Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Arctic rush

    Share
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 4166
    Points : 4204
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Tue Oct 30, 2018 1:59 am

    Hole wrote:Gazprom and RVD will extend the railway to Sabetta. Cost: 1,7 Bill.

    but why? it's fuckin cold there lol1 lol1 lol1

    BTW Capsian Sea - Yamal raliroad line was originally Stalin idea. Buried by ukrop Khrushchev clown clown clown
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 1469
    Points : 1469
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Tue Oct 30, 2018 3:15 am

    Transportation via Belomorcanal & on the Volga is cheaper than building a railroad. A new canal would be even better: http://enews.fergananews.com/articles/2480
    https://www.azer.com/aiweb/categories/caucasus_crisis/index/cc_articles/goble/goble_2008/goble_1108/goble_1127_canal.html
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 1469
    Points : 1469
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Mon Dec 03, 2018 12:08 am

    Russia will ban foreign warships from sailing on the Northern Sea Route

    We still don't have enough nuclear icebreakers
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7477
    Points : 7571
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Dec 14, 2018 12:21 pm


    Occasional paywall so here is full article:



    Russia gives nuclear group control of Arctic sea route


    https://www.ft.com/content/b5dc9c38-fd56-11e8-aebf-99e208d3e521

    Rosatom plans to deploy icebreaker fleet to allow year-round access for shipping

    Russia plans to hand control of shipping through the Arctic Northern Sea Route to Rosatom as the state-run nuclear group seeks to become the sole operator of one of the world’s emerging trade arteries.

    Russia’s parliament voted on Tuesday to give the company, which has a nuclear-powered icebreaker fleet, control over infrastructure, access, security and shipping in the northern waterway as it seeks to introduce year-round shipments within the next decade. The route would roughly halve sailing times from Europe to China.

    The transport ministry will retain an administrative role and will issue shipping permits in conjunction with Rosatom.

    The Northern Sea Route stretches from the Bering Strait between Russia and the US along the far north of Russia to its exit close to Norway. Unusually high temperatures inside the Arctic Circle have caused the ice sheet to shrink by 13 per cent over the past decade, according to Nasa data, increasing access for shipping.

    The waterway is a potential geopolitical flashpoint. Global shipping companies, including Maersk, have conducted trials of its viability while Russia has upgraded mothballed military bases in the Arctic region and established new sites. Arctic countries are also competing over the region’s potentially vast hydrocarbon resources.

    We want to be like [a] taxi for icebreakers in the Arctic. There should be icebreakers available along the route for anyone to call up and get one to accompany a ship

    Maxim Kulinko, deputy head of Northern Sea Route directorate at Rosatom,
    Shifting control from Russia’s transport ministry to Rosatom, which builds and operates the country’s nuclear power plants, is seen as a way to modernise the sea route. It was widely used in Soviet times but then neglected until a few years ago when energy projects in the Arctic began to produce oil and gas.

    Using Russia’s Arctic waters to travel between Europe and Asia instead of the far longer route through southern seas and the Suez Canal could save freight companies about $1m per trip and weeks of travel time, according to shipping industry experts.

    Under the plan, Rosatom will run a fleet of icebreakers to pilot freighters along the route, which is frozen for six to seven months of the year.

    “We want to be like Yandex taxi for icebreakers in the Arctic,” Maxim Kulinko, deputy head of Northern Sea Route directorate at Rosatom, told the FT, referring to Russia’s most popular ride-hailing app.

    “There should be icebreakers available along the route for anyone to call up and get it to accompany a ship,” he said. “When the line works regularly, that’s when you have year-round shipment.”

    The Russian state would provide 50 per cent of the financing for the initiative, with the remainder coming from Rosatom and fundraising, Mr Kulinko added.

    Rosatom is building eight new icebreakers and expects them all to be operational by the early 2030s.

    “Based on our estimates, year-round shipments require at least five LK60 icebreakers, three Leader icebreakers, and four LNG-run icebreakers. This is possible around the year 2030-31,” Mr Kulinko said at a recent conference on the Arctic region in St Petersburg.


    “What is important is the vector, the ambition, and not so much whether we hit the mark in 2024 or 2030,” said Sergei Buyanov, head of the Central Research and Development institute of the Russian navy.

    Russian companies such as nickel producer Norilsk Nickel, gas company Novatek and oil group Gazprom Neft already use the route. They accounted for the bulk of the 10.7m tonnes of cargo transiting through it last year — a total that was up more than 40 per cent on 2016.

    Total cargo using the waterway is expected to reach 18m tonnes this year and 29m tonnes in 2019, according to Rosatom estimates, after Novatek ramped up LNG production at its flagship Arctic gas liquefaction plant, Yamal LNG, and crude production was increased at Gazprom Neft’s Novy Port field.

    Officials from neighbouring countries told the FT they would wait and analyse Russia’s experience with the route before introducing their own operations.

    “We have very large shipping industries that will follow this very closely,” said Bard Ivar Svendsen, ambassador for Arctic and Antarctic Affairs at Norway’s foreign ministry. “There aren’t a lot of ships that have done this route, and I think we need more experience with it before we can say how effective and how successful it will actually be. This is potentially very, very interesting.”

