Modern Icebreaker design: Ramming etc.

[numerouno]

only the ice blocks on the top part of a ridge in the Baltic are frozen together to a maximum of 50cm.

The total thickness of packed ice in the Baltic can exceed 20 meters, and the Otso (without featuring bow propellers) can penetrate that, according to published sources (Turunen & Partanen: "Raakaa voimaa ...", 2011). There is no misunderstanding on anyone's part that such thickness can only come from packing.


Modern icebreakers are using a blunt icebreaking bow. The wedge has been discarded for 30 years.

The problems here is, nobody's ordering old design single-purpose icebreakers for the Baltic any longer.

Here's the "outdated" 1997 USCG Healy, with her wedge-shaped bow. According to my Turunen & Partanen, this shape originates from the Finnish Otso class (1986). I suppose you have your special way to discredit this source as well? Use 196 points flashing orange?




The Kontio (1987), of the Otso class:

[sigurdur]

Numerouno:
It is nice to see that Finland is still developing ice breakers.

I think the US Coast Guard needs to order a couple of those ships to have. I was dumbfounded to find out that the Coast Guard is so far behind the times not to have at least ONE really good large icebreaker.

[numerouno]

Typical thicknesses of the consolidated layers in ridges are:
the Baltic Sea ridge 0.5 m



However if wedge shape icebreaker bows are still being made then i was wrong about that.

Whoa! You just admitted an error. Are you still ok? I told you to have your wife pick up the Turunen & Partanen. It contains a gallery of all Finnish icebreaker "scrap views" so you can compare their lines.

I wonder why there's pressing need by you to argue something that is really not arguable, like the thickness of pack ice ridges in the Baltic. Yes, they can be 20+ meters, and yes, penetratable by ice breakers with far less draught than the thickness of the ice. We have the video, and the book, and the eyewitnesses.



I think the US Coast Guard needs to order a couple of those ships to have.

Sigurdur, they can't buy foreign, there's still some protectionist U.S. law in place. The coast guard ship Healy can't handle towing ships very well as it has no "hook" that directly links the two vessels, it's a powerful research vessel.

[numerouno]

Ok, Iceskater, have a nice day, or whatever. You're in the weirdo category from now on as far as I'm concerned.

[numerouno]

So, Iceskater does this seem to confirm what the aired YLE documentary and printed books said? The Baltic ice can pack up to 20+ meters (Turunen & Partanen say 28 meters is the thickest recorded in the Baltic [by using divers]) , and an icebreaker can penetrate it, with ice under keel.

The picture in your source is basically just the same as the animation in the YLE 1976 documentary that you claimed was wrong, in the beginning of this cabacle!

The Otso, according to the same source, has in tests successfully penetrated 15 meters thick ice, by entering the ridge backwards and drilling through just with her propellers (only the "ordinary" rear ones exist in the class). This means there will have surely been ice under the ship's keel, and the ship has indeed dug a trench in the ice, the possibility of which you have emphatically denied so far, on accord of your own thinking.

"Ramming" here is, I told you I think, if not totally, at least greatly, misleading. Turunen & Partanen use the Finnish term "syöksy", ("dash", "charge"), which is more correct. The English term is historically loaded, and I feel misleading, did I say this 6+ times already.

Here's some people "ramming", under the term "syöksy":

Source: Finnish Defence Forces: www.puolustusvoimat.fi/wcm/Erikoissivustot/k239/Suomeksi/Kuvagalleria/

He's "ramming" as well:


Your business can "ram" too:

www.stat.fi/ajk/poimintoja/2011-11-14_liikevaihtokuvaajat.html

This Syöksy class boat must be designed for "ramming"?

www.puolustusvoimat.fi/wcm/Erikoissivustot/noco2010/English/Units+and+equipment/Finland+alue/

[numerouno]

An icebreaker cannot keep climbing on to ice at low engine power.


You seem to have trouble in reading and/or understanding, again -- the possibility of drilling through is also reported.

Yes there is a great deal of ice under the boats as they pass thru the ridge, but this is like a cocktail drink that you can stir rather than a solid glass of ice.

That you would not be able know, would you?

You seen to have given in, finally!

[numerouno]

Only the very top layer of the ridge is bonded together. The rest is a mixture of slush, air and lose ice blocks.

Ok, do indicate the "slush, air and lose ice" in the picture! "Not bonded together"? How come there IS a ridge in the first place?

What is "stirable"? If you mean it has no resistance, fine, the icebreakers are all out in vain.

Sorry, but ha ha for you.

[numerouno]

Cavities in the rubble of the keel are filled with water and slush.

And what does the "non-cavity" thing called ice do? Disappear? Disappear at once, even much deeper than the keel? (ice is 20+ meters, keel 6 meters or so.) Come on, no chance for you!

[numerouno]

There is no trench made of solid ice like a canal in solid rock.

Nevertheless, there is trench made in pack ice by icebreaker, as explained by literature, including that you are referencing to yourself. This is also the point made by at least one TV documentary, and at least one printed book directed at the general audience.

Current icebreakers in the Baltic do not "ram" ice in the literal sense as wrongly suggested by the English usage -- also as explained by the same literature.

Huge horizontal force by an icebreaker does not equal ramming, in fact quite the opposite. Find out about "bollard pull".

Ask your wife to come along with you to the bookstore, any bookstore in Helsinki, and have her read out the excellent recent Finnish title for you -- or has she recently escaped.

You can continue claiming I'm the dumbest person on Earth, the Finnish media is against you, and that anyone does not appreciate your scientific expertise, but I'm finally out now.