• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty

  • Thread starter Thread starter mattoigta
  • Start date Start date
Originally posted by sledge:
[qb] Oh and Colin no such thing as a warning missile. If your gonna use a finite resource you shoot to kill. [/qb]
Actually almost any semi-smart missile can launched without targeting the ship. Certainly the gunfire would do. But a missile appearing on the radar even if it‘s not aimed at you will drive the point home. If things went this far, do you think they would worry about a $200,000 missile?
 
If you only have 8 you would and besides the CPF has one of the best self defence capabilities in the world.
 
...and we are talking about two NATO countries going to war over an insignificant rock in the middle of butt-f***-nowhere. (Waiting for the Falklands analogy, NATO is the kicker here)

You navy guys have an odd sense of humor.
 
um colin how do you aim a self guiding missile to miss??? Ya can‘t and as for radar guided missiles you need to be locked on to a target for them to launch.

And yes when your stuck in a steel box for months at a time u get a odd sense of humour
 
But Infanteer, didn‘t you just hear, anyone can get into NATO as long as they declared thier support for "Iraqi Freedom". It will soon be like saying "but they are both member states of the UN..."
 
Good one.

I must admit I am seeing NATO become more and more obsolete every day...

"Where is the North Atlantic?"
 
I will confess not to be an expert on missile systems, but I do remember the guys on one ships explain how they would prevent the missile from hitting the target drone, so the impression I have is that they do have a certain amount of control over them. I will ask the question on another forum that may have the answer.

However the scenario is not that unreal or without precedent, remembers the Iceland-British Cod war? or even the Turbot war? Fisheries resources are becoming scarce and the Island represent the ability to own fishing grounds and any minerals in the surrounding areas. The only reason Canada has not had more confrontations regarding resources is due to our lack of will (political that is) and resources, the reasons exist already in plenty.
 
Colin I am a expert on missile systems. Its my job, so stop sending and receive. In other words stop flapping about what you don‘t know anything about and listen. Ships don‘t purposely miss the drones if locked on. They do use telemetric missiles with no warheads (they send data but don‘t go boom) skin on skin contact between drones and missiles are rare.

But yes the scenario is quite possible. I agree esspecially for those reasons.
 
Thanks Sledge for the response, as I mentioned it is not my area of expertise, but I was under the belief that it was possible. Which ship do (did) serve on?

One guys I worked with was a Blowpipe gunner and during a shoot was ordered to miss the drone, he nailed it dead on. The Officer crapped on him, but the BSM bought him beers all night.
 
Colin, I serve on the Regina. Now a blowpipe is not a weapon I know much about, never saw one. I have seen its replacement the javelin. With which you could miss if you wanted to. But its always more fun and confidence building to hit the target.
 
I know it was not well-loved by the guys using it, and it‘s targeting aspect was limited. It was a good weapon when it came out, but we held onto it for to long and was obsolete compared to other systems also in service. If I remember correctly the gunner kept the crosshairs on the target and guided the missile onto target by a small thumb switch, although it‘s been 20 years since I tried the simulator.
 
That would sound about right for what I know of it. But in this case my knowledge is limited.
 
If you think that the whole Hans Island thing is neat, wait a few years when the Northwest Passage becomes practicable for navigation. Get this, Canada says that it‘s internal waters, the rest of the world (mainly the US) says that it‘s actually an international strait. A trip through the NWP is about 7000kms shorter then going through Panama, so you can imagine that lotsof folks are keen to use it. Better yet we currently have -no- way to stop vessels from transitting it either. THATS going to be fun...
 
Ummmm its called an airstrike if worse comes to worse...its amazing what firing CRV-7s from a CF18 will do to a ship.
 
Apr. 5, 2004. 09:27 AM

THE TORONTO STAR

EDITORIAL: Guarding the Arctic


Canada‘s sovereignty over Arctic waters is in danger of melting away as surely as the polar ice is succumbing to global warming. Within a decade or two, climatologists predict, the route through the Arctic archipelago could be navigable year-round.

That would create an irresistible shortcut for freighters and warships travelling between Europe and Asia. The ships could shave 7,500 kilometres and weeks off their journey by using the Northwest Passage instead of the Panama Canal.

