Arctic Warfare

>Operating SSKs under arctic ice sheets

I want you to think about why that isn't a good idea.

The next US icebreaker.

news.usni.org/2019/05/08/vt-halter-marine-details-coast-guard-icebreaker-bid

They have a whopping 460 mile range submerged at 3 knots, and an even more impressive 15 mile range when submerged at 21 kn.

needing to snorkle while under ice

America doesn't give a shit and all other parties are too weak to give Russia proper competition.

So Russia.

Their snorkle range is about 8.5k miles at 7kn for the newer boats. But yeah, a Kilo would be fucking useless in an Arctic Ocean conflict at least for the next 100 years before we see more significant ice melt.

I mean, if Ivan starts fucking with Canada, the US is absolutely going to get involved. Not out of good will, but simply by the necessity of maintaining strategic security on our northern border.

It would be pretty badass to see infantry combat on these hugeass ice sheets

>No cover
>Ground surface is a perfect contrast to human bodies on thermal imaging
>Mobile SAM systems likely can't accompany you
That'd be a fucking nightmare without air superiority.

They would first have to build up their icebreaker fleet as well as build arctic bases.

Besides, it's unlikely that Russia would attack Canada directly. They'd probably just replicate what China is doing in the South China Sea. Control the waterways and discourage any attempts to move in or exploit the resources in the Arctic without Russian consent.

Russia is far better prepared to operate in and control the Arctic sea than the US is. They have several large icebreakers (including nuclear powered ones), they have entire cities located in the Arctic (while the US has towns). They are even developing floating nuclear reactors that can be used to power remote bases in the region. Based on how sluggishly the US is renewing their icebreaker fleet (currently even Finland has a larger and more sophisticated fleet of icebreakers than the US) it is unlikely that the US will catch up to them anytime soon.

Post ufw Captain Pietr the patriot announces that your 60 year old diesel sub will do patrols under the arctic ice sheet

Im launching myself out a torp tube as soon as pissible.
>mfw no face

>such is life

Attached: DissapointedLenin.jpg (960x540, 205K)

I hate their Russian agenda so much. I too think America would do well if it fucked off or got nuked to glass but for the love of god try to be objective.

>who would win?

youtube.com/watch?v=GaX9a168mRg
youtube.com/watch?v=y8glF48MuUQ

Attached: Sega.png (340x495, 256K)

>casually riding across a cold ice ground surface in hot vehicles that'll light up like a Christmas tree on FLIR
>no air cover
Nothing personal, Ivan.

Attached: MinimumCivillianCasualties.jpg (650x366, 34K)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_22220_icebreaker

Attached: Lider.jpg (1333x1000, 336K)

The actual ships look nothing like that model.

That's probably for the better. The model makes it look like a fancy arctic cruise ship.

arctictoday.com/moscow-confirms-go-ahead-for-giant-nuclear-icebreaker/?wallit_nosession=1

Attached: DR1dSmmW4AErOJ-.jpg (477x477, 39K)

He's right, though. Look at the picture of the thing under construction. The entire covered bow is missing it would seem. Nothing wrong with it, but it looks like they've changed the design.

globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/lk-100ya.htm

Attached: 15335856113340.jpg (320x320, 77K)

What?

Russia has like two dozen ice breakers. The USA has 2, and one is a parts barge at this point.
The USA has the least ice capable ships of any nation that touches the arctic circle

This is true, but the US also has way more operational SSNs than Russia, and a bunch of loud icebreakers followed by surface vessels would be an easy target.

Yeah would be pretty kino

>Senior
It clearly said retired.

When Americans do it its called lobbying for more funds. When Russians do it its called telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth because Russians don't lie

Subs dominate the north pole.

Attached: PolarBears.jpg (847x429, 60K)

>100yeahs
checks out

>Retired officer
Ok retard.

The war wouldn't be fought with icebreakers, air assets or land units. It's a cold, hard, submarine war, and the US would shit all the way down Russia's throat in an ASW environment.

>If a war suddenly started tomorrow, the Russians would have an early advantage due to their much more numerous assets already placed in the region.
look at you, pretending to know things

I mean, the Russians have a fucking fleet assigned to the North Sea. The US would have to retask another fleet to the arctic if nothing else. As soon as the first Virginias arrive in the Arctic Circle, it’s over for Russia, though.