    Bjorn Lyrvall, ambassador for Arctic Affairs at Sweden’s foreign ministry, said the route could have potential for shipments of Swedish iron ore to south-east Asia.

    “But obviously there is more work that needs to be done before we are there. You have to have predictability and availability of the route. [There are] insurance costs,” he said.

    Achieving year-round shipments would make the Northern Sea Route competitive with rivals such as Suez, said Sergei Vakhrukov, deputy secretary of Russia’s Security Council.

    “NSR is no Suez. The latter . . . lies in different latitudes,” said Mr Vakhrukov. “Without the proper nuclear icebreakers, navigation is possible only in the summer or fall period, which is only five to six months and does not make the route economic. We need year-round navigation, only then can it compete.”
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 1469
    Points : 1469
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Dec 14, 2018 8:23 pm

    "If u build it/them, they'll come!"
    Those 12 new icebreakers could also be armed & put under the VMF/CG command if need be, acting as giant OPVs.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7477
    Points : 7571
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Dec 14, 2018 8:41 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:"If u build it/them, they'll come!"
    Those 12 new icebreakers could also be armed & put under the VMF/CG command if need be, acting as giant OPVs.

    Arming icebreakers is waste of time and money

    If something hostile drags itself up there it will either be small enough to handled by some guys with AKs and speedboat or big enough to require full size warship

    Icebreakers are supposed to break ice, if they need something to fight war then they should build a warship
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 1469
    Points : 1469
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Dec 14, 2018 9:09 pm

    They could be given defensive armaments & act as mother ships for smaller boats, UAVs & helos to deploy CG &/ marines personnel.
    I wonder, how the USN & FN CVNs can sail in the tropics while the Russian reactors can't handle the warm water for cooling?
    If they make them dual use, then those icebreakers can go to Antarctica & deploy to warm seas & launch SA/CMs- no need to build Leaders!
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7477
    Points : 7571
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Dec 14, 2018 9:18 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:They could be given defensive armaments &  act as mother ships for smaller boats, UAVs & helos to deploy CG &/ marines personnel.
    I wonder, how the USN & FN CVNs can sail in the tropics while the Russian reactors can't handle the warm water for cooling?
    If they make them dual use, then those icebreakers can go to Antarctica & deploy to warm seas & launch SA/CMs- no need to build Leaders!

    Reactors on old Arctica-class icebreakers were designed intentionally to rely on cold environment for cooling, they are not supposed to sail anywhere else anyway.

    Russia has reactors that can do tropics

    And new icebreakers will be able to sail anywhere as well (new reactor model)
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 1469
    Points : 1469
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Dec 14, 2018 9:48 pm

    Reactors on old Arctica-class icebreakers were designed intentionally to rely on cold environment for cooling, they are not supposed to sail anywhere else anyway.
    I knew that.
    Russia has reactors that can do tropics. And new icebreakers will be able to sail anywhere as well (new reactor model)
    That's good. But their hauls will roll a lot more in the heavy seas & will need a Roll Stabilisation System. https://www.marineinsight.com/naval-architecture/roll-stabilization-systems/

    Russia closes the Northern Sea Route
    Canada has a similar policy in the NWP.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7477
    Points : 7571
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Dec 15, 2018 5:04 pm


    Long write-up, lot's of numbers. Looks like most of the cash will be invested by companies instead of government, good approach.

    Russia presents a grandiose 5-year plan for the Arctic

    https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/arctic-industry-and-energy/2018/12/russia-presents-grandiose-5-year-plan-arctic
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7477
    Points : 7571
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Dec 21, 2018 1:32 am


    Construction of platform "North Pole" started

    https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/115409/

    Scientific platform, moves into position and stays there while water freezes around it. Operates independently for 2 years.




    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 1469
    Points : 1469
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Wed Dec 26, 2018 8:03 pm

    China’s advances in Arctic may pose security threat to Canada
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2620
    Points : 2614
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  Isos on Wed Dec 26, 2018 9:24 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Construction of platform "North Pole" started

    https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/115409/

    Scientific platform, moves into position and stays there while water freezes around it. Operates independently for 2 years.





    Add luxury stuff and that could a nice hotel.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 4166
    Points : 4204
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Wed Dec 26, 2018 10:32 pm

    Isos wrote:
    Add luxury stuff and that could a nice hotel.

    yup, and in lowest levels special rooms for grim-piss activists lol1 lol1 lol1



    Tsavo Lion wrote:China’s advances in Arctic may pose security threat to Canada

    funny, Canada is the gangsta state which hijacks CFO of Huawei under bogus pretext and is saying about China's bullying? bwahahahha
    Opim Wars over, time to wake up in new better world thumbsup thumbsup thumbsup
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 1469
    Points : 1469
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Thu Dec 27, 2018 12:47 am

    She's Uncle Sam's lieutenant that also tries to do the same with its NWP as Russia with NEP/NSR, i.e. claims her EEZ & sovereignty there.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 19239
    Points : 19791
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  GarryB on Fri Dec 28, 2018 1:13 am

