After I released this story, the Congressional Budget Office released a report about the MASSIVE cost overrun expected to build three US Coast Guard heavy icebreakers. They are estimating a cost of $5.1 billion for all three; that is a 60% increase. Congressional Report Details New Delays and Cost Overruns for Coast Guard Icebreaker gcaptain.com/congressional-report-details-new-delays-and-cost-overruns-for-coast-guard-icebreaker/
Would have cost less to refit the Polar Sea and Polar Star, our two heavy breakers. We've known this for a long time. They've looked into it a few times. The Healy and other medium breakers can't do the work needed to meet our obligations. Despite being in caretaker status, sitting at the pier, and being parted out for the Star for over a decade, the Polar Sea's hull is still in excellent shape. But we need new and more expensive because that's better, right?
At this point, it's no longer a real shocker, Sal. It'd be if there were no massive cost and time overrruns. But, gotta keep folks properly greased,...
Retrofit a navy fleet vessel with big engines, possibly a nuke powered one that is in decent repair, not slated for overhauling, to run as an icebreaker-just add reinforcement to its hull on the bow, and some starboard and port thrusters/(bubblers) to break up ice. Not being political here, however, it is unacceptable that we spend so much on Ukraine and other nations, when we can use the funds to build better ships, ice breakers, and other much needed equipment and infrastructure!
Joke's on all of you, we're not going to be boating our crap all over the globe that much longer on the ridiculous scale we do now. Globalism is rapidly dying and it no longer makes any sense to ship materials from 8 countries in 3 different continents to 11 other countries for processing, to the finished product shipping AGAIN to yet somewhere else..
Im still dissapointed how hard it is to get people to buy into this ctrm stock these shipping stocks be nuts man. I watched costamare double it was like half undervalued.
As a former CG officer back in the '60s, some of my classmates served on the old wind class vessels that as usual in those days we got second hand from the Navy. One of my COs was the captain of the last wind class in service. I might add that when you buy a 'used' car you have to make sure it isn't 'used up'. These vessels were hurry up builds for WW2 and well past their expiration date when we got them. During my active duty period the 'star' class vessels were built. The problem with having a forty year replacement cycle is that there is no institutional knowledge of how to do it, secondly, the personnel replacement cycle in the military will insure that there is no continuity in the organization established to build such vessels. That said, Finland is a great partner for this venture, they actually regularly build breakers and their shipyards are inside, a good plan for shipbuilding in a cold climate. Nuclear would be a good way to go for a breaker but the CG has no experience with that making staffing a continuous problem. Finland has access to the large diesels made in Europe that are way more fuel efficient than the gas turbine technology used to build recent US breakers. Unlike the Navy, the CG actually works on a budget.
@@Hobbyblasphemist they don't have a lot of spare nuclear people. It Is probably one of the hardest schools to fill. People think SEALS are hard to find.
I can speak to things a bit from the Canadian perspective. I'm an engineer with the Canadian Coast Guard, and one of the designers on the new Polar Class 2 icebreakers. First thing I'd like to say, the Russians aren't masters of icebreakers, the Finnish are. Aker Arctic designs most of the world's icebreakers, and Helsinki Shipyards builds most of them. Importantly, they built most of the Russian fleet, going all the way back. Of the current Russian fleet, the Karu, Tor, Dudinka (which is actually sailing in the Baltic right now), Taymyr and Vaygach (both nuclear), Admiral Makarov, Krasin, Kapitan M. Izmaylov, Kapitan Kosolapov, Kapitan A. Radzhabov, Kapitan Sorokin, Kapitan Nikolaev, Kapitan Dranitsyn, Kapitan Khlebnikov, Mudyug, Magadan, Dikson, Murmansk (one of their newest icebreakers), and 14 smaller river class icebreakers, were all built by Helsinki. There's also hull number 519. Which was supposed to be the newest Russian icebreaker, but when the war in Ukraine broke out, the Finnish government revoked the export license, so that project is stalled. The mention of the Fins is important because of the "Icebreaker Pact". US shipyards haven't been doing icebreakers for decades, they have no idea what they're doing. The USCG has not finished the design for their new Polar replacements, but they're going into build at the end of the year anyway because they want to stick to schedule. It's the exact same thing that happened with the Canadian Navy and the Joint Service Ship, which is years behind schedule, way over budget, and currently sitting at Vancouver shipyards half-built, rusting away, because the project is stalled out with design problems. The Canadian shipyards are in slightly better shape, but not great. I think we have a better design, but I'm also bias. We're also getting way more icebreakers. We currently have 6 heavy icebreakers, 16 medium icebreakers, 2 icebreaking patrol ships (plus 6 for the navy), and 2 super-heavy icebreakers (they will be the heaviest, highest ice rated, icebreakers in the world), on order. But there isn't enough Capacity to build all that in Canada. So for both the US and Canada, Finland is the answer. Davie Shipyards here in Canada thought the same and decided to buy Helsinki Shipyards. As with most military/government procurement, you've got to buy from local companies where possible, and Davie was basically forcing this Icebreaker Pact thing through so that they could further legitimize building Coast Guard icebreakers in Finland. To summarize. The Canadian program will be slow, overbudget, and probably half the ships will be built in Finland, but it'll work. The USCG Polar class replacement will be a nightmare once it goes fully into build later this year. It will be years late, overbudget, and will probably have insane teething problems. The USCG will likely decide to make a second run of icebreakers in Finland when the project bogs down in the US.
As a former Canadian Coast Guard Chief Engineering officer, I have always advocated for having heavy ice breakers being built in Finland because they have the expertise. It would be cheaper (saving tax payer money), they would be delivered on time and there would be no alterations if there was a government change. Instead we still have the Louis S. St. Laurent which was built in 1969.
@@rickcudmore8156 The two PC 2 class icebreakers will be decent when they're finished, but they're gonna be exceedingly expensive. They also aren't scheduled to launch until 2030, so another half decade of the Louis and Larsen. In the near term we'll be getting 2 of the Harry DeWolf class arctic patrol ships that the navy is currently receiving. Basically the navy bought 6 and someone thought it was a good idea to add 2 more to the order for us. They're trash, absolute dumpster fire of a vessel. The navy flubbed the design and we've done our best to preemptively fix as many design problems as we can before they build ours but they're still being built by Irving, and will still be garbage. One of the one's the navy already got just pulled into Pearl Harbor after a fitting failed in the salt water cooling system and they took on 20,000L of water. We were giving very little leeway with fixing the design. No hull changes, no propulsion or power plant changes. Auxiliary systems had a little wiggle room, but they generally locked down the design. At least our cranes should work, the one's on the Navy ships don't.
I served on the Polar Sea (WAGB 11) 93-97 as a MK3. Went all over the world and went to the North Pole with the Canadians. Met the Russians and went onboard the Yamal, a Russian nuclear icebreaker. Great ship!
The shipyards that could have built WORLD CLASS ice breakers are gone now as the commercial Shipbuilding went to South Korea back in the eighties. The skill sets required are also gone as we retired. The remaining qualified boatbuilders dont have the spare capacity.
@blaydCA I was raised in West Seattle, we had 2 shipyards and a creosote plant. We now have 1 and a container yard! I think Seattle Steel (formerly Bethlehem Steel) is still there. Herr lumber is gone, West Seattle dive shop is gone. Lloyd's Marina is gone. Unfortunately, I can't think of the names of both shipyards anymore. One was Todd's off harbor island, don't know on west side of the river was, anybody remember?
@@jeffrains9569 My employment at General Dynamics - Quincy Shipbuilding Division ended in 1985. It was leveled for a MWRA treatment facility. We built quality commercial and military ships, some which are still in service (Bobo class). Generally on time and on budget with a skilled core workforce , with additional hires with less skills as needed. Peak employment was well over 3000 at that facility. This was well before computer design did every detail.
@blaydCA, Very true. I worked at Avondale Shipyards, the yard the built the Healy,. I cut a lot of the steel that went into her construction. They shut that yard down in 2014.
@eherrmann01 A ship I was on in the late 70s had the same variable pitch prop system as the polar star and sea. It kept jamming, so we limped into Todd's. It started acting up in Seward Alaska, and that time, we limped there on our bow thruster! Got it kinda working to limp down to Seattle. Fun times had by all in the engine room let me clue you!
As a Canadian, I cannot for the life of me understand why Ottawa is not heavily investing to create a serious, credible and capable fleet of icebreakers. It's like we're leaving an open buffet without any sort of surveillance with some hungry Russians creeping in slowly.