You think they aren't already there?

Russia considers the Arctic Circle as a bastion. It is heavily guarded. They also are setting up an Arctic Circle base that is filled with T-80U tanks (modernized because muh gasoline does not freeze in Arctic temps), Tor-M2DT SAM systems, S-400 SAM and 100mm Arctic SPGs.

Good point, we’ve probably got some SSNs lurking around the Boomer Bastion.

why's noone in this thread talking about China in the Arctic? China just tried to build a naval base and airfield in Greenland
once China has removed western powers from south china sea china will look at locking down the indian ocean and the artic

Attached: 1557966832998.jpg (1049x2000, 473K)

>China just tried to build a naval base and airfield in Greenland
Source on that? In all seriousness, the main reason no one considers China a threat to the arctic is that their only route in, the Bering Strait, is controlled by 2 powers that do not want the Chinese military operating on their northern coasts.

Implessive, with this peaceful fleet a new Dawn will rise in the east as the sun sets on the evil west and it's warmongering ways.

>Icebreaking ships duking it out with dismounted marine infantry fighting on the ice

Im hard rn thanks op

Attached: 1545312676808.png (640x632, 312K)

I know the story, since it was big in Danish news - at least the one about an airfield.

What basically happened was that Greenland (which is a part of Denmark, but with their own local rule) wanted to grow their infrastructure with foreign investments. China then offered to pour a lot of money into a new airport, but that woried the Danish goverment because of the long term geopolitacal consequenses it might have. Since the sea ice is melting, making the arctic region much more accesable, Greenland and the waters up there might become the new big point of interest for a lot of players.

The Danish goverment then made an offer instead - possibly the U.S. also did. In the end the Chinese plans never materialized.

What is more interesting - and worrying - for a lot of the smaller countries close to the arctic is that China is now trying to label itself as what they call a "near-arctic" country and having a legitimate claim and interests in the region. Traditionally there has only been "arctic countries" which are those who actually has land up there, unlike China.

Russia. They actually have the icebreakers that work and have the military that's deployed.
Ameriniggers are afraid of cold.

Interesting. I can’t imagine the US ever allowing Greenland or Iceland to accept any Chinese military presence due to the strategic importance of the GIUK gap. I don’t see China finding a way to get infrastructure into the Arctic, though. All polar countries (minus Russia) are too rich to desperately need Chinese investment like SEA and Africa, and Russia and the US both would want to exclude China from having any presence in the region.

ADCAP>ice breaker

I agree.
But what China *could* try as a long term plan is to influence the politics in Greenland. As it is now the majority of the local population up there want to become an independent country at some point in the future. But as it is now they're still way too reliant on Denmark for basically everything from defence, to acces to knowledge and higher education and simply due to the amount of money that flows in their direction.

The Idea is of course not popular down here in Denmark, due to both the amount of underground ressources in Greenland that becomes more and more profitable to extract as the temperature rises, and because no one likes to give away territory. However the danish population is kinda divided since we also recognize that the people in Greenland have to right to chose their own rule and future.

From a Chinese perspective it could make sence to try to influence Greenland towards wanting independance. If they get that they would also need a hefty amound of investment to make their new country even function. China could gladly give them exaclty that but with a hidden agenda of power and influence.

Yeah, I could see the US and China competing for influence in a potentially independent Greenland. I know America tried to purchase the territory after WWII and incorporate it into the US, but the Danes understandably didn’t want to sell it. Apparently, the US already does a good bit of investment in the region, and has been looking for ways to get its businesses access to their natural resources.

True. The U.S. still have a base up there I believe.

As it stands now Denmark is slowly gearing the armed forces towards large scale/near-peer war again (just like the rest of NATO) with an increased focus on the arctic. Being a small country this is a challenge for us because Greenland is fuckhuge and largely hard to axcess, so the goal right now is to ramp up our ability to gather information up there with survailance aircraft, patroll vessels and micro-satelites. There has also been talks of buying some more F-35 than planned, so we could staion some of them up there. But that is expencive and only becomes relevant if Russia should begin flying around up there.

As for cooperation with the U.S. that still lie as the core of out defence-strategy. We're a very small country and population so NATO is fundamental for us. That makes us more open to U.S. involment in Greenland compared to China. Thats also why we participate in almost every American, European or NATO exercise that we realistically can.