pity there isn’t even a sketch of the new ship? I hope the bid was based on a complete design…
There’s a sketch in LinkedIn:
Who have designed these icebreakers??
Are you part of the guilty party??
I have no idea who is behind that design. I guess we’ll find out in the near future.
at least not as fugly as the HEALY
To my knowledge neither VT Halter or ST Marine has any experience in designing and building heavy icebreakers, so it would be foolhearted to get into a project like this without expert assistance. Nothing said in the Singapore press either about who they are cooperating with:
Usually there are some typical features that give away the designers before it is publicised. (The bridge, mast, funnel etc.)
Do you see any here?:
PS> Isn’t there someting Aker Arctic-like with that bridge??
This article has a slightly better rendering:
Disgusting. An icebreaker ought to be built at a cold climate, high quality, shipyard like Bath Iron Works.
BIW didn’t submit a bid.
I have to wonder who the other two bidders were and what their bids were? even more so I wonder if Halter really knows what they have bitten off here? it is just quite possible that the goobermint took Halter’s good record for building T-AGS ships as some king of proof they can build an icebreaker?
this contract just possibly could turn into a major shit show but too early now to say it will, I hope Halter is going to bring in some technical expertise they obviously would not have already in house. Maybe even some Finnish expertise perhaps?
I hope so too.
I know Tupsis don’t want to say anything, but something tells me this one will come with a complimentary sauna.
@c.captain, according to this article, “Socha said the other finalists were Bollinger Shipyards of Lockport, Louisiana, and a partnership between Philly Shipyard of Philadelphia and Fincantieri Marinette Marine, the Wisconsin-based subsidiary of an Italian shipbuilder.” This was also quoted in US Naval Institute article I posted above.
@ombugge, as I mentioned before, I don’t know who is behind the VT Halter design. We were in the Fincantieri team together with VARD, so we lost and I’m back to learning Russian…
What about the 3 mediums? The article mentions only the 3 heavies. The other yards may still get the 2nd place prize.
Perhaps, but that project hasn’t even started yet. Furthermore, there has been talks about building just heavies because the cost difference is quite small. You could perhaps save by keeping roughly the same hull but dropping e.g. the centerline shaft and some gensets.
“The Coast Guard cannot meet the challenges of tomorrow’s Arctic with today’s paradigms. Rapid technological advancements within the maritime industry, combined with robust investments by strategic competitors, have raised the stakes,” reads the document. “The service must take this opportunity to leverage transformative technology and lead the employment of innovative policies to solve complex problems.”
Wottheheck would that gibberish say if it were in English? “We need new icebreakers because the old ones are dead and mostly buried”?
I think leveraging transformative technology with innovative policies to solve complex problems using new paradigms means the new icebeakers are going to break down a lot but this guy will be in the clear because he will have retired by then.
In still simpler terms the new icebreakers are going to be fucked up but it’s not going to be his problem.
< weep >
lets hope a bunch of “ice” scientists are not designing it … this logic prevails more nowadays!!!, this all is surely prompted by increased traffic and traffic potential thru the nw pass.
seems like a lot of $$ for a ship but one probably shouldn’t be surprized till we see the cost over runs !!! hahhahahaha
Not designed by Glosten? That’s what I heard but I may be mistaken