Part of that is that it is that it has only been in recent years that the concept of the ocean north of Canada and Alaska being open to commercial exploitation. It's hard for voters to picture the threat as they still see that as a year round ice-choked ocean from their grade school geography books and only a few expeditions in special ships have sailed a Northwest Passage. Most don't see the satellite photos showing how that region is opening up for longer and longer periods each year. They just read a story about it with maybe a before/after photo of a particular glacier or see a news story on CBC with some video from a helicopter of just a small bay or piece of shoreline, but it all seems terribly remote. For the moment there is no Chinese fishing fleet strip mining Canadian waters unmolested that gets voters in Saskatoon or Quebec concerned enough to spend billions to patrol the region. The same is true of the US in regard to Alaska.
I wonder how many ice-breakers worth of money and weapons we sent to Ukraine over the last few years? I bet that would have paid for it all. We can’t do everything- and taxes are high enough already.
Chilean viewer here: I'm shocked that the USCG can't get new icebreakers. We just built our first domestic Ice Class PC5, the Almirante Viel, and it was comissioned this year. I understand it's not like the design the USCG wants, but how can Chile build an icebreaker and not the US? I think it would be just easier for the US and Canada( since their De Wolff has cost overruns) to just buy Norway's Svalbard class icebreakers. Or buy one from us for the Antartic, I'm sure Asmar would jump at the opportunity and offer a great deal!!!! As usual, great video Sal!
I went to mcmurdo station 3 times and all 3 times I got to go on board the ice breakers. The polar sea and the polar star. Those were beautiful ships back in the 80s. And early 90s.
Thanks for reporting on this topic. Funding for the Coast Guard in general is way below what is needed. The price tag for domestic (Great Lakes, New England, and Mid-Atlantic) and Polar icebreaking assets replacement is at the $3 billion mark per, Coast Guard Polar Security Cutter report, by Congressional Research Service, dated July 15, 2024. The USCGC Healy was developed with a major upgrade in science spaces. The science support spaces needed, I think, conflicts with an armed icebreaking cutter. Further the USCG lacks the ability and funding to keep some form qualified surface warfare ratings and officers in the service. I entered the USCG in 1977. I have been retired for 4 years. In the late 80s the USCGC Glacier was home ported in Portland OR. I was in the Coast Reserve as a LT (O-3). One of ships crew a CPO gave me a tour of the ship in 1986. The ship was commission into the Navy in 1955 and transferred to the USCG in 1966. The Glacier was worn out. The diamonds on the diamond plate were gone in many areas due to wear. In the summer of 1986 she was dry docked in Portland OR and many areas of the hull had deteriorated. Like the current Polar class, refitting and repairing the ship wasn't feasible.
Unfortunatly so many policy decisions are deliberatly molded to suit the climate narrative, irrespective of the realities: farmers needlessly bailing and packaging straw after the harvest, the energy and carbon released from the straw is entirley made of energy and carbon stored during the growing season, so burning it on the filed in situ is totally carbon neutral. Yet bailing and transport is a needless energy sink with no return. policy and relaity parted company a long time ago.
Well, since nobody ever gets court-martialed or goes to prison, and their companies get “punished” for malfeasance by getting even bigger government contracts…no.
So we need heavy icebreakers for Antarctic missions. The sea ice in McMurdo sound is annual. The surrounding areas that need missions, like treaty inspections and environmental cleanups can have massive pressure ridges that need the 13300 tons of turbine fueled power that a ship like the Sea and Star provides.
I almost put in for the Polar Star when it was commissioned but I realized that I don't like ice and snow. 🥶 I do regret not doing it though because it would have been an experience like no other. Especially the maiden voyage.
Last year, I was a part of Operation Deep Freeze. The Polar Srar escorted us into McMurdo. Days before getting to the ice sheet and while we were discharging. we kept hearing scuttlebutt about the Polar Star breaking down. But everything went smooth, and the Polar Star got the job done. Hope that wasn't her last mission.
Icebreakers need to be tough! The quality of the steel is imperative. In developing the North Slope oil fields, the contractors were breaking the frames of their Caterpillar equipment if it got cold soaked. Then there was the problem of not being able to restart a cold engine. Lubrication is also a big problem in cold weather. Simply stated, our environmental laws were written without considering the arctic. The older solutions to these problems have been outlawed. Nobody is looking at things like using LNG to run generators on an icebreaker. Its never too cold to vaporize the LNG. It will vaporize continuously, so the generator would be in constant use. The choice is use it or waste it. In the event of needing a cold start, it should be able to pony up the rest of the ship. Even nuclear power plants need external electricity during start up. The real nightmare is losing all electrical power in the arctic winter. The next problem is getting LNG in the Arctic. We are used to ships making Arctic deployments, not being full time Arctic vessels. Maintaining a presence with transiting vessels is inefficient. Next is the problem of crew rotations. Do we need Blue and Gold crews like subs? Do we need Station Keeping? Congress changes every 2 years, but Icebreakers need many years to build. How do you catch a moving specification?
Worked in the Alaska Oil Fields 33 years and never heard of a Cat frame breaking. Have used Herman Nelson and Tioga heaters and never had a problem getting cold equipment running.
I worked on the North Wind and the South Wind in Seattle in the 60s, and thought then that the Polar Star wasn’t well made. I do appreciate your channel and your presence there. Thanks
My nephew was the captain of the Nathaniel B. Palmer for years. He was skipper when the Palmer broke ice to deliver food to the Russian Antarctic station when the Russian nuclear ice breaker broke down.
I was on the USCGC Northwind in 1964, and we got to within 400 miles of the North Pole. We also were at the same point East as in the one clip of where the eastern most point of the Healy was. We spent the summer helping to resupply the Dew Line Stations. In 65 we were in the Kara Sea looking for/found the oil that the Russkies are drilling now.
Regrettably, this is more reflective of USCG underfunding. The FY24 CG budget is 13.45B; VS FY24 USN budget at 255.8 B! CG Budget is 5.5% of the USN! Consider USCG missions 11 core missions; USN has 4 missions. On a day in, day out basis... THE CG does more for the average taxpayer vs the Navy. Is it not time to appropriately budget the USCG? The state of the Polar Sea & Polar Star are symptoms of the greater problem; underfunding the United State's oldest seagoing service. JB Hall, USCG LT/KP '95
Canada is finishing our 6th Arctic Offshore Patrol vessels for the RCN. These are PC 5 hull and PC 4 bow. So they are decent icebreakers, armed with a 25mm gun and two MG's. We could easily build 2 more for the USCG (We are building two modified ones for the CCG) After that Canada is building around 21 new ice breakers, 16xMediums, 3 heavy mediums and 2 heavy icebreakers if I recall correctly. The Mediums will displace over 8,000tons and be PC 4.
When the Polar class breakers first came into service they couldn't work in ice. We used to call them the Seattle national bank because since they couldn't get underway the funding for them was divided among the other units in the area. Ice breakers should be built and run by NOAA.
Was aboard USCGC Staten Island WAGB 278 1969 /1970. Just missed Northwest passage with the SS Manhattan. It was out for 3-4 months then 3-4 months in the yards and so on. Did resupply for NARL Pt. Barrow and oceanography surveys including Prudoe Sound / North Slope. 10:12
If you go back to 1940 the US population was only about 135 million. We had no computers, jet planes or cell phones. Yet we could, and did, build ships. People back then could get things done. They built highways, bridges, skyscrapers and a decade and a half after they fought WW2 they were putting satellites in space, developing concepts for transplant surgery and modern computers. Now we can't build frigates, destroyers or ice breakers.
Still is homeported in Seattle. Dry docks in CA. This is a scheduled dry dock, she is not being taken out of service. She cannot keep doing the annual trip by herself and keeping up with maintenance and training. It’s so sad that we are so far away from having any relief.
Sal, I ran an ice-breaking study for the US Coast Guard many years ago. Not because I have lots of icebreaking experience, I have none, but I had lots of government contracting experience. Here's what I can convey: first, we referred to this as "polar icebreaking." The other "icebreakings" operations are "domestic ice" or "Dom-Ice" (icebreaking in the Great Lakes) and International Ice (looking for icebergs). Half the folks in the USCG wanted polar icebreakers, and the other half didn't. Why? Because all polar icebreaking missions are under the control & funding of the National Science Foundation (NSF). That is, the icebreaker doesn't get underway unless the NSF wants to go! So half the icebreaking folks in the USCG don't like the mission of providing taxi service to the NSF. An accounting trickery done under the Clinton administration.
