Russians spend £234 million building an icebreaker that can carry oil, and the fake news attributes it to global warming.
Russian tanker powers through Arctic without an icebreaker excort
the £234 million tanker does have its own inbuilt icebreaker
Russian tanker powers through Arctic without an icebreaker escort because of global warming
Why would an icebreaker be escorted by an icebreaker? You really can’t make up the level of stupid dishonesty on display by the criminals in the fake news press.
Then again, I shouldn’t be surprised.
‘ despite the fact that the vessel was forced to go through ice fields 1.2 meters thick, reports Portnews.ru.’
So because of global warming there is still 1.2 meters thick ice.
And the vessel is rated to handle ice up to 2.1m. thick, so no ‘despite’ in dealing with 1.2m.
Because there’s still ice…where there’s normally no ice this time of the year.
They had to hug the Russian coast all the way around..normally there’s not ice there this time of the year…
They disproved global warming
But… it is . . . “breaking news”…
It all went well until you mentioned “oil”. It’s an LNG carrier, designed to transport liquefied natural gas at cryogenic temperatures.
Just imagine the HUGE benefits if the Arctic sea ice actually drop back to MWP extent, instead of remaining just a small amount down from the extremes of the LIA and late 1970’s !!
What is it with these fools that they want everything to be COLD and MISERABLE. !
Because THEY are cold hearted and miserable people and hate it we are not.
“…powers through the Arctic…. ”
where in the Arctic? Very misleading. Did they go above the Arctic Circle for 50 miles? Of course much of the sea above AC is ice-free. Or did they go straight over the pole? ha ha, that ain’t gonna happen.
the implication is that they went into some previously deep freeze, thick ice area, but they are vague about it. But it’s the media, long ago did I give up on clarity honesty intelligence from the scoundrels and libtards.
“Or did they go straight over the pole? ha ha, that ain’t gonna happen.”
There should be nothing surprising about this. Santa Claus and his reindeer have been doing this for a LONG time… ;)
Buck, their route is on the internet…it’s all bullshit
They hugged the Russian coast all the way around
BTW, it’s usually ice free this time of the year
The only reason they had to break any ice at all…
…is because there’s more ice this year!
yeah I looked at it …. the implication was that this route had been frozen solid forever, until …. well like last year! and now it’s all ice free b/c of ‘climate change.’ Horsefeathers!
Bill Spears, spokesperson for Sovcomflot, the shipping company which owns the tanker.
“It’s very exciting that a ship can go along this route all year round.”
What about all the little wooden vessles that got through going back 100 years or more? With no satellite data, no GPS, no thick steel bottom, etc. That must have been big time climate change, far much more so than today!
Without ice breakers 1937-
Painting Depicting the Meeting in the Northwest Passage of …
Painting Depicting the Meeting in the Northwest Passage of the RMS Nascopie and the … to allow the Hudson’s Bay Company to … west through Bellot …
Search domain http://www.nauticapedia.canauticapedia.ca/Gallery/Aklavik_Nascopie_Painting.php
Looks like a tanker breaking through ice back in 2009-
It’s this 1978-built Canadian handysize:
I can see the point being made, though I have two queries against it rather than the one Tony mentioned
Firstly it is amusing the right wing Telegraph reported is quoting the left wing Guardian and the second is this comment ” “It’s very exciting that a ship can go along this route all year round.” in the piece.
Can it really? It did it in July when the ice had mainly broken up. Can it do it in Feb? Not yet I doubt.
I have to say though that if ships of fools on a yacht can now do it, then it is unsurprising a fortified larger ship can do it without an icebreaker beating the path.l So this does now mean for part of the year it’s cheaper.
“the right wing Telegraph”… say what????
Centrist, at best… you are just not used to a “balanced” viewpoint.
As you say, a lesser amount of Arctic sea ice would be an ABSOLUTE GODSEND for commerce, travel, fishing etc !!
Maybe the right-wing paper will next quote the celebrated industrialist and professional adventurer Sir David Kim Hempleman-Adams waxing poetic about the heroic history of Soviet Arctic exploration …
… when idealistic newcomers to the Far North traveled along the coast and built themselves comfortable camps.
For people like Andy everybody and everything is right wing/nazi which does not parrot his(master) point of view:
be it abortion,
(as long as you are white
Being eg muslim would make you an adorable person even when you oppose all of his points of view.
Being black= the same.
Being Asian= he has no opinion right now.
As TV never told him how to react to an opposing asian.
East-Asians are obviously considered subhumans by progressives.
They never get their butt kissed like other groups.
Maybe because they have such a great track record.
Low crime&violence rate,good integration,reliable,high output of prodigies,no terror attacks,low rape rate—
Seems there is a group of perverts who admires you more the worse you are.
True, with a possible disclaimer:
Andy [blank] is a doubter of the official Party line and a probable revisionist. As such, he likely believes that while all conservatives are dead wrong and will end up on the trash heap of history, only half of them or so are Nazis.
Considering the recorded history of the Party, he is in for a rough ride. People like him rarely survive the first 5 years after the revolution. He would be in a different cell block than certified reactionary enemies of the people like you and me—and they may toy with him longer—but that’s about the only difference.
I’m neutral politically so for me they are left and right wing. You are right wing so it seems “neutral” :)
August 25, 2017 at 7:30 pm
I’m neutral politically so for me they are left and right wing. You are right wing so it seems “neutral” :)
Now THAT is funny! Your about as “neutral” as CNN.
… and like everyone else on the centrist Left he was taught that Nazis are right-wing.
Andy just misspelled Neutered ;-)
You need a mirror that sees more than half your body !
You are leaning significantly to the left… and don’t even realise it.
His mirror is probably leaning left also.
