick is a bad argument!
          1. Undecim
            Undecim 14 September 2020 15: 43 New
            +2
            And the slapstick argument is bad!
            This is for sure, especially if it is accompanied by hysteria. Can you explain how the crossing of the Lena River in the Yakutsk area is connected with the inclinations of the "collective West" in general and the United States in particular, on the NSR and American icebreakers? What do you want to prove to me? Do you understand at all what my comment is about?
            1. APASUS
              APASUS 14 September 2020 16: 30 New
              -2
              Quote: Undecim
              What do you want to prove to me?

              I don't want to prove anything to you! Just speaking out, do not stoop to outright cheating.
              1. Undecim
                Undecim 14 September 2020 16: 55 New
                0
                I understand, you are convincing yourself that I am deceiving you and are refuting yourself. I will not interfere, this process is extremely intimate.
                1. APASUS
                  APASUS 14 September 2020 19: 50 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Undecim
                  I understand, you are convincing yourself that I am deceiving you and are refuting yourself.

                  You are our understanding! wink
                  What didn't you embarrass the absence of ships on the map (which you placed) in the absence of navigation? Look for ships where they can't be
                  1. Undecim
                    Undecim 14 September 2020 19: 57 New
                    +1
                    Discussion with you is a real pleasure. Why should I have been embarrassed if they were not supposed to be there at that time? The screen was not to show the absence of ships, but to show the seasonality of navigation, there in my commentary I also indicated this reason for the fact that at the present time and in the next forty years, while the ice does not melt, the NSR is of no interest to anyone except Russia.
    2. Free wind
      Free wind 14 September 2020 13: 55 New
      +1
      The carrying capacity is much less, the crew is larger, and the salary costs are higher, it will be a problem to recruit a crew, you probably cannot drive a Filipino into the ice, and what no seasonality.
    3. thinker
      thinker 14 September 2020 14: 03 New
      +2
      Here is a real screen, comments are unnecessary ...
    4. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave 14 September 2020 14: 22 New
      +3
      Timokhin did a little better on this topic.
      https://topwar.ru/172751-amerikanskie-tjazhelye-ledokoly-xxi-veka-odin-v-postrojke-dva-na-ocheredi-chto-dalshe.html
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 14 September 2020 15: 52 New
        +2
        It's just that Timokhin is better versed in such an issue as "the technology of overcoming the critical reflection of individuals, instilling in them the representations, goals and values ​​set by the manipulator."
        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 14 September 2020 16: 52 New
          +2
          This cannot be taken away from him.
    5. timokhin-aa
      timokhin-aa 17 September 2020 09: 49 New
      +1
      And the fact that the Americans do not have icebreakers - they simply do not need them.


      They have icebreakers and they are building new ones. And they are discussing another series with a pole to the new.
  11. Lionnvrsk
    Lionnvrsk 14 September 2020 13: 24 New
    +1
    Quote: pavlentiy
    and this nonsense about Anglomaniacs

    Because they pulled up all these receptions, primaries, recreational areas, shopping, castings and other crap! repeat
  12. Region-25.rus
    Region-25.rus 14 September 2020 14: 45 New
    +3
    Quote: Mikhalych
    There is still a sister ship

    Is it possible to write something instead of "sistership" (sister of the ship) somehow in Russian. Tortured by these Anglomaniac Are parrots speaking human words perhaps smarter than other parrots? tongue

    this term is 200 years old if that. And if not in the know, then almost ALL the terms in our fleet or from Holland, or Spain or England - dec, twindeck, coaming, ladder, beams, pillers, bollard, spire, windlass, waterway, rail, fender, compass, course , knitsa, space, hatch, porthole .... - awesome, native Russian words aha!
    Before throwing such emoticons - tongue teach first the mat. part ...
    1. Tank hard
      Tank hard 14 September 2020 15: 59 New
      -1
      Quote: Region-25.rus
      this term is 200 years old already if that

      This term - "sister shipe", what have we been using for 200 years? I didn't know about it ... Or maybe we have been using the term "summit" for 200 years? And then I thought that in Russian the term "meeting" is more convenient, understandable and harmonious. wink But where am I to the "young reformers", "Boris's nest chicks" .. repeat
      1. Motorist
        Motorist 15 September 2020 23: 36 New
        +1
        Now I started thinking: there are more than our words in the mechanical part - at the time of the "planting" of Dutch terms, this was not relevant. Hull and sail armament - no questions asked. By the way, I haven't heard "sistership" before (25 years ago) either.
      2. Motorist
        Motorist 15 September 2020 23: 41 New
        0
        Tank, soryan, wanted to respond to Region-25. In any case, and to you - hi
    2. Motorist
      Motorist 15 September 2020 23: 24 New
      0
      Quote: Region-25.rus
      almost ALL terms in our fleet

      But "barring" and "well" - in our opinion. Although, "shaft" is, of course, questionable (German - die Welle). Also - "bloodworm", "bearing", "gasket". I admit there are more brand words in the navy. hi
  13. Region-25.rus
    Region-25.rus 14 September 2020 16: 03 New
    +2
    Quote: Tank Hard
    Quote: Region-25.rus
    this term is 200 years old already if that

    This term - "sister shipe", what have we been using for 200 years? I didn't know about it ... Or maybe we have been using the term "summit" for 200 years? And then I thought that in Russian the term "meeting" is more convenient, understandable and harmonious. wink But where am I to the "young reformers", "Boris's nest chicks" .. repeat

    those. - "I didn’t know, so it didn’t, didn’t exist and cannot be?" - excellent position. Read about the creation of the Russian Fleet by Peter the Great .... And ... young man, in the past I was like a sailor with some experience, and I understand a little (a little) in naval terminology, and I know where they (terms) came to us .. . and your example is a bit incorrect (to put it mildly). Read books in general, history is better and better than classics.
    ps
    the term "sister ship" is also used officially. And most importantly, you don't need to expose your illiteracy so brightly and publicly!
  14. GREG68
    GREG68 14 September 2020 16: 28 New
    +2
    In icebreaker construction, we have always been ahead of the planet. You can't catch us! And it pleases. The icebreaker fleet must be developed, and not only for military purposes, but also for scientific purposes.
  15. tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 14 September 2020 20: 39 New
    +1
    The Americans will build icebreakers, reinforce the Berkov hulls, go to the NSR. The speed will be as long as the ice conditions allow. And the roar from the breaking ice will be such that I’m not sure that their sonar systems will hear anything. Go only in the line, the flanks are open. we already have a century of experience in ice conditions, calculate the course of the American caravan by one or two times. A fashionable aizipod, will make a kerdyk, from ice or a mine, the icebreaker has to go first! And everyone sailed, there are not many missiles, they have the ability to end. Here is a picture for the states it is drawn in case they decide on this adventure. And they probably figured it out. Enough for them with their nuclear submarines. drinks
  16. KryoWarrior1978
    KryoWarrior1978 14 September 2020 21: 30 New
    0
    Comrades readers! I, as soon as you, are not an expert. But what if this trinity really drives into Our waters, whatever it gets, (Burkes and other mandula), when we divide the NSR with the Leaders and the Arctic. I saw the ice-class tug with azipods on the track, after the icebreaker. So the icebreakers need a fleet.
    Such an opinion.
  17. zenion
    zenion 16 September 2020 18: 21 New
    0
    I don’t even worry. A new nose is riveted to one aircraft carrier and how it was.