# Why aren't all ships icebreakers?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-ships-icebreakers/758557>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [June 27, 2016, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-ships-icebreakers/758557 "2016-06-27T20:40:59Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Corry\_El](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Corry\_El](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corry_El)\
**Post date:** [June 29, 2016, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-ships-icebreakers/758557/41 "2016-06-29T15:27:38Z")

</div>

> [@engineer\_comp\_geek](#):
>
> Wikipedia lists 5 ships sunk by icebergs in the hundred or so years since the Titanic.
> 
> 2007 Explorer  
> 1991 Finnpolaris  
> 1977 William Carson  
> 1959 Hans Hedtoft
> 
> So, even designing a ship as an icebreaker per the OP isn’t always enough to prevent a sinking.

Yes, in fact all the cases since WWII were ice strengthened ships, though not icebreakers per se, operating in polar or near polar waters. None were cases like Titanic where a non ice strengthened ship hit an iceberg in regular North Atlantic sea lanes (and it was never a problem on any other major sea route). So the general problem really was very close to 100% solved by the actions taken after the Titanic disaster (Ice Patrol) and electronic aids since WWII era which make reporting and avoiding iceberg positions easier. And OTOH ice strengthened ships are not immune to sinking caused by ice damage.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\
**Post date:** [June 29, 2016, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-ships-icebreakers/758557/42 "2016-06-29T16:47:16Z")

</div>

> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#):
>
> We should just make ships out of the same apparently nearly indestructable material that Tony Stark uses in his ‘Iron Man’ suits. While we’re at it, we can power them with ARC fusion technology and use his ‘proprietary thruster technology’ to enable them for continuous suborbital flight, thus avoiding the entire problem of icebergs and rocks all together. …

But then they start colliding with each other, possibly leading to eternal nuclear winter.

So they need to be fur-lined too.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\
**Post date:** [June 29, 2016, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-ships-icebreakers/758557/43 "2016-06-29T17:25:08Z")

</div>

> [@Kobal2](#):
>
> Oh, that’s not what I was thinking. But a tank can say “you know what ? Fuck roads” and get away with it right through the highway concrete barrier :). Also take shortcuts through people’s houses.

This is why tanks are a bad idea. I commute in the Seattle area every day, I’d probably be doing this two or more times a week. Especially on I-405.

I’ve been speculating for decades about getting a helicopter.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-ships-icebreakers/758557.md?page=2)