Since the Canadian icebreaker program is now running behind, perhaps there's a sop to lend them the first one two years before they're supposed to take delivery of their new hull.
I wonder what will happen when RMC builds the MPI (a design originally done for the CCG) in about 2-3 years... Faster than anything they've recently built.
a base in AK is a good idea; however, we need bases and coaling stations in the Canadian archipelago along the Northwest Passage. Russia and China do not recognize those waters as Canadian Sovereign, and will immediately start penetrating them in the event of an even greater rise in tensions. They will look to do mineral exploitation, and setting up sea bases. We will need to counter that. The best way to do so is with unmanned surface vessels, but we will need tenders and larger warships to help out. Setting up fuel bunkers up north will help that effort tremendously.
and before anyone says "so what, that's a Canadian problem," look at the ranges of ship-launched Chinese and Russian cruise / ballistic / hypersonic missiles, the orientation of our air defense network, and reconsider.
The Canadians like having their defense paid for by the US. They also like having their products purchased by the US. They will not like having to pay US tax rates and not get Canadian levels of pseudo-services.
Unfortunately, according to a local oil distributor, the oil companies aren't really interested in Keystone. They decided to invest in upgrading already built pipelines.:(
most of BC (not Van/Vic or the Haida Gwaii), Alberta, Yukon, Saskatchewan, Manitoba. No to Ontario or Quebec south of the tree line (ie keep the power plants on the James River, etc). New Brunswick is probably OK, as is Nova Scotia and Lab/Newf. PEI gets rolled into another state. We'll have none of Nunavut: It can be a territory by itself or part of the NW Territories. Roll up St. Pierre and Miquelon, la grenouille can go find another place to contaminate.
Take none of them. Make an independent Alberta, etc. close allies. Admission to the Union means two more Democrat Senators from each former Canadian province. Their conservatives are liberals to us.
When that war happened, Canada didn't exist except as a colony of Great Britain. But if Canada insists, we can play again...pick a long weekend and bring your best: We'll bring the Cajun Navy, two girl scout troops and the North Dakota Wing, Civil Air Patrol.
In fact, Canada as a nation didn't exist until maybe 1867 with the Act of Confederation - or was it the Balfour Declaration in 1926? The Statute of Westminster in 1931? Or the Act of Patriation in 1982? Or is it really an independent nation now? The Governor-General still has final say for the King over all laws.
Except they didn't. They fought as British subjects under British Army command. Notice they don't talk much about the USN victories on the Great Lakes, nor how the War of 1812 ended up.
They also claim the Canadian Army burned Washington. Those were British regulars, there weren't any Canadians there, there wasn't a Canadian Army then because Canada didn't exist until 1867.
Sal, you can stomp on this annexation bullshit right now. Yes we are friends and neighbours and we’ve had each others back since the Fenians quit being assholes. We like you but we don’t want to be you. When the leader of the most powerful country in the world muses about the annexation of your country while addressing the entire leadership of the USA military you’re goddamn right we notice. This is not right and is not the way you treat friends and allies.
I concur but let's remember that Canadians started it by being jerks. I got unsolicited diatribes from Canadian "friends" (I grew up in western Canada) during Bush 43, Obama , and both Trump 45 and 46, ranting against my politics and I am fairly circumspect about posting anything on social media. I also wouldn't consider myself particularly radical right, but it didn't matter to them as I supported a series of Hitlers. I thought it was funny when Trump referred to Trudeau, despised even by many Canadians, as Governor Trudeau, but it would have been better had he left it as a one-off joke.
When you start pulling your weight, securing your sectors and doing proper country things, we can entertain your gripes. Until then, deal with it. You are enjoying the illusion of sovereignty that you neither secure in blood nor pay for in treasure. You have a government that makes rules because we allow it, and we believe it just…for now. Should we feel threatened enough by the developments of the world and the encroachment of our enemies, that may change. So, I recommend that you get serious about stuff right quick. Take yourself seriously and we will too.