“In 1977, the Soviets powered the first surface vessel to the geographic North Pole. The nuclear icebreaker Arktika departed Murmansk on August 9 and reached the pole on the 17th. The return to Murmansk, by way of Franz Josef Land, was completed on August 23rd. The 14-day experimental voyage, more than half of which was spent breaking through ice, covered 3852 miles at an average speed of 11.5 knots. In 1978 another historic voyage occurred: the first complete high-latitude passage of surface ships, which travelled from Murmansk through the Bering Strait to Magadan. The nuclear icebreaker Sibir’ led the Amguema-class transport ship Kapitan Myshevskiy, which was loaded with oilfield equipment bound for the Kolyma region. They passed to the north of all the major island groups (except Wrangel Island), shaving many miles off the standard coastal route”
That does not count.
1977 was in the official “global cooling era” :)
“The Soviet offer to open the Northern Sea Route to foreign shipping and provide icebreaking support for a fee was first extended in 1967. A demonstration voyage took place that summer in which a Soviet ship transported cargo from western Europe to Yokohama. Although the transit was successfully accomplished in only 27 days, foreign shippers never seized upon this initiative. Possibily the offer was tacitly withdrawn so that the Soviets would not offend their Arab allies by proposing an alternative to the Suez Canal”
I would agree the Telegraph is right of centre, except in terms of Trump (it is never-Trump in general), and has some correspondents in favour of climate change but others totally skeptical.
Regarding the article, it is normal fair for the Guardian, somewhat surprising in the Telegraph, but of course highlighted in the BBC, which allegedly has a Charter ensuring it remains impartial.
Real headline should be: ice-breaker sails through Arctic ice, also carries LNG cargo
The UK Daily Mail is also, inexplicably, totally anti-Trump and prints false stories gleefully – disappointing. The Mail is basically climate realist which, as you can imagine, leads to some dilemmas.
“Foreign response to the international activities to promote utilization of the Northern Sea Route began with the leasing of cargo space aboard Soviet SA-15 Noril’sk-class icebreaking carriers. In 1989, there were several transits from Hamburg to Osaka. In 1990, six more voyages took place, each requiring about 25 days to complete the route. This was approximately 10 days faster than the Suez Canal route”
“That same year, the nuclear icebreaker Rossiya (75,000 shaft horsepower) also made the third visit to the North Pole by a surface ship. (The second visit, by the Sibir’, was in 1987). The unique feature of this nine-day cruise was the fact that the ship was adapted to accomodate 40 foreign tourists, who paid $20,000 each for the trip. The cruise was considered such a success that the Sovietskiy Soyuz made two similar tourist trips in 1991 and 1992”
From back in 2008:
New icebreaking oil tanker for Russian Arctic.
You think about it, a tanker constructed especially for the job is a good choice for ice breaking in large expanses of water just from the aspect of naval architecture. Tankers are generally large and heavy ships and are less likely to sink than a freighter or transport when damaged forward in the part of the ship carrying oil and riding up on the ice.
During most of WW II in the Pacific Japanese tankers and oilers were 2nd on the list of priority as targets for US submarines. Only capital war ships such as aircraft carriers, battleships, and cruisers, were deemed more important targets. Thus any tankers in a merchant convoy were the prime targets considered more important than even a transport that could be carrying many 1,000s of troops and so there are many accounts from US subs of attacks on the tankers and one thing that stands out is that the preferred location for a torpedo to strike to ensure putting a tanker or oiler down was towards the stern.
From Dick O’Kane, skipper of the USS Tang and the top US submarine ace of WW II. Fifth (and final) war patrol attacking a Japanese convoy in the Formosa Strait at night on the surface:
“Our bow was nicely ahead of the leading tanker, and shifting the screws for a moment stopped our swing. The three lumbering ships were coming by on a modest line of bearing, slightly disadvantageous to us since only the after half of the second tanker protruded beyond the leader. Tankers were not sunk by hits in the forward section, however, and this vulnerable stern would be all we needed………..”
There were cargo ships delivering goods in the second world war, from the UK, using parts of the NSR without ice breaker support.
They didn’t need icebreaker support with the convoys (though the Russians may have in their ports). The ships stayed outside the ice pack. The ice being broken was by the sailors on board breaking the heavy accumulations off the superstructure, guns, etc.
The winter routes stayed closer to Norway to avoid the ice despite the fact that the Germans controlled Norway. The summer routes went further west and north when the ice edge was further north to stay further from the Germans in Norway.
“The winter routes stayed closer to Norway to avoid the ice despite the fact that the Germans controlled Norway. ”
It is also 24 h dark in winter so in those days it was much harder to find you even close to the cost but they tried.
BTW some Liberty ships making the run to Russian ports from the US had crack form along the deck in rough seas in extremely cold conditions.
And investigation found it was not due to defects in structure or design but because steel with too high of carbon content was being used and became brittle, especially along welds.
There has been a lot of BS written on this by people with supposed engineering expertise but the problem is that they never seem to take into account that generally liberty ships making the run to Russia were loaded 30% or more over the maximum of the design specifications for the ships. So the combination of extreme cold, constant heavy pounding, rolling, and twisting from heavy seas, and loads well over the maximum designed gross, caused many ships to crack and several to break into and sink.
Looked up this journalist’s biography. Obviously he is an award winning journalist with an expertise in science related matters.
”David Millward is now a member of The Telegraph’s US reporting team, following a lengthy stint covering Transport. During more than 30 years with the paper he has been thrown out of Yugoslavia and followed football hooligans around Europe.”
Examples of his scientific articles:
I particularly like the ones on the Hulk Hogan sex video case and “Rescued African lion demands blankets to sleep on”.
Thrown out of Yugoslavia and followed football hooligans. What marvelous credentials. Why is this guy not working for the NYT?