    Icebreakers are supposed to break ice, if they need something to fight war then they should build a warship

    Amusing you take this stand with icebreakers but not aircraft carriers...
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 1469
    Points : 1469
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Dec 28, 2018 1:42 am

    Icebreakers are supposed to break ice, if they need something to fight war then they should build a warship
    At least they could be used as auxiliaries, given general shortage of surface ships in the VMF. For example, 1 could tow a barge with helos, UAVs, STOVLs, fuel & supplies for other ships & subs. If more electronics r installed, they could easily spend 6-9 months in remote areas gathering intel & monitoring whatever/whoever.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7477
    Points : 7571
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Dec 28, 2018 1:42 am

    GarryB wrote:
    Icebreakers are supposed to break ice, if they need something to fight war then they should build a warship

    Amusing you take this stand with icebreakers but not aircraft carriers...

    What stand?

    They need icebreakers to break ice.

    They need warships to fight wars.

    They need aircraft carriers for precisely nothing.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 1469
    Points : 1469
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Dec 28, 2018 2:03 am

    They need aircraft carriers for precisely nothing.
    Right, not US/French style CVNs, but they do need ships that act as LHD/UDK + carry aircraft. So, they would continue to be called "aircaft carrying ships" like in the Soviet times, when they had Moskva & Kiev TAKRs.
    Each country has its specifics & thus different requirements for its large capital ships. If Russia didn't have such a long Arctic coastline, she wouldn't need for so many icebreakers that btw were so far useless in other applications.
    OTH, TAKR/UDKs can be used for more than striking militants toting AKMs & RPGs.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 19239
    Points : 19791
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  GarryB on Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:09 am

    They need aircraft carriers for precisely nothing.

    Of course.

    They can just rely on their western allies for support... the world policeman America will always have their back... their navy is special and does not need air support.

    Their Army has developed assuming it does not and will not have control of the air, their navy has developed along the same way... yet they still have an air component in their Army and their Navy and they also have an Air Force... but missiles and UAVs will do everything in the future and they wont need aircraft...

    The British made that mistake... thinking they could have a swing wing interceptor and a swing wing strike aircraft and a VSTOL fighter, but of course they would only have the VSTOL fighter operating after the first week because all the runways would be destroyed, while Harriers will operate from Mall carparks.

    Bloodhound missiles will clear the skies of enemy air power...

    The result is that their current fighter, the Typhoon, is not even ready yet as a fully multirole aircraft... EFA started development in the 1990s... so your super new STOVL fighters might get onboard ships by about 2040... by then they will be too late.

    In fact icebreakers are the best example of why ships need aircraft... they can scout ahead and look for easier passages in the iceflow...

    Actually I would say an ideal weapon for an icebreaker would be a 240mm mortar for cracking thick ice...
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7477
    Points : 7571
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:44 am


    Everything becomes fanboy fantasy farce here, does it?

    What's next? Hungary building much needed nuclear icebreakers for their oceans because they won't be able to rely on their "Eastern allies"?

    This is supposed to be icebreaker tread so it would be nice to keep it on topic. If anyone wants to blow hot air over nothing he can always go on carrier tread, ehhnia is already holding fort there.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 4166
    Points : 4204
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:08 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    They need aircraft carriers for precisely nothing.

    nope,  dick  flag waving and as extra fleet grouping AA and ASh defenses  thumbsup  thumbsup  thumbsup




    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    Right, not US/French style CVNs, but they do need ships that act as LHD/UDK + carry aircraft. So, they would continue to be called "aircaft carrying ships" like in the Soviet times, when they had Moskva & Kiev TAKRs. Each country has its specifics & thus different requirements for its large capital ships. .


    That's the idea IMHO, the only thing that puzzles me is how Russians want to unify LHD and fast TAKR in unified hull?!

    BTW did you Moskva class? it was a pure ASW helo carrier PKR condor class ( protivpodvodny kreyser officially). up to 18 Ka27s.
    But as scale model was cool, I was building one when I was a skid lol1 lol1 lol1
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 4166
    Points : 4204
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:24 am

    GarryB wrote:In fact icebreakers are the best example of why ships need aircraft... they can scout ahead and look for easier passages in the iceflow...

    true, those aircraft are called Ka-27/ Minoga in Russian icebreakers' case thumbsup thumbsup thumbsup



    GB wrote: Actually I would say an ideal weapon for an icebreaker would be a 240mm mortar for cracking thick ice...

    ADFAIK Russians already decided to use lasers instead (with nuclear propulsion should be fairly easy)
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 1469
    Points : 1469
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:54 am

    Actually I would say an ideal weapon for an icebreaker would be a 240mm mortar for cracking thick ice..
    Too dangerous to carry ammo. & there's not enough room for lots of it needed on an icebreaker.
    When I was a kid, I saw pictures of future large bulk carriers & tankers with triangular elongated bulb to break the thickest of ice from underneath instead.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 1469
    Points : 1469
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sat Dec 29, 2018 8:15 am

    American and British submarines inhabit the Arctic
    The fact that the Russian Arctic is reliably protected is too early to say

    Sponsored content

    Re: Arctic rush

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:31 am