We're neighbors but not friends. And no, you don't like us. Your national past time, other than hockey, is running down the US. I've been there. I've been reading the Canadian papers online and perusing other Canadian websites since I got on the Web in 1999, I know how the conversations go when Americans are not around. The 'Canadian nice' mask slips whenever the Libs are in control. Chretien's people made no attempt to hide their hatred for George Bush and the US as a whole. It drives Canadians nuts that we don't pay you much mind. It's a good thing we don't.
I have a good friend who's Canadian. I've known him for over a quarter century. What I just said to you I've said to him many times and he agrees. Other, more rational Canadians also agree. They're out there, in places like YouTube and alternative media.
As for Trump's annexation comments, please wake up and see that for what it is. Trump is playing hardball with you by rattling your cage. It's a head game and you've fallen for it. Geopolitical PSYOPS. You can thank that sniffy beta male Justin Trudeau for that. Trump has no intention of making Canada the 51st State and even if he did, his base and the Republicans in Congress would shut it down. With all those new left wing voters, Canadian annexation would give the Democrats permanent control of the US government. Canadian annexation would be suicide. So take a deep breath and relax.
If the Chinese or Russians step foot in North America, it's our problem. If they do, they must be evicted immediately. Once that camel gets its nose under the tent, we might as well hang it up.
The Canadian archipelago isn't really accessible, at least not without going through the Alaskan Arctic first. It's shallow, rocky, poorly charted... and there are no good spots for ports or refueling stations (although Canada is trying to open up one). The only deepwater port is on Hudson Bay. Canada is planning on building 24 new icebreakers over the coming decades. Unfortunately, they belong to the Canadian Coast Guard, so will all be unarmed. Yes, even with the move of the CCG to Canda's Defense Department, there is no plan to arm any of them. There is a law pending to allow them to share information with the military and intelligence services. Baby steps.
nobody has time for baby steps. The NW passage is unpredictable in terms of ice levels, so impassable this summer could mean free of ice next. As for mapping, I wouldn't put it past the Chinese and/or Russians to already have that body of water filled with UUVs that are engaged in mapping operations and/or natural resources identification
Baby steps was a criticism of my Canadian colleagues.. Anway-
I just found a link to a recent publication on Canada's Arctic Maritime Infrastructure. I haven't had time to do more than skim it, so perhaps I'll learn something new. But my entering assumption is that the NWP won't see regular use because it's simply too shallow and hard to navigate. If you look at the shipping trends, we're seeing significant traffic- aiming at year round, now- through the NSR/Bering Strait. And that makes the NWP less of a priority than the Alaskan Arctic or the Hudson Bay and St Lawrence Riverway.
I've looked at the charts of the waters up there, which can be viewed online. There's a lot of water up there deep enough to support submarine operations. While I haven't seen any myself, I have a sneaky suspicion that we possess accurate bottom contour charts of the area.
The “Tariff Monies” currently collected by our United States, please assess a figure and request that figure to EACH of the GOP Congressmen in Each of those Shipbuilding Districts, including the Governors.
It is highly advised by me, Nurse Jane, to pack weapons “Appropriate” for each Deployed Area.
Let me dial down into the Maritime Law…either your permission.
Let’s have a meetup in your Chart Room.
Let’s “Assess” our Threat-Level in each area we believe USCG Ice Breakers will be operating!
CDR Salamander, please Breath because, I’m proposing a Board Certified “Veterinarian” accompany me on any United States Ship which is assigned to these Arctic Waters!
“We don’t shoot Polar Bears in Russia”!
That’s my mantra! Indigenous people have their “Missions”.
I have designed the square footage needed for the SS Nurse Jane… I’ll dig up those Architectural Drawings. I shared these with Dr Skopets, Russian speaking Vet formerly associated with Calvert Animal …
My billable rate is $500/hr or $8.20 per minute. I write the receive and invoice. If I like my “Client”, I charge nothing.