We needed new ice breakers 20 years ago...And I think the Navy needs at least 3 of their own plus another 3-5 for the Coasties minimum. I think the partnership with Canada and Finland is our best bet. The Fins know what they are doing and are capable of getting them delivered on time.
Yeah, it would be great if we could build the shipyard capacity here in the US, but the problem is that no shipyard will tool up and deliver an affordable solution for a ship that at most they might build 6 of over the course of a decade, and then there are no new orders coming for 20 years. The reality is unless that a niche vessel like this is a boom or bust option that domestic shipbuilders just aren't interested in unless a premium is paid to build them that covers their tool up and tool down costs. Sadly your best bet is to go to a commercial shipyard that already has standard icebreaker designs on their draft tables and the necessary tooling to make them. There just isn't that much demand for icebreakers for more than a handful of shipbuilders worldwide to mess with them. If the Finns can't do it, perhaps there is a shipyard in South Korea or Japan that is interested, but it certainly seems that no US shipyard has any interest in doing this without raping taxpayers. Of course, one problem is that the Coast Guard or Navy are going to have to accept these will be off-the-shelf vessels to a large extent if they want them to be the least bit affordable and they need to stop this habit of changing specs all through the design process and construction process. A couple adequate icebreakers is better than no icebreakers and certainly better than one perfect breaker that costs as much as three adequate ones but you still need three total to do the job properly no matter how perfect the one was.
G'day Sal, and as always, a great topic and well delivered...whilst the need for ice breakers isn't a necessity down here in Aus, I've always been intrigued by the process, and have known the RUssian fleet has been leaps and bounds ahead for many years, their fleet of nuclear powered ships is nothing short of impressive. Hopefully the US and Canada can catch up in coming years. Great episode as always, and cheers from Aus!!!! 🍻🍻🍻🍻
Ice breakers or not, the Jones Act needs to go. The fact that the only way to get an ice breaker built is to go to foreign ship builders should tell us how much of a failure the Jones Act is.
Thanks for showing this SAL. As a Canadian we have a HUGE hole in our coverage of the North West passage and ocean rights. We need to start spending our money here at home instead of spending BILLION on the Ukraine adventure and NATO (IMO). Oh Canada where art thou....🍻 on me!
NATO and every European military needs to be combined into a single military command with a single authority. It would prevent Russia from dining on any country that was part of this world power military. Properly organized Europe can defend itself.
Canada just built 6 armed medium icebreakers for the Navy, 2 more unarmed are under construction for the CCG. Construction of the 2 massive Polar Class 8s are moving ahead finally. The CCG just got three shiny "new to them" medium icebreakers from Davie shipyard. The Louis has just been refitted again to last until the 8s are on station. In my hometown right now there is another older class medium icebreaker in the Port Weller Drydocks being completely overhauled. 6 of those are still in service on the East Coast. Money is being spent under the NSBP. We can damn well also afford to fund Ukraine's war too, 15% of your fellow countrymen have in-laws over there. F Russia
@@scottmccambley764 I disagree about funding Ukraine. I'm First Nation (Mi'kmaq/Metis) and we still have people living in 3rd world conditions with NO water/hydro/internet and education (kids have to move outa reserves to finish HS). We also have have a HUGE housing issue letting in 5 million over the last 10 yrs. As for 15% of of my fellow countrymen, that is because we took in 50k nice little mustache men after ww2 (just go to a cemetery and see how many Wulf Angles/Iron Crosses in Alberta/Saskatchewan). Like that nice old man getting a standing ovation in our Parliament. I don't like Stephan Bandera gang, do you? How about Tiki marches in Ukraine before March 2022? CBC used to cover that....now silence. F Ukraine the most corrupted country in Europe (Corruption Perceptions Index rating of 36/100) and as for Russia, why bring them into this? Phobia? I DO agree with the Ice Breaker stuff and thanks for the info about it.
@@scottmccambley764 According to 2021 census, Ukrainian Canadians number 1,258,635 or 3.5 per cent of the country's population....so your 15% is a lie....or hyperbole comment? I know what percentage of Canadians are FN/Metis. In Canada, 1,807,250 people identified themselves as Indigenous in the 2021 Census, accounting for 5.0% of the country's total population. Google search....took less than a minute.
@@danharold3087 I agree 100% the EU can defend itself. Their combined military budget was €240 billion (USD 269 billion) and they DWARF the Russians in GDP (smaller than Texas/California). Russia only spent around $84 billion for defense in 2023. Same with population....448 million vs 144 million.
Ice breaker Colaberation effort? Sounds great, we can all go ahead and buy Svalbard class ships from the Norwegians. Even if it's just lisenseing the design for doemstic production...it's right there!
@kentslocum can you imagine the absolute temper tantrum people would throw in front of Congress, though? At least if they lisense the design when the start build there will actually be a finalized design *stares menacingly at the constitution class*
The hovercraft ice breaker solution my come into play. That can be mounted on the bow of a normal ship or just run up and down the channel. Air getting under the ice breaks it from below because the ice, unsupported by water has a low tensile strength. There is also an old solution of a air blower tentacle. This extends from the bow down and forward to blow air under the ice and this break in. These may be faster deploying tools.
Posting this after reaching 0:28 DO we even need ice breakers? For the lower 48 coastal waters I would guess very few times are they essential. On the Great lakes very possible to require some use. In the waters of Alaska we have used them many times as we need access to communities above the Arctic Circle year round! One event a couple of years ago was Kotzbue runnining out of fuel and an IceBreaker leading a tanker through the Bering Sea to Kotzbue!
I got an idea. Here in Puerto Rico, we have an old former Navy base (Roosevelt Roads) which I've always thought could be a good shipbuilding yard. Ya make those icebreakers here, which will mean they are hotter than if they were made in, say, Quincy, Massachusetts. Then, when they go to do the icebreaking, they'll work better, because they're hotter.
Expensive to get material there to do the build since we'd need to use Jones Act ships to get it there. Same reason repair is done in Hawaii not construction. The USN would want to be invited back. Remember, they got kicked out.
Help, we have a breaker gap! Damn Chinese breakers, Russian breakers breaking stuff. We need the capacity to break potential foreign breakers breaking our sovereign ice. Where are you Lindsey Graham when we need you?
I read about the U S Navy needs 34 billion to bring needed repairs not upgrades just repairs !! They just got gave Ukraine 61 BILLION without any OVERSIGHT!! WTF ??? CARRIER REPAIRS AND SUBMARINE REPAIRS CANNOT BE DONE IN THE NORTHWEST BECAUSE THEY SHUTDOWN ALL THOSE REPAIR FACILITIES !! HOW CAN A NAVY BE EFFECTIVE WITHOUT A PLACE TO FIX BROKEN AND MECHANICAL PROBLEMS ?? WHERE IS THE MONEY GOING ???
Ironic that the us government can skip around the jones act. I’m not against the jones act I just find the double standard interesting. Although South Korea could probably pump out an ice breaker on time and near on budget.
Quibble: a minute of latitude is historically 1 nautical mile; 1852 metres (precisely) is the current legal definition (very close to 1 minute of latitude).
We have been behind in icebreakers for many years. Polar Star and Polar Sea were the workhorses of our fleet, but Polar Sea has been out of service since 2010. It has not been repaired or replaced. Healy is more of a research ship. How is it that the United States cannot maintain a small fleet of icebreakers?
If one looks at the chart looking down from the north one will observe a large channel of water that, with the effects of Climate Change, opens each year. The route takes 5 days off the common route from China to Europe. With the issues that have slowed the Panama Canal and the war and unsettled political issues near the Suez canal the northern route is looking pretty good. Find that top down map of the earth a see for yourself. It is fascinating.
As someone who worked on both sides of the Polar Security Cutter project, that project is a disaster and my personal opinion is that the contract should have been given to someone else who could actually make progress on it a long time ago.
So essentially, we now have only one working icebreaker, and it is obsolete and mechanically frail. That said, we should be buying icebreakers from Finland from now on. They have the expertise, and we need to keep a robust presence in those regions.
I always thought that having an excavator type arm on the bow that has a way to have a hot high pressure nozzle like a water jet cutting machine that could be used to slice thru ice to weaken it for breaking. I wonder if the Russian ice breakers are used to break up the ice cap to prevent wind blpwn ice flows from shearing off drill rigs.
The Polar Star and Polar Sea are old. They were being built back in the early 70s when I was in the Coast Guard. I remember the old ones Northwind and Statin Island.
