Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

To build ships that break ice, U.S. must relearn to cut steel

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 190 posts

Re: To build ships that break ice, U.S. must relearn to cut steel

#31

Post by ChainOfFools »

fsckboy wrote: post #14
thorncorona wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need mass to break ice.

> You need mass to break ice. this is one of the narrow cases where pounds comes off the bench to say, "actually, you need weight" (icebreakers slide/ride up on top of the ice and the weight of the ship breaks breaks it ice downward)

That's because pounds use force as a base unit, mass is kind of incorporated into it the notion of a pound, whereas the metric system generally handles the units for force and mass separately.

The imperial system actually does have a rather obscure unit called a slug which is equivalent to the kilogram (in terms of being purely a mass quantity) in the metric system, but since the pound already incorporates that term ( bundled together with the gravitational acceleration factor) it seldom sees action.

Re: To build ships that break ice, U.S. must relearn to cut steel

#32

Post by deaddodo »

horeszko wrote: post #28

Makes me wonder how much manufacturing knowledge has been lost in the west, and how long it might take to rediscover it all. Does anyone know of any good sources on this?

Strictly speaking, none.

The knowledge is all there, the problem is lack of experience/training.

Re: To build ships that break ice, U.S. must relearn to cut steel

#33

Post by 1970-01-01 »

horeszko wrote: post #28

Makes me wonder how much manufacturing knowledge has been lost in the west, and how long it might take to rediscover it all. Does anyone know of any good sources on this?

It's the skills that are lost. The knowledge is safe in print.

Re: To build ships that break ice, U.S. must relearn to cut steel

#34

Post by georgeg23 »

omginternets wrote: post #27
dingosity wrote: post #16

Do we really need to OWN icebreakers? Maybe we could start a website where countries and companies who own icebreakers can operate them for the benefit of other countries and companies who want to use them. They just walk to the shore in the Canadian north, click the "Call Icebreaker" button on the app and wait for an icebreaker someone else owns to arrive.

Generally speaking, states try to avoid having critical dependencies on other states, because they become points of leverage for adversarial foreign policy. For the purposes of keeping America running, yes, we really do need to own icebreakers in the same way that we need to own powerplants, steel mills, chip foundries and and refineries.

But then market pressures for efficiency will lead to mergers and acquisitions...

Re: To build ships that break ice, U.S. must relearn to cut steel

#35

Post by andylynch »

cm2187 wrote: post #26

> designers, engineers and welders grapple with something the U.S. hasn’t done in decades: reliably shape hardened steel that is more than an inch thick into a curved, reinforced ship’s hull I don't understand. Aren't modern military ships armoured anymore?

No, they aren’t armoured nearly as much as WWII era ships; it shorten range, slows them down, and doesn’t really work against guided weapons

Re: To build ships that break ice, U.S. must relearn to cut steel

#36

Post by hef19898 »

notamy wrote: post #24

Meta: What is it about this post that attracted so many flippant comments? Non-meta: Why does the US have so few of these ships? Were more just not produced? I didn’t see an answer in the article but it’s possible I missed it.

Icebreakers? No need, as simple as that.

Re: To build ships that break ice, U.S. must relearn to cut steel

#37

Post by [deleted] »

mschuster91 wrote: post #25

Surprise, this is what happens when you shift everything in heavy industry or production in general off to India and China without keeping at least some production domestic or at least have everything documented and regularly (i.e. once every ten years) check if the documentation is accurate and workers can understand it to build a product that meets specifications.

[deleted]

Re: To build ships that break ice, U.S. must relearn to cut steel

#38

Post by hef19898 »

andylynch wrote: post #35
cm2187 wrote: post #26

> designers, engineers and welders grapple with something the U.S. hasn’t done in decades: reliably shape hardened steel that is more than an inch thick into a curved, reinforced ship’s hull I don't understand. Aren't modern military ships armoured anymore?

No, they aren’t armoured nearly as much as WWII era ships; it shorten range, slows them down, and doesn’t really work against guided weapons

Or torpedoes.

Re: To build ships that break ice, U.S. must relearn to cut steel

#40

Post by appleiigs »

mschuster91 wrote: post #25

Surprise, this is what happens when you shift everything in heavy industry or production in general off to India and China without keeping at least some production domestic or at least have everything documented and regularly (i.e. once every ten years) check if the documentation is accurate and workers can understand it to build a product that meets specifications.

The U.S. doesn't have a centrally planned economy. Each business is free to do as it wishes... and if they wished to survive competitively, they moved their production offshore (helps avoid UAW strikes).

Easy to know U.S. lost expertise, but tough question how do you get it back? Tariffs? A larger military-industrial complex? Even larger government?

Post reply on HN