CDR Salamander, you will absolutely need appropriate “Weapons”. That’s your field of expertise! Very respectfully, Nurse Jane
I'm OK with these coming out under-gunned. Gotta get the shipyards rolling and don;t want to Constitution these hulls. Hope armament can be augmented downstream (down ice?) via containerized systems and or USV
Have we seen whether these will be three different classes of ships, two, or just one? The US-European company agreements would argue for at least two different designs. Regarding weaponry, allow me a bit of free thinking here.... At these latitudes, topside ice is a constant problem, which means (center of gravity) x (moment arm) problems coming out of your ears. This would be exacerbated by late-add weapons - need to know what the current design moment arm reserve is for each class. I would also point out that ice can be a weapon. We have seen the PLAN use water cannons against the Philippine fishermen and Coast Guard; I have no doubt they would employ the same tactic in the Arctic. So.....what sort of water cannon will these "Arctic Security Cutters" have?
Two classes of ships. Looks like five of one, six of the other. The five hull design is the one Sal is writing about (and its my preferred design). Other one is smaller, underpowered, less redundant, and currently has NO WEAPONS.
The Finnish shipyard's where they build these ice breakers for Finland and in the bad old days even for Russia, are second to none. Finn's know how to bend iron. They know how to make ships float. Based on past experinces with very good naval designs, no doubt the Coast Guard will take a perfectly good design and the 15/85 rule will be reversed and we will a coal burning Chinese junk sometime 2040 using the procurement processes in place which will go 85/15. Fat Leonard, a four star Admiral Deputy CNO going to the can for accepting a bribe. What could possibly go wrong?Well no sense being negative from jump street. Maybe we will get something that can keep the ice clear in the great lakes. Hope springs eternal.
Moonpool probably important for scientific reasons given that you can't count on sheltered access to open water in thicker ice. I don't begrudge some concession to multifunctional design in USCG Flight I ... as long as we get a more heavily armed USN Flight II.
The BB's commissioning circa early 1940' were build to plans spec'ed for some mk and mod AA gun not 5"38 dual purpose, very early to no radar, 1.1 " quad mount "Chicago Pianos and Ma Deuce machine guns and got shipalts to take 'em off and replace with fc radar directed 5'38's, Bofors 40mm and Oerlikon 20mm ASAP as deck space, weight and moment, permited. Got some space, weight and moment left? Put another gun on it. Now? Shoulder mounted homing missiles? Them too, CIWS? In bunches like grapes. Design engineers?, free visas for Ukuranian Wheelchair vets. Antidrone drones
This is silly. I know this because 'Climate Change!" We need floating cities to survive the onslaught of rising oceans! The Arctic will melt!!! (where are we on that 12 yr countdown?)
Glad to see a bit of strategery instead of the pseudo mental masturbation and self wallet stroking we normally see out of the DC dunderkund.
It will only last until the dems are back in charge again. Why, do you know how many homeless shelters and methadone clinics you could fund for the cost of one cutter?
Some of you guys need to realize what time it is, I know its always been the safe bet that "nothing ever happens" but within most of our lifetimes there will either be no more dems or no more United States
Please share Jarrad Kushner has Real Estate dealings in European East.
So did Hunter Biden!
What does our group think of this? Nurse Jane wants to know how our group thinks… thank you!
copy from TASS:
“DUSHANBE, October 9. /TASS/. Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev noted a successful implementation of the planned cooperation plans between the two countries at a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
"The roadmaps that we have approved are being successfully implemented," the Azerbaijani leader said. He also noted that "the Russian-Azerbaijani intergovernmental commission has met relatively recently, where the co-chairs discussed in detail a wide range of issues, not only trade and economic. And, of course, today is a good opportunity to go over the agenda again. It is quite extensive and positive."
Unfortunately Sal, there will be two different designs. This design will be for five of them; the other six (built at Bollinger and RMC) will not be armed at all. At least not in the current design.
Next question for icebreakers should be looking at a replacement class for the Bay-class tugs. These little ships keep coastal areas open in the North East and Great Lakes, and have been since 1979. I know the Coasties get a lot of service out of their cutters, but the best time to start a design these days is 10 years before it’s needed.
The USCG put on an RFI for Domestic icebreakers back in April (I think) looking for 19 of them, likely to augment the Great Lakes icebreakers and replace the Bay class. The MPV design (the one Sal didn't feature) is actually a Buoy Tender, and can fit in the Great Lakes. Maybe they'll get some use there?