I remember seeing the Polar Star when I was living up in Alaska more than 20 years ago. Unfortunate to hear it is on its way out, but understandable for a ship that has to crash its way through ice so much. Really unfortunate to hear how deficient the U.S. has become on having dependable, usable, ice breakers. The crew members I met from Polar Star were very proud of what they did. Here's hoping the U.S. can get its head out of its derriere and bring some dignity back to the ice breaking ships.
Glad you mentioned that the USN has no interest in navigating on the surface in the Arctic Sea. The Submarine Force is the only presence needed for the maintenance of Sovereignty and security. A surface warship hemmed-in by ice would be a sitting duck, and even an icebreaker couldn't change that tactical dilemma.....................
The sad state of US icebreakers is disturbing. The last icebreakers used in Boston, nearby MA ports & in Maine were tugboats. The Coastguard needs much greater funding. We should certainly consider contracting with Finland to build more.
😂 indeed that northern route for cargo movement is attractive 🤠 The USA needs ice breakers. Not just for that, but for the Great lakes which freeze annually...😅 We are totally unprepared for being any sort of global power, ....anymore
Before watching. My Pop and older brother were on USCG icebreakers. 70s, 80s and 90s. Both were on 1940s ships. Can the US Army, Navy and Air Force do with 40s gear? .
How old are the F16 ??? It's upgrade and REPAIR ! Newest jets can't stay in the air F35 ?? What TRUMP SAID HE BUILT ALL NEW ARMED FORCES BUT THAT WAS A LIE !!
I joined the Coast Guard in 1980. Polar Star and Polar Sea were already almost 20 years old! Breakers are not sexy. Perhaps if they had vertical launch systems the USCG could get a few through congress.
Got a tour of Polar Star 2016 at McMurdo. Glad i did before the townies got banned for cleaning them out of energy drinks at the PX. (Station had run out of red bull two weeks prior and people were going bonkers)
As far as the Norther route goes, its no free lunch. The Bearing Sea is serious choke point. Going around Africa is far less so (or South America). Those are year round and you do not need ice breakers even in the summer aka like you do in the Arctic let alone the Winter Months. Equally Arctic access is choked from all but Barents Sea and Northern Russia.
6:03 even if the jones act forbid this, any legislation authorizing the spending to procure this easily could have clauses that waive the act. And even if that was overlooked,it’s most likely that such legislation would be interpreted as implicitly waiving any such restrictions.
Hey Sal, at 9:34 you mention the Navy and their polar presence being with submarines, makes me think of something I shared in the Arctic video on my channel that I've mentioned before (What Is Really Going On With Arctic Sea Ice?). In the April 15, 2017 edition of The Economist magazine, on page 67, they did an article titled Icebreakers - Making Waves - The quickest way to break the ice is by submarine - and they talk about using submarines to create flexural gravity-wave resonance to shatter the ice sheet above. The article says that America's heavy icebreaker, Polar Star, can break a channel through two-metre ice at a rate of three knots and that a submarine could force such a passage ten times as fast. It's an interesting article, pretty sure it's still available online, I provide a link to it in the source materials for my video. I'd include it here but youtube doesn't usually allow links in comments.
The Arctic can be such a tough environment that icebreakers often can't function well without adequate basing & support, & both the U.S. & Canada lack much Arctic infrastructure of any kind, much less a proper Arctic port for repairs & resupply. The mooted joint "ABBA" icrebreaker proposal has merit (it's always going to be more economical to field one properly-supported general-purpose type than two specialised, small production run, undersupported types), however, this should be considered in the context of the willingness to build & maintain the infrastructure necessary to support icebreaker operations in the desired areas, including roads to remote hamlets & accessible supply depots.
Hey Sal, Start cooperating with the Finns. They are known to built the worlds finest icebreaking vessels. They have long standing experience building nuclear icebreakers, for themselves to keep the Baltic open in winter, but slso for others, including the Russians in the past. My Finnish friends and the technical news have been telling me for decades: Nobody does icebreakers as well as the Finnish ship yards. A small nation with some outstanding expertise areas, and now a NATO partner.
We're assuming that Ukraine doesn't somehow destroy all those Russian icebreakers... because Russia seems to have half their navy destroyed by a country without a navy.
Sal, I know we all know your name, but make a small few seconds pause in the beginning of the video. Thing is, RUclips start to play video even before you click on it. Therefore few first words are always stays silent. Idk about desktops, but it is the case in mobile app. So if you would simply give few seconds in the beginning to play out before people click on the video, no one going to miss anything. Just random advice
Specialty ship construction is only viable if there is a baseline of ship construction methods and experience. Have to build the baseline up. Also, going fully private was a mistake. Its a bit like setting a rule where you can not work on your own car. Makes you dependent on the mechanic regardless of his skill, experience, honesty, or timeframe. Navy yards raising up Navy personnel lets them have better, more informed interactions with the process and outside contractors.
Hi Sal I love the channel. I live on the Hudson River in NY. It was very common to see a coast guard breaker on the river in the winter. In the last 10 years I have seen one. How much does this necessity because of global warming
After I released this story, the Congressional Budget Office released a report about the MASSIVE cost overrun expected to build three US Coast Guard heavy icebreakers. They are estimating a cost of $5.1 billion for all three; that is a 60% increase.
Congressional Report Details New Delays and Cost Overruns for Coast Guard Icebreaker
gcaptain.com/congressional-report-details-new-delays-and-cost-overruns-for-coast-guard-icebreaker/
Predictable! Ugh!
Would have cost less to refit the Polar Sea and Polar Star, our two heavy breakers. We've known this for a long time. They've looked into it a few times. The Healy and other medium breakers can't do the work needed to meet our obligations.
Despite being in caretaker status, sitting at the pier, and being parted out for the Star for over a decade, the Polar Sea's hull is still in excellent shape. But we need new and more expensive because that's better, right?
At this point, it's no longer a real shocker, Sal. It'd be if there were no massive cost and time overrruns.
But, gotta keep folks properly greased,...
Retrofit a navy fleet vessel with big engines, possibly a nuke powered one that is in decent repair, not slated for overhauling, to run as an icebreaker-just add reinforcement to its hull on the bow, and some starboard and port thrusters/(bubblers) to break up ice. Not being political here, however, it is unacceptable that we spend so much on Ukraine and other nations, when we can use the funds to build better ships, ice breakers, and other much needed equipment and infrastructure!
this is becoming one of the most important geopolitical yt channels
Geopolitics is exactly what popped into my mind when I saw this.
You're absolutely right. I check for new stories daily as part of my routine.
more like, sea politik/power and trade routes are becoming increasingly more relevant to the average geopolitical observer.
Joke's on all of you, we're not going to be boating our crap all over the globe that much longer on the ridiculous scale we do now. Globalism is rapidly dying and it no longer makes any sense to ship materials from 8 countries in 3 different continents to 11 other countries for processing, to the finished product shipping AGAIN to yet somewhere else..
Im still dissapointed how hard it is to get people to buy into this ctrm stock these shipping stocks be nuts man. I watched costamare double it was like half undervalued.
As a former CG officer back in the '60s, some of my classmates served on the old wind class vessels that as usual in those days we got second hand from the Navy. One of my COs was the captain of the last wind class in service. I might add that when you buy a 'used' car you have to make sure it isn't 'used up'. These vessels were hurry up builds for WW2 and well past their expiration date when we got them. During my active duty period the 'star' class vessels were built. The problem with having a forty year replacement cycle is that there is no institutional knowledge of how to do it, secondly, the personnel replacement cycle in the military will insure that there is no continuity in the organization established to build such vessels. That said, Finland is a great partner for this venture, they actually regularly build breakers and their shipyards are inside, a good plan for shipbuilding in a cold climate. Nuclear would be a good way to go for a breaker but the CG has no experience with that making staffing a continuous problem. Finland has access to the large diesels made in Europe that are way more fuel efficient than the gas turbine technology used to build recent US breakers. Unlike the Navy, the CG actually works on a budget.
As a side note, I was faculty at NY Maritime for a few years in the '70s. One of very few with actual ship experience.
The problem is Congress is not doing budgets. They've been living off continuing resolutions.
Wärtsilää Is a Finnish company eaven.😉
Would it be feasible to have the engine dept manned by the USN for nuclear breakers, avoiding CG having to have its own nuclear schools or anything?
@@Hobbyblasphemist they don't have a lot of spare nuclear people. It Is probably one of the hardest schools to fill. People think SEALS are hard to find.
As someone who grew up on the Great Lakes, Duluth, the idea of not investing in Ice breaker seem ludicrous.