I was just guessing. The MPI was originally billed as a light icebreaker/buoy tender, but now is being marketed as a medium. Would be an expensive buoy tender, but we'll see. I'm sure we'll find uses for them.
I really like this. Now, about those new ROK DDGs......
Since the Canadian icebreaker program is now running behind, perhaps there's a sop to lend them the first one two years before they're supposed to take delivery of their new hull.
I wonder what will happen when RMC builds the MPI (a design originally done for the CCG) in about 2-3 years... Faster than anything they've recently built.
a base in AK is a good idea; however, we need bases and coaling stations in the Canadian archipelago along the Northwest Passage. Russia and China do not recognize those waters as Canadian Sovereign, and will immediately start penetrating them in the event of an even greater rise in tensions. They will look to do mineral exploitation, and setting up sea bases. We will need to counter that. The best way to do so is with unmanned surface vessels, but we will need tenders and larger warships to help out. Setting up fuel bunkers up north will help that effort tremendously.
and before anyone says "so what, that's a Canadian problem," look at the ranges of ship-launched Chinese and Russian cruise / ballistic / hypersonic missiles, the orientation of our air defense network, and reconsider.
yet another justification for Canada to just give up and request to join the United States.
The Canadians like having their defense paid for by the US. They also like having their products purchased by the US. They will not like having to pay US tax rates and not get Canadian levels of pseudo-services.
We'll take Alberta! They can keep the rest! Start the pipelines now!
restart Keystone XL
restart Keystone XL PDQ!!
Unfortunately, according to a local oil distributor, the oil companies aren't really interested in Keystone. They decided to invest in upgrading already built pipelines.:(
most of BC (not Van/Vic or the Haida Gwaii), Alberta, Yukon, Saskatchewan, Manitoba. No to Ontario or Quebec south of the tree line (ie keep the power plants on the James River, etc). New Brunswick is probably OK, as is Nova Scotia and Lab/Newf. PEI gets rolled into another state. We'll have none of Nunavut: It can be a territory by itself or part of the NW Territories. Roll up St. Pierre and Miquelon, la grenouille can go find another place to contaminate.
Take none of them. Make an independent Alberta, etc. close allies. Admission to the Union means two more Democrat Senators from each former Canadian province. Their conservatives are liberals to us.
By the time they can apply for admission, they will be more conservative.
Why the Canada hate? Would you abandon the US to be a mexican? Why do you start from the proposition that Canadians don't have patriotic feelings?
My Canadian friends love to point out that they have been to war with the US and that they kicked our ass.
Breathes there the man, with soul so dead,
Who never to himself hath said,
This is my own, my native land!
Whose heart hath ne’er within him burn’d,
As home his footsteps he hath turn’d,
From wandering on a foreign strand!
If such there breathe, go, mark him well;
For him no Minstrel raptures swell;
High though his titles, proud his name,
Boundless his wealth as wish can claim;
Despite those titles, power, and pelf,
The wretch, concentred all in self,
Living, shall forfeit fair renown,
And, doubly dying, shall go down
To the vile dust, from whence he sprung,
Unwept, unhonour’d, and unsung.
"My Canadian friends love to point out that they have been to war with the US and that they kicked our ass."
More accurately, they helped the British regulars deployed to protect them from us kick our behinds.
Scoreboard!
When that war happened, Canada didn't exist except as a colony of Great Britain. But if Canada insists, we can play again...pick a long weekend and bring your best: We'll bring the Cajun Navy, two girl scout troops and the North Dakota Wing, Civil Air Patrol.
In fact, Canada as a nation didn't exist until maybe 1867 with the Act of Confederation - or was it the Balfour Declaration in 1926? The Statute of Westminster in 1931? Or the Act of Patriation in 1982? Or is it really an independent nation now? The Governor-General still has final say for the King over all laws.
Except they didn't. They fought as British subjects under British Army command. Notice they don't talk much about the USN victories on the Great Lakes, nor how the War of 1812 ended up.
They also claim the Canadian Army burned Washington. Those were British regulars, there weren't any Canadians there, there wasn't a Canadian Army then because Canada didn't exist until 1867.