From the Iron Range here. Grew up in Hibbing, MN😊
I can speak to things a bit from the Canadian perspective. I'm an engineer with the Canadian Coast Guard, and one of the designers on the new Polar Class 2 icebreakers.
First thing I'd like to say, the Russians aren't masters of icebreakers, the Finnish are. Aker Arctic designs most of the world's icebreakers, and Helsinki Shipyards builds most of them. Importantly, they built most of the Russian fleet, going all the way back. Of the current Russian fleet, the Karu, Tor, Dudinka (which is actually sailing in the Baltic right now), Taymyr and Vaygach (both nuclear), Admiral Makarov, Krasin, Kapitan M. Izmaylov, Kapitan Kosolapov, Kapitan A. Radzhabov, Kapitan Sorokin, Kapitan Nikolaev, Kapitan Dranitsyn, Kapitan Khlebnikov, Mudyug, Magadan, Dikson, Murmansk (one of their newest icebreakers), and 14 smaller river class icebreakers, were all built by Helsinki.
There's also hull number 519. Which was supposed to be the newest Russian icebreaker, but when the war in Ukraine broke out, the Finnish government revoked the export license, so that project is stalled.
The mention of the Fins is important because of the "Icebreaker Pact". US shipyards haven't been doing icebreakers for decades, they have no idea what they're doing. The USCG has not finished the design for their new Polar replacements, but they're going into build at the end of the year anyway because they want to stick to schedule. It's the exact same thing that happened with the Canadian Navy and the Joint Service Ship, which is years behind schedule, way over budget, and currently sitting at Vancouver shipyards half-built, rusting away, because the project is stalled out with design problems. The Canadian shipyards are in slightly better shape, but not great. I think we have a better design, but I'm also bias. We're also getting way more icebreakers. We currently have 6 heavy icebreakers, 16 medium icebreakers, 2 icebreaking patrol ships (plus 6 for the navy), and 2 super-heavy icebreakers (they will be the heaviest, highest ice rated, icebreakers in the world), on order. But there isn't enough Capacity to build all that in Canada. So for both the US and Canada, Finland is the answer. Davie Shipyards here in Canada thought the same and decided to buy Helsinki Shipyards. As with most military/government procurement, you've got to buy from local companies where possible, and Davie was basically forcing this Icebreaker Pact thing through so that they could further legitimize building Coast Guard icebreakers in Finland.
To summarize. The Canadian program will be slow, overbudget, and probably half the ships will be built in Finland, but it'll work. The USCG Polar class replacement will be a nightmare once it goes fully into build later this year. It will be years late, overbudget, and will probably have insane teething problems. The USCG will likely decide to make a second run of icebreakers in Finland when the project bogs down in the US.
Thank you, this was an epic post and to tell the truth it was wonderful in detail and objectivity.
For whatever reason I somehow missed that Davie bought the Helsinki yard.
As a former Canadian Coast Guard Chief Engineering officer, I have always advocated for having heavy ice breakers being built in Finland because they have the expertise. It would be cheaper (saving tax payer money), they would be delivered on time and there would be no alterations if there was a government change. Instead we still have the Louis S. St. Laurent which was built in 1969.
@@rickcudmore8156 The two PC 2 class icebreakers will be decent when they're finished, but they're gonna be exceedingly expensive. They also aren't scheduled to launch until 2030, so another half decade of the Louis and Larsen.
In the near term we'll be getting 2 of the Harry DeWolf class arctic patrol ships that the navy is currently receiving. Basically the navy bought 6 and someone thought it was a good idea to add 2 more to the order for us. They're trash, absolute dumpster fire of a vessel. The navy flubbed the design and we've done our best to preemptively fix as many design problems as we can before they build ours but they're still being built by Irving, and will still be garbage. One of the one's the navy already got just pulled into Pearl Harbor after a fitting failed in the salt water cooling system and they took on 20,000L of water.
We were giving very little leeway with fixing the design. No hull changes, no propulsion or power plant changes. Auxiliary systems had a little wiggle room, but they generally locked down the design. At least our cranes should work, the one's on the Navy ships don't.
Very educational, thank you. Enlighten my ignorance - what are teething problems?
I served on the Polar Sea (WAGB 11) 93-97 as a MK3. Went all over the world and went to the North Pole with the Canadians. Met the Russians and went onboard the Yamal, a Russian nuclear icebreaker. Great ship!
In Soviet Russia, ice break YOU!!!
Wow, that would have been amazing!
I was stationed down at McMurdo when the Polar Star made her maiden voyage to Antarctica. She sure was beautiful.
Good to see this getting some attention
The shipyards that could have built WORLD CLASS ice breakers are gone now as the commercial Shipbuilding went to South Korea back in the eighties.
The skill sets required are also gone as we retired.
The remaining qualified boatbuilders dont have the spare capacity.
@blaydCA I was raised in West Seattle, we had 2 shipyards and a creosote plant. We now have 1 and a container yard! I think Seattle Steel (formerly Bethlehem Steel) is still there. Herr lumber is gone, West Seattle dive shop is gone. Lloyd's Marina is gone. Unfortunately, I can't think of the names of both shipyards anymore. One was Todd's off harbor island, don't know on west side of the river was, anybody remember?
@@jeffrains9569
My employment at General Dynamics - Quincy Shipbuilding Division ended in 1985.
It was leveled for a MWRA treatment facility.
We built quality commercial and military ships, some which are still in service (Bobo class).
Generally on time and on budget with a skilled core workforce , with additional hires with less skills as needed.
Peak employment was well over 3000 at that facility.
This was well before computer design did every detail.
@@blaydCA Todd's and I think Lockeed (think that was other yard) built Liberty ship during WWII
@blaydCA, Very true. I worked at Avondale Shipyards, the yard the built the Healy,. I cut a lot of the steel that went into her construction. They shut that yard down in 2014.
@eherrmann01 A ship I was on in the late 70s had the same variable pitch prop system as the polar star and sea. It kept jamming, so we limped into Todd's. It started acting up in Seward Alaska, and that time, we limped there on our bow thruster! Got it kinda working to limp down to Seattle. Fun times had by all in the engine room let me clue you!
They should adopt your ABBA acronym and name the icebreaker the Polar Queen.
That is funny!
Fun fact: Abba is also the name of a Swedish seafood producer who's big in caviar from the North Sea.
As a Canadian, I cannot for the life of me understand why Ottawa is not heavily investing to create a serious, credible and capable fleet of icebreakers.
It's like we're leaving an open buffet without any sort of surveillance with some hungry Russians creeping in slowly.
Because no one wants to raise taxes. I think it will be needed.
Our military and civil defence is pretty pathetic.
Part of that is that it is that it has only been in recent years that the concept of the ocean north of Canada and Alaska being open to commercial exploitation. It's hard for voters to picture the threat as they still see that as a year round ice-choked ocean from their grade school geography books and only a few expeditions in special ships have sailed a Northwest Passage. Most don't see the satellite photos showing how that region is opening up for longer and longer periods each year. They just read a story about it with maybe a before/after photo of a particular glacier or see a news story on CBC with some video from a helicopter of just a small bay or piece of shoreline, but it all seems terribly remote. For the moment there is no Chinese fishing fleet strip mining Canadian waters unmolested that gets voters in Saskatoon or Quebec concerned enough to spend billions to patrol the region. The same is true of the US in regard to Alaska.
I wonder how many ice-breakers worth of money and weapons we sent to Ukraine over the last few years? I bet that would have paid for it all. We can’t do everything- and taxes are high enough already.
There is also a need for icebreaking capacity in the St. Lawrence Seaway during spring break up.That is a joint U.S. Canada venture,
Yeah, it's a great sight on a sunny March day to sit in a riverside restaurant when the breaker comes through!
Chilean viewer here: I'm shocked that the USCG can't get new icebreakers. We just built our first domestic Ice Class PC5, the Almirante Viel, and it was comissioned this year. I understand it's not like the design the USCG wants, but how can Chile build an icebreaker and not the US? I think it would be just easier for the US and Canada( since their De Wolff has cost overruns) to just buy Norway's Svalbard class icebreakers. Or buy one from us for the Antartic, I'm sure Asmar would jump at the opportunity and offer a great deal!!!!
As usual, great video Sal!
I went to mcmurdo station 3 times and all 3 times I got to go on board the ice breakers. The polar sea and the polar star. Those were beautiful ships back in the 80s. And early 90s.
Cool video, Sal! Thanks for the icebreaker breakdown.
Thanks for watching!
Thanks for reporting on this topic. Funding for the Coast Guard in general is way below what is needed. The price tag for domestic (Great Lakes, New England, and Mid-Atlantic) and Polar icebreaking assets replacement is at the $3 billion mark per, Coast Guard Polar Security Cutter report, by Congressional Research Service, dated July 15, 2024. The USCGC Healy was developed with a major upgrade in science spaces. The science support spaces needed, I think, conflicts with an armed icebreaking cutter. Further the USCG lacks the ability and funding to keep some form qualified surface warfare ratings and officers in the service. I entered the USCG in 1977. I have been retired for 4 years. In the late 80s the USCGC Glacier was home ported in Portland OR. I was in the Coast Reserve as a LT (O-3). One of ships crew a CPO gave me a tour of the ship in 1986. The ship was commission into the Navy in 1955 and transferred to the USCG in 1966. The Glacier was worn out. The diamonds on the diamond plate were gone in many areas due to wear. In the summer of 1986 she was dry docked in Portland OR and many areas of the hull had deteriorated. Like the current Polar class, refitting and repairing the ship wasn't feasible.
First? Glad to see the topic being covered by more channels. We are reaping the results of peace dividend-induced laziness.
Peace dividend is a contradiction in terms. Freedom comes from the barrel of a gun, everyone that has 3 working brain cells knows this.
Govt selling out industry...
Unfortunatly so many policy decisions are deliberatly molded to suit the climate narrative, irrespective of the realities: farmers needlessly bailing and packaging straw after the harvest, the energy and carbon released from the straw is entirley made of energy and carbon stored during the growing season, so burning it on the filed in situ is totally carbon neutral. Yet bailing and transport is a needless energy sink with no return. policy and relaity parted company a long time ago.
Our only Great Lakes breaker is the Mackinaw. Sh is always broken down and we need two, or three, more. That’s just the lakes.
Ice breakers, subs, destroyers, frigates, carriers, is there any US ship building program that isn't massively behind and horribly mismanaged?
Thanks to Democrats for defunding the military and giving our tax dollars to other countries.
Is there a goverment program that is?
@@Ve-om7lf I guess it depends which government. PRC seems to be doing well
@nigeriaroberts678 I would encourage you to look up Tofu Dreg construction, particularly in regards to their collapsing housing market.
Well, since nobody ever gets court-martialed or goes to prison, and their companies get “punished” for malfeasance by getting even bigger government contracts…no.
Fun fact, the Aiviq was actually offered to be sold to the US Coast Guard back in 2015, then to the Canadian Coast Guard in 2018
Should of bought it in 2015 and we'd be at least a little better off
So we need heavy icebreakers for Antarctic missions. The sea ice in McMurdo sound is annual. The surrounding areas that need missions, like treaty inspections and environmental cleanups can have massive pressure ridges that need the 13300 tons of turbine fueled power that a ship like the Sea and Star provides.
Thank you, Sal.
100% Love your channel.
Really hope you and your family have an awesome weekend.
Sending love from the UK 🇬🇧
I almost put in for the Polar Star when it was commissioned but I realized that I don't like ice and snow. 🥶 I do regret not doing it though because it would have been an experience like no other. Especially the maiden voyage.
From Sydney, Australia, you do a great job Sal, keep it up
Our Seagoing Icebreaker fleet has been fucked up since the 1970’s! WE NEED ALL NEW ICEBREAKERS DEAN, US Coast Guard Bosun 🇺🇸🛟
Last year, I was a part of Operation Deep Freeze. The Polar Srar escorted us into McMurdo. Days before getting to the ice sheet and while we were discharging. we kept hearing scuttlebutt about the Polar Star breaking down. But everything went smooth, and the Polar Star got the job done. Hope that wasn't her last mission.
Icebreakers have always fascinated me.
Icebreakers need to be tough! The quality of the steel is imperative. In developing the North Slope oil fields, the contractors were breaking the frames of their Caterpillar equipment if it got cold soaked. Then there was the problem of not being able to restart a cold engine. Lubrication is also a big problem in cold weather. Simply stated, our environmental laws were written without considering the arctic. The older solutions to these problems have been outlawed. Nobody is looking at things like using LNG to run generators on an icebreaker. Its never too cold to vaporize the LNG. It will vaporize continuously, so the generator would be in constant use. The choice is use it or waste it. In the event of needing a cold start, it should be able to pony up the rest of the ship. Even nuclear power plants need external electricity during start up. The real nightmare is losing all electrical power in the arctic winter. The next problem is getting LNG in the Arctic. We are used to ships making Arctic deployments, not being full time Arctic vessels. Maintaining a presence with transiting vessels is inefficient. Next is the problem of crew rotations. Do we need Blue and Gold crews like subs? Do we need Station Keeping? Congress changes every 2 years, but Icebreakers need many years to build. How do you catch a moving specification?
Worked in the Alaska Oil Fields 33 years and never heard of a Cat frame breaking. Have used Herman Nelson and Tioga heaters and never had a problem getting cold equipment running.
I worked on the North Wind and the South Wind in Seattle in the 60s, and thought then that the Polar Star wasn’t well made. I do appreciate your channel and your presence there. Thanks
Great analysis Sal. Sad situation.
My nephew was the captain of the Nathaniel B. Palmer for years. He was skipper when the Palmer broke ice to deliver food to the Russian Antarctic station when the Russian nuclear ice breaker broke down.
The Healy was in rough shape when it was built over 20 years ago. My ship was being built in the same shipyard.
I was on the USCGC Northwind in 1964, and we got to within 400 miles of the North Pole. We also were at the same point East as in the one clip of where the eastern most point of the Healy was. We spent the summer helping to resupply the Dew Line Stations. In 65 we were in the Kara Sea looking for/found the oil that the Russkies are drilling now.
Thank you, Sal. This is a very important topic.
Regrettably, this is more reflective of USCG underfunding. The FY24 CG budget is 13.45B; VS FY24 USN budget at 255.8 B! CG Budget is 5.5% of the USN! Consider USCG missions 11 core missions; USN has 4 missions. On a day in, day out basis... THE CG does more for the average taxpayer vs the Navy. Is it not time to appropriately budget the USCG? The state of the Polar Sea & Polar Star are symptoms of the greater problem; underfunding the United State's oldest seagoing service.
JB Hall, USCG LT/KP '95
Sadly, Congress keeps doing Continuing Resolutions. Not real budget making. They need more advocates on Capitol Hill.
Canada is finishing our 6th Arctic Offshore Patrol vessels for the RCN. These are PC 5 hull and PC 4 bow. So they are decent icebreakers, armed with a 25mm gun and two MG's. We could easily build 2 more for the USCG (We are building two modified ones for the CCG) After that Canada is building around 21 new ice breakers, 16xMediums, 3 heavy mediums and 2 heavy icebreakers if I recall correctly. The Mediums will displace over 8,000tons and be PC 4.
When the Polar class breakers first came into service they couldn't work in ice. We used to call them the Seattle national bank because since they couldn't get underway the funding for them was divided among the other units in the area. Ice breakers should be built and run by NOAA.
NOAA isn't for law enforcement or military ops
Icebreakers!! Thanks Sal! This is a fun one!
Was aboard USCGC Staten Island WAGB 278 1969 /1970. Just missed Northwest passage with the SS Manhattan. It was out for 3-4 months then 3-4 months in the yards and so on. Did resupply for NARL Pt. Barrow and oceanography surveys including Prudoe Sound / North Slope. 10:12
Sweden and Finland have a joint venture for new green icebreaker, you can check Swedish icebreaker Ymer Oden orv Atle.
If you go back to 1940 the US population was only about 135 million. We had no computers, jet planes or cell phones. Yet we could, and did, build ships. People back then could get things done. They built highways, bridges, skyscrapers and a decade and a half after they fought WW2 they were putting satellites in space, developing concepts for transplant surgery and modern computers. Now we can't build frigates, destroyers or ice breakers.
Weve always been second best when it comes to breakers time to correct that
Polar Star is currently docked across the street in San Francisco. Wonder how long it will be able to make the Arctic/Antarctic transit twice a year.
I served on the Polar Star in 1984. It was in Seattle then.
Still is homeported in Seattle. Dry docks in CA. This is a scheduled dry dock, she is not being taken out of service. She cannot keep doing the annual trip by herself and keeping up with maintenance and training. It’s so sad that we are so far away from having any relief.