Sal, you can stomp on this annexation bullshit right now. Yes we are friends and neighbours and we’ve had each others back since the Fenians quit being assholes. We like you but we don’t want to be you. When the leader of the most powerful country in the world muses about the annexation of your country while addressing the entire leadership of the USA military you’re goddamn right we notice. This is not right and is not the way you treat friends and allies.
I concur but let's remember that Canadians started it by being jerks. I got unsolicited diatribes from Canadian "friends" (I grew up in western Canada) during Bush 43, Obama , and both Trump 45 and 46, ranting against my politics and I am fairly circumspect about posting anything on social media. I also wouldn't consider myself particularly radical right, but it didn't matter to them as I supported a series of Hitlers. I thought it was funny when Trump referred to Trudeau, despised even by many Canadians, as Governor Trudeau, but it would have been better had he left it as a one-off joke.
When you start pulling your weight, securing your sectors and doing proper country things, we can entertain your gripes. Until then, deal with it. You are enjoying the illusion of sovereignty that you neither secure in blood nor pay for in treasure. You have a government that makes rules because we allow it, and we believe it just…for now. Should we feel threatened enough by the developments of the world and the encroachment of our enemies, that may change. So, I recommend that you get serious about stuff right quick. Take yourself seriously and we will too.
We're neighbors but not friends. And no, you don't like us. Your national past time, other than hockey, is running down the US. I've been there. I've been reading the Canadian papers online and perusing other Canadian websites since I got on the Web in 1999, I know how the conversations go when Americans are not around. The 'Canadian nice' mask slips whenever the Libs are in control. Chretien's people made no attempt to hide their hatred for George Bush and the US as a whole. It drives Canadians nuts that we don't pay you much mind. It's a good thing we don't.
I have a good friend who's Canadian. I've known him for over a quarter century. What I just said to you I've said to him many times and he agrees. Other, more rational Canadians also agree. They're out there, in places like YouTube and alternative media.
As for Trump's annexation comments, please wake up and see that for what it is. Trump is playing hardball with you by rattling your cage. It's a head game and you've fallen for it. Geopolitical PSYOPS. You can thank that sniffy beta male Justin Trudeau for that. Trump has no intention of making Canada the 51st State and even if he did, his base and the Republicans in Congress would shut it down. With all those new left wing voters, Canadian annexation would give the Democrats permanent control of the US government. Canadian annexation would be suicide. So take a deep breath and relax.
If the Chinese or Russians step foot in North America, it's our problem. If they do, they must be evicted immediately. Once that camel gets its nose under the tent, we might as well hang it up.
The Canadian archipelago isn't really accessible, at least not without going through the Alaskan Arctic first. It's shallow, rocky, poorly charted... and there are no good spots for ports or refueling stations (although Canada is trying to open up one). The only deepwater port is on Hudson Bay. Canada is planning on building 24 new icebreakers over the coming decades. Unfortunately, they belong to the Canadian Coast Guard, so will all be unarmed. Yes, even with the move of the CCG to Canda's Defense Department, there is no plan to arm any of them. There is a law pending to allow them to share information with the military and intelligence services. Baby steps.
nobody has time for baby steps. The NW passage is unpredictable in terms of ice levels, so impassable this summer could mean free of ice next. As for mapping, I wouldn't put it past the Chinese and/or Russians to already have that body of water filled with UUVs that are engaged in mapping operations and/or natural resources identification
Baby steps was a criticism of my Canadian colleagues.. Anway-
I just found a link to a recent publication on Canada's Arctic Maritime Infrastructure. I haven't had time to do more than skim it, so perhaps I'll learn something new. But my entering assumption is that the NWP won't see regular use because it's simply too shallow and hard to navigate. If you look at the shipping trends, we're seeing significant traffic- aiming at year round, now- through the NSR/Bering Strait. And that makes the NWP less of a priority than the Alaskan Arctic or the Hudson Bay and St Lawrence Riverway.
Link here: https://www.cmsn.ca/_files/ugd/0bcbee_ddf2cdb7dc1e41f08b47596fe2c61c1b.pdf
Churchill, Iqaluit, Sachs Harbour?
I've looked at the charts of the waters up there, which can be viewed online. There's a lot of water up there deep enough to support submarine operations. While I haven't seen any myself, I have a sneaky suspicion that we possess accurate bottom contour charts of the area.
Congratulations CDR Salamander!
We are on the “Same Page”!
May I offer a suggestion?
The “Tariff Monies” currently collected by our United States, please assess a figure and request that figure to EACH of the GOP Congressmen in Each of those Shipbuilding Districts, including the Governors.
It is highly advised by me, Nurse Jane, to pack weapons “Appropriate” for each Deployed Area.
Let me dial down into the Maritime Law…either your permission.
Let’s have a meetup in your Chart Room.
Let’s “Assess” our Threat-Level in each area we believe USCG Ice Breakers will be operating!
CDR Salamander, please Breath because, I’m proposing a Board Certified “Veterinarian” accompany me on any United States Ship which is assigned to these Arctic Waters!
“We don’t shoot Polar Bears in Russia”!
That’s my mantra! Indigenous people have their “Missions”.
I have designed the square footage needed for the SS Nurse Jane… I’ll dig up those Architectural Drawings. I shared these with Dr Skopets, Russian speaking Vet formerly associated with Calvert Animal …
My billable rate is $500/hr or $8.20 per minute. I write the receive and invoice. If I like my “Client”, I charge nothing.
CDR Salamander, you will absolutely need appropriate “Weapons”. That’s your field of expertise! Very respectfully, Nurse Jane
I'm OK with these coming out under-gunned. Gotta get the shipyards rolling and don;t want to Constitution these hulls. Hope armament can be augmented downstream (down ice?) via containerized systems and or USV
McStimpy: Fore and aft harpoon guns.
Have we seen whether these will be three different classes of ships, two, or just one? The US-European company agreements would argue for at least two different designs. Regarding weaponry, allow me a bit of free thinking here.... At these latitudes, topside ice is a constant problem, which means (center of gravity) x (moment arm) problems coming out of your ears. This would be exacerbated by late-add weapons - need to know what the current design moment arm reserve is for each class. I would also point out that ice can be a weapon. We have seen the PLAN use water cannons against the Philippine fishermen and Coast Guard; I have no doubt they would employ the same tactic in the Arctic. So.....what sort of water cannon will these "Arctic Security Cutters" have?
Two classes of ships. Looks like five of one, six of the other. The five hull design is the one Sal is writing about (and its my preferred design). Other one is smaller, underpowered, less redundant, and currently has NO WEAPONS.
Yeah, look at the austal and eastern opcs closely. They aren’t the same. We need to be real careful here and careful will cost us time and money.
The Finnish shipyard's where they build these ice breakers for Finland and in the bad old days even for Russia, are second to none. Finn's know how to bend iron. They know how to make ships float. Based on past experinces with very good naval designs, no doubt the Coast Guard will take a perfectly good design and the 15/85 rule will be reversed and we will a coal burning Chinese junk sometime 2040 using the procurement processes in place which will go 85/15. Fat Leonard, a four star Admiral Deputy CNO going to the can for accepting a bribe. What could possibly go wrong?Well no sense being negative from jump street. Maybe we will get something that can keep the ice clear in the great lakes. Hope springs eternal.
Good call!
Seems like a lot of capability in a relatively small package. I'd add another Bushmaster to the stearn aspect...maybe some manpads.
And how helpful, really, is a moonpool?
For the scientific and UUV missions? Very. Protected handling makes the work go better.
Does the Jayhawk MH60-T support ESSS? 900 gals of extra fuel or 16 Hellfires could be a nice plus up to that ships capability
don't even know if they are rated for iced conditions, but I guess that we will find out. Also, we can always embark a detachment...
Moonpool probably important for scientific reasons given that you can't count on sheltered access to open water in thicker ice. I don't begrudge some concession to multifunctional design in USCG Flight I ... as long as we get a more heavily armed USN Flight II.