Sal, I ran an ice-breaking study for the US Coast Guard many years ago. Not because I have lots of icebreaking experience, I have none, but I had lots of government contracting experience. Here's what I can convey: first, we referred to this as "polar icebreaking." The other "icebreakings" operations are "domestic ice" or "Dom-Ice" (icebreaking in the Great Lakes) and International Ice (looking for icebergs). Half the folks in the USCG wanted polar icebreakers, and the other half didn't. Why? Because all polar icebreaking missions are under the control & funding of the National Science Foundation (NSF). That is, the icebreaker doesn't get underway unless the NSF wants to go! So half the icebreaking folks in the USCG don't like the mission of providing taxi service to the NSF. An accounting trickery done under the Clinton administration.
Thanks for this update. ❤
We needed new ice breakers 20 years ago...And I think the Navy needs at least 3 of their own plus another 3-5 for the Coasties minimum. I think the partnership with Canada and Finland is our best bet. The Fins know what they are doing and are capable of getting them delivered on time.
Yeah, it would be great if we could build the shipyard capacity here in the US, but the problem is that no shipyard will tool up and deliver an affordable solution for a ship that at most they might build 6 of over the course of a decade, and then there are no new orders coming for 20 years. The reality is unless that a niche vessel like this is a boom or bust option that domestic shipbuilders just aren't interested in unless a premium is paid to build them that covers their tool up and tool down costs. Sadly your best bet is to go to a commercial shipyard that already has standard icebreaker designs on their draft tables and the necessary tooling to make them. There just isn't that much demand for icebreakers for more than a handful of shipbuilders worldwide to mess with them. If the Finns can't do it, perhaps there is a shipyard in South Korea or Japan that is interested, but it certainly seems that no US shipyard has any interest in doing this without raping taxpayers. Of course, one problem is that the Coast Guard or Navy are going to have to accept these will be off-the-shelf vessels to a large extent if they want them to be the least bit affordable and they need to stop this habit of changing specs all through the design process and construction process. A couple adequate icebreakers is better than no icebreakers and certainly better than one perfect breaker that costs as much as three adequate ones but you still need three total to do the job properly no matter how perfect the one was.
G'day Sal, and as always, a great topic and well delivered...whilst the need for ice breakers isn't a necessity down here in Aus, I've always been intrigued by the process, and have known the RUssian fleet has been leaps and bounds ahead for many years, their fleet of nuclear powered ships is nothing short of impressive. Hopefully the US and Canada can catch up in coming years.
Great episode as always, and cheers from Aus!!!! 🍻🍻🍻🍻
Ice breakers or not, the Jones Act needs to go. The fact that the only way to get an ice breaker built is to go to foreign ship builders should tell us how much of a failure the Jones Act is.
Saw polar star cruise San Pablo bay 8/15/24, now docked 8/21/24 pier 30 San Francisco
Thanks for the update Sal.
Thanks for showing this SAL. As a Canadian we have a HUGE hole in our coverage of the North West passage and ocean rights. We need to start spending our money here at home instead of spending BILLION on the Ukraine adventure and NATO (IMO). Oh Canada where art thou....🍻 on me!
NATO and every European military needs to be combined into a single military command with a single authority. It would prevent Russia from dining on any country that was part of this world power military. Properly organized Europe can defend itself.
Canada just built 6 armed medium icebreakers for the Navy, 2 more unarmed are under construction for the CCG. Construction of the 2 massive Polar Class 8s are moving ahead finally. The CCG just got three shiny "new to them" medium icebreakers from Davie shipyard. The Louis has just been refitted again to last until the 8s are on station. In my hometown right now there is another older class medium icebreaker in the Port Weller Drydocks being completely overhauled. 6 of those are still in service on the East Coast. Money is being spent under the NSBP. We can damn well also afford to fund Ukraine's war too, 15% of your fellow countrymen have in-laws over there. F Russia
@@scottmccambley764 I disagree about funding Ukraine. I'm First Nation (Mi'kmaq/Metis) and we still have people living in 3rd world conditions with NO water/hydro/internet and education (kids have to move outa reserves to finish HS). We also have have a HUGE housing issue letting in 5 million over the last 10 yrs. As for 15% of of my fellow countrymen, that is because we took in 50k nice little mustache men after ww2 (just go to a cemetery and see how many Wulf Angles/Iron Crosses in Alberta/Saskatchewan). Like that nice old man getting a standing ovation in our Parliament. I don't like Stephan Bandera gang, do you? How about Tiki marches in Ukraine before March 2022? CBC used to cover that....now silence. F Ukraine the most corrupted country in Europe (Corruption Perceptions Index rating of 36/100) and as for Russia, why bring them into this? Phobia?
I DO agree with the Ice Breaker stuff and thanks for the info about it.
@@scottmccambley764 According to 2021 census, Ukrainian Canadians number 1,258,635 or 3.5 per cent of the country's population....so your 15% is a lie....or hyperbole comment? I know what percentage of Canadians are FN/Metis. In Canada, 1,807,250 people identified themselves as Indigenous in the 2021 Census, accounting for 5.0% of the country's total population. Google search....took less than a minute.
@@danharold3087 I agree 100% the EU can defend itself. Their combined military budget was €240 billion (USD 269 billion) and they DWARF the Russians in GDP (smaller than Texas/California). Russia only spent around $84 billion for defense in 2023. Same with population....448 million vs 144 million.
Ice breaker Colaberation effort? Sounds great, we can all go ahead and buy Svalbard class ships from the Norwegians. Even if it's just lisenseing the design for doemstic production...it's right there!
It would probably be more efficient to buy them from others than trying to build them ourselves. 😂
@kentslocum can you imagine the absolute temper tantrum people would throw in front of Congress, though? At least if they lisense the design when the start build there will actually be a finalized design *stares menacingly at the constitution class*
Norway builds great vessels.
@@Ve-om7lf The US military is infamous for continuously meddling with designs and balooning the construction time and costs.
@@Ve-om7lf How much more would it cost to build them in the US. After building a few of them the shipyard would go unused?
The hovercraft ice breaker solution my come into play. That can be mounted on the bow of a normal ship or just run up and down the channel. Air getting under the ice breaks it from below because the ice, unsupported by water has a low tensile strength. There is also an old solution of a air blower tentacle. This extends from the bow down and forward to blow air under the ice and this break in. These may be faster deploying tools.
As a kid, I dreamed of playing on an ice breaker. I loved the idea of a ship that can’t be stopped ..
I didn’t know America was so bad off….Tom
Posting this after reaching 0:28 DO we even need ice breakers? For the lower 48 coastal waters I would guess very few times are they essential. On the Great lakes very possible to require some use. In the waters of Alaska we have used them many times as we need access to communities above the Arctic Circle year round! One event a couple of years ago was Kotzbue runnining out of fuel and an IceBreaker leading a tanker through the Bering Sea to Kotzbue!
Great information! As history has taught the U.S., something "BAD" has to happen before the need to address this serious issue.
As a swede I approve of your ABBA acronym! 🙂
Partnering with Canada & Finland sounds like a good idea. It would be cheaper with the collaboration.
Thanks again Sal
I got an idea. Here in Puerto Rico, we have an old former Navy base (Roosevelt Roads) which I've always thought could be a good shipbuilding yard. Ya make those icebreakers here, which will mean they are hotter than if they were made in, say, Quincy, Massachusetts. Then, when they go to do the icebreaking, they'll work better, because they're hotter.
😐
Well, more jobs on the Island would be nice....But, they need a reliable power company first.
@@WALTERBROADDUS
Abundant qualified workforce?
Expensive to get material there to do the build since we'd need to use Jones Act ships to get it there. Same reason repair is done in Hawaii not construction. The USN would want to be invited back. Remember, they got kicked out.
@@DM-mv4eq Yeah, I remember that.
Did the economy suffer after the USN left?
Thanks Sal
Help, we have a breaker gap! Damn Chinese breakers, Russian breakers breaking stuff. We need the capacity to break potential foreign breakers breaking our sovereign ice. Where are you Lindsey Graham when we need you?
@@frankdesantis8078
Lindsey is busy installing teats on a bull.
@@blaydCA Trump thinks Putin has one, and he's been milking it for years. Man, will he be surprised when someone tell him different.
@@everettputerbaugh3996
One teaspoon instead of a gallon! LoL
Ole Linsey is busy infringing the rights of thems damn hoemeoseggsuls, cuz thems iz coming for our guns, or something....
I read about the U S Navy needs 34 billion to bring needed repairs not upgrades just repairs !! They just got gave Ukraine 61 BILLION without any OVERSIGHT!! WTF ??? CARRIER REPAIRS AND SUBMARINE REPAIRS CANNOT BE DONE IN THE NORTHWEST BECAUSE THEY SHUTDOWN ALL THOSE REPAIR FACILITIES !! HOW CAN A NAVY BE EFFECTIVE WITHOUT A PLACE TO FIX BROKEN AND MECHANICAL PROBLEMS ?? WHERE IS THE MONEY GOING ???