Moonpool could also be very useful for [UMSV] UUV (? Unmanned submersible vehicle) surveillance and weapons, should we want to transfer any to Navy.
Sounds like a great way to launch an ASW UUV, since you can't hear a darn thing while moving around in the ice...
that makes sense, thanks!
Just keep the NAVSEA Good Idea Fairies far away from this. We do not need a repeat of the FREMM cluster fark. And I speak as a retired EDO.
Let's get Flight I in the water before doing a more heavily armed Flight II for the USN.
I wish I could like this twice.
The best help SecWar could give the Navy is to drop a JDAM or 20 on NAVSEA
The BB's commissioning circa early 1940' were build to plans spec'ed for some mk and mod AA gun not 5"38 dual purpose, very early to no radar, 1.1 " quad mount "Chicago Pianos and Ma Deuce machine guns and got shipalts to take 'em off and replace with fc radar directed 5'38's, Bofors 40mm and Oerlikon 20mm ASAP as deck space, weight and moment, permited. Got some space, weight and moment left? Put another gun on it. Now? Shoulder mounted homing missiles? Them too, CIWS? In bunches like grapes. Design engineers?, free visas for Ukuranian Wheelchair vets. Antidrone drones
This is silly. I know this because 'Climate Change!" We need floating cities to survive the onslaught of rising oceans! The Arctic will melt!!! (where are we on that 12 yr countdown?)
Glad to see a bit of strategery instead of the pseudo mental masturbation and self wallet stroking we normally see out of the DC dunderkund.
It will only last until the dems are back in charge again. Why, do you know how many homeless shelters and methadone clinics you could fund for the cost of one cutter?
None.
But we can still get clean needles and social workers for the street people in plenty.
Some of you guys need to realize what time it is, I know its always been the safe bet that "nothing ever happens" but within most of our lifetimes there will either be no more dems or no more United States
With that thinking there will be neither. So why talk icebreakers. Pick another topic.
CDR Salamander,
Please share Jarrad Kushner has Real Estate dealings in European East.
So did Hunter Biden!
What does our group think of this? Nurse Jane wants to know how our group thinks… thank you!
copy from TASS:
“DUSHANBE, October 9. /TASS/. Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev noted a successful implementation of the planned cooperation plans between the two countries at a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
"The roadmaps that we have approved are being successfully implemented," the Azerbaijani leader said. He also noted that "the Russian-Azerbaijani intergovernmental commission has met relatively recently, where the co-chairs discussed in detail a wide range of issues, not only trade and economic. And, of course, today is a good opportunity to go over the agenda again. It is quite extensive and positive."
Unfortunately Sal, there will be two different designs. This design will be for five of them; the other six (built at Bollinger and RMC) will not be armed at all. At least not in the current design.
https://open.substack.com/pub/sixtydegreesnorth/p/usa-finland-icebreaker-deal-announcement?r=22534v&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web for more info
I had read about the Davie ice breaker deal on "Naval News," recently. Good stuff.
And yes, you can upgrade the gun to a 57mm. Takes a bit more structural reinforcement, but the yard told me it was doable.
I don’t know. This kind of thinking made the LCS cost go from an estimated $220M to actual $550M per ship.
I was talking to folks at Helsinki Shipyard. They know what they can do and what they can't without messing things up.
Next question for icebreakers should be looking at a replacement class for the Bay-class tugs. These little ships keep coastal areas open in the North East and Great Lakes, and have been since 1979. I know the Coasties get a lot of service out of their cutters, but the best time to start a design these days is 10 years before it’s needed.
The USCG put on an RFI for Domestic icebreakers back in April (I think) looking for 19 of them, likely to augment the Great Lakes icebreakers and replace the Bay class. The MPV design (the one Sal didn't feature) is actually a Buoy Tender, and can fit in the Great Lakes. Maybe they'll get some use there?
Perhaps. The current Seagoing Buoy Tenders, like SPAR and ALDER, are in their 30s, so may have a good useful life remaining.
I was just guessing. The MPI was originally billed as a light icebreaker/buoy tender, but now is being marketed as a medium. Would be an expensive buoy tender, but we'll see. I'm sure we'll find uses for them.