Ironic that the us government can skip around the jones act. I’m not against the jones act I just find the double standard interesting. Although South Korea could probably pump out an ice breaker on time and near on budget.
Quibble: a minute of latitude is historically 1 nautical mile; 1852 metres (precisely) is the current legal definition (very close to 1 minute of latitude).
Was at Avondale when the built Healy. That was a CF from the go. Only 30 years old, and so much of her basic HM&E is years oudated....
We have been behind in icebreakers for many years. Polar Star and Polar Sea were the workhorses of our fleet, but Polar Sea has been out of service since 2010. It has not been repaired or replaced. Healy is more of a research ship. How is it that the United States cannot maintain a small fleet of icebreakers?
If one looks at the chart looking down from the north one will observe a large channel of water that, with the effects of Climate Change, opens each year. The route takes 5 days off the common route from China to Europe. With the issues that have slowed the Panama Canal and the war and unsettled political issues near the Suez canal the northern route is looking pretty good. Find that top down map of the earth a see for yourself. It is fascinating.
As someone who worked on both sides of the Polar Security Cutter project, that project is a disaster and my personal opinion is that the contract should have been given to someone else who could actually make progress on it a long time ago.
correction: the russian icebreaker fleet is not "one of the largest in the world" it is THE largest in the world, by far.
So essentially, we now have only one working icebreaker, and it is obsolete and mechanically frail. That said, we should be
buying icebreakers from Finland from now on. They have the expertise, and we
need to keep a robust presence in those regions.
Is there a Sal channel for railroads?
I always thought that having an excavator type arm on the bow that has a way to have a hot high pressure nozzle like a water jet cutting machine that could be used to slice thru ice to weaken it for breaking.
I wonder if the Russian ice breakers are used to break up the ice cap to prevent wind blpwn ice flows from shearing off drill rigs.
The Polar Star and Polar Sea are old. They were being built back in the early 70s when I was in the Coast Guard. I remember the old ones Northwind and Statin Island.
I remember seeing the Polar Star when I was living up in Alaska more than 20 years ago. Unfortunate to hear it is on its way out, but understandable for a ship that has to crash its way through ice so much. Really unfortunate to hear how deficient the U.S. has become on having dependable, usable, ice breakers. The crew members I met from Polar Star were very proud of what they did. Here's hoping the U.S. can get its head out of its derriere and bring some dignity back to the ice breaking ships.
Glad you mentioned that the USN has no interest in navigating on the surface in the Arctic Sea. The Submarine Force is the only presence needed for the maintenance of Sovereignty and security.
A surface warship hemmed-in by ice would be a sitting duck, and even an icebreaker couldn't change that tactical dilemma.....................
The sad state of US icebreakers is disturbing. The last icebreakers used in Boston, nearby MA ports & in Maine were tugboats. The Coastguard needs much greater funding. We should certainly consider contracting with Finland to build more.
Thanks
I saw Polar Star in the Chuckchi Sea working on R/V Shell America
😂 indeed that northern route for cargo movement is attractive 🤠 The USA needs ice breakers. Not just for that, but for the Great lakes which freeze annually...😅 We are totally unprepared for being any sort of global power, ....anymore
They stop shipping stuff on the lakes in November
Before watching. My Pop and older brother were on USCG icebreakers. 70s, 80s and 90s. Both were on 1940s ships. Can the US Army, Navy and Air Force do with 40s gear? .
How old are the F16 ??? It's upgrade and REPAIR ! Newest jets can't stay in the air F35 ?? What TRUMP SAID HE BUILT ALL NEW ARMED FORCES BUT THAT WAS A LIE !!
So… just about the time the Arctic becomes ice free year round, we’ll get some deliveries of the world’s best icebreakers.
I wonder how the US and Canada will... erm... solve this strange policy effect.
I joined the Coast Guard in 1980. Polar Star and Polar Sea were already almost 20 years old! Breakers are not sexy. Perhaps if they had vertical launch systems the USCG could get a few through congress.
Got a tour of Polar Star 2016 at McMurdo. Glad i did before the townies got banned for cleaning them out of energy drinks at the PX. (Station had run out of red bull two weeks prior and people were going bonkers)
Partnering with Canada and Finland is like Partnering with Metro Boston? Not a lot!
As far as the Norther route goes, its no free lunch. The Bearing Sea is serious choke point. Going around Africa is far less so (or South America). Those are year round and you do not need ice breakers even in the summer aka like you do in the Arctic let alone the Winter Months. Equally Arctic access is choked from all but Barents Sea and Northern Russia.
6:03 even if the jones act forbid this, any legislation authorizing the spending to procure this easily could have clauses that waive the act. And even if that was overlooked,it’s most likely that such legislation would be interpreted as implicitly waiving any such restrictions.
Hey Sal, at 9:34 you mention the Navy and their polar presence being with submarines, makes me think of something I shared in the Arctic video on my channel that I've mentioned before (What Is Really Going On With Arctic Sea Ice?). In the April 15, 2017 edition of The Economist magazine, on page 67, they did an article titled Icebreakers - Making Waves - The quickest way to break the ice is by submarine - and they talk about using submarines to create flexural gravity-wave resonance to shatter the ice sheet above. The article says that America's heavy icebreaker, Polar Star, can break a channel through two-metre ice at a rate of three knots and that a submarine could force such a passage ten times as fast. It's an interesting article, pretty sure it's still available online, I provide a link to it in the source materials for my video. I'd include it here but youtube doesn't usually allow links in comments.
Sal I dont believe Polar Star is in drydock. I saw her docked alongside next to the SF Bay Bridge on Sunday.
You are correct. She is showing at anchor in SF Bay. One of the stories had her in drydock. Sorry for the error!
The Arctic can be such a tough environment that icebreakers often can't function well without adequate basing & support, & both the U.S. & Canada lack much Arctic infrastructure of any kind, much less a proper Arctic port for repairs & resupply.
The mooted joint "ABBA" icrebreaker proposal has merit (it's always going to be more economical to field one properly-supported general-purpose type than two specialised, small production run, undersupported types), however, this should be considered in the context of the willingness to build & maintain the infrastructure necessary to support icebreaker operations in the desired areas, including roads to remote hamlets & accessible supply depots.
Hey Sal,
Start cooperating with the Finns.
They are known to built the worlds finest icebreaking vessels.
They have long standing experience building nuclear icebreakers, for themselves to keep the Baltic open in winter, but slso for others, including the Russians in the past.
My Finnish friends and the technical news have been telling me for decades:
Nobody does icebreakers as well as the Finnish ship yards.
A small nation with some outstanding expertise areas, and now a NATO partner.
I guess if its benig built at Bollinger, they will have no issues finding a bottle to christen it with.
We're assuming that Ukraine doesn't somehow destroy all those Russian icebreakers... because Russia seems to have half their navy destroyed by a country without a navy.
According to certain alarmists there is a distinct lack of sea ice in the north, so... no ice breakers necessary ...
Sal, I know we all know your name, but make a small few seconds pause in the beginning of the video. Thing is, RUclips start to play video even before you click on it. Therefore few first words are always stays silent. Idk about desktops, but it is the case in mobile app. So if you would simply give few seconds in the beginning to play out before people click on the video, no one going to miss anything.
Just random advice
I really hope they buy to keep it and can actually use and arm it like it should be. Medium ice breakers dont go to Antarctica only the Polar Star.
Hi Sal, Great episode. Would you tell me where you get all your cool shirts?
Specialty ship construction is only viable if there is a baseline of ship construction methods and experience. Have to build the baseline up.
Also, going fully private was a mistake. Its a bit like setting a rule where you can not work on your own car. Makes you dependent on the mechanic regardless of his skill, experience, honesty, or timeframe. Navy yards raising up Navy personnel lets them have better, more informed interactions with the process and outside contractors.
Hi Sal I love the channel. I live on the Hudson River in NY. It was very common to see a coast guard breaker on the river in the winter. In the last 10 years I have seen one. How much does this necessity because of global warming
I was on Healy in 2008 while working on a Communication upgrade project for the USCG. She was in dry dock, maybe Seward?
Portland. Seward is WAY too small for HEALY.
@@ryoungatlmidotnet I was in 4 ports in 2 days, Seward, Homer, Whittier, & Stitka