What‘s currently an occasional passage soon could be deemed a strait connecting the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Under the long-standing doctrine of freedom of the seas, it would be an international waterway open to any vessel, of any origin.

In fact, Russia and the United States already hold that view.

The prospect of oil tankers and leaky rustbuckets from all corners of the globe flooding through our pristine Far North is horrifying.

Despite much hand-wringing, the federal government under both Liberal and Conservative regimes has done a feeble job of asserting and safeguarding Arctic sovereignty over the decades. It never can find the money or resources needed to do the job properly.

"Our military presence in the Arctic is not exactly extensive. It virtually constitutes the largest demilitarized zone in the world," Martin Shadwick of York University‘s Centre for International Security told Parliament‘s standing defence committee last June.

In such a void, even symbolic exercises are significant. The longest one-way sovereignty patrol in Canada‘s history began last Thursday, when a 20-member team of reservist Canadian Rangers and soldiers set out by snowmobile from Resolute Bay, Nunavut, for a 1,300-km trek. They are to reach Alert, at the top of Ellesmere Island, next Monday.

Their mission is to wave the Canadian flag over the disputed waters - but no more than that.

They will steer clear of the Danish flag planted on tiny Hans Island, midway between Ellesmere Island and Greenland, a Danish territory. Canada and Denmark disagree about its ownership.

This summer, the frigate HMCS Montreal is to sail to Baffin Island for joint exercises with 200 soldiers and five helicopters. It will be the first large warship to conduct a sovereignty patrol in more than a decade. Another patrol is set for next year.

These are encouraging displays, but they are not nearly enough.

For example, the hulls of Canadian frigates and destroyers are too thin to be "ice-capable." We have only a handful of dedicated icebreakers and the military is still waiting for its new British-built submarines, which can cruise beneath the ice.

And we need to step up surveillance via satellites and overflights - technology that will cost millions.

We should tell the international community that the unique Arctic ecosystem needs the stewardship Canada can offer. Similarly, Australia was granted a custodial role for the Great Barrier Reef although it lies only partly within its waters.

Ottawa has neglected its northern border for too long. We must truly stand on guard over Canada‘s most remote regions. :cdn:
 
Denmark has four icebreakers to Canada‘s none, and five functioning submarines. Canada has four British reject subs that leak when under water.
Correction we do have ice breakers. CCG has a fleet of 17 icebreakers. Five are dedicated icebreakers and 12 are multi-tasked ice-strengthened vessels.

CCG Ice Operations Centres task icebreakers and guide the movement of marine traffic through ice.

Icebreakers
Des Groseillers
Henry Larsen
Lous S. St-Laurent
Pierre Radisson
Terry Fox

Icebreaker / Buoytenders
Ann Harvey
Edward Cornwallis
Georges R. Pearkes
Griffon
J.E. Bernier
Martha L. Black
Sir Wilfrid Laurier
Sir William Alexander
Earl Grey
Samuel Risley

Ice Strengthened / Navaids Tenders
Simcoe
Tracy
 
"Correction we do have ice breakers. CCG has a fleet of 17 icebreakers. Five are dedicated icebreakers and 12 are multi-tasked ice-strengthened vessels."

Yes and the majority are tied up because of the lack of funds and have not sailed for quite sometime.
 
Originally posted by 2332Piper:
[qb] Yes, we have the icebreakers but, correct me if I am wrong, are they armed only with a rifle to keep the polar bears away? It‘s nice and dandy for us to wave our fleet of icebreakers to everyone, but if they are not armed, the best they can do is ask them politely to leave. [/qb]
Yes you are correct, one of the Coast Guard cutters I served on had a .303 Enfield still wrapped in cosmolene paper and stuffed under the Captain‘s bunk, we only took it out when we decommissioned the ship, wish I could have got my hands onto that rifle. All of the Icebreakers carry a hunting rifle for bear defence.

Apparently a couple of our Cutters on the East Coast were fitted with mounts for .50 cals for the Turbot wars. There is a strong lobby in the CCG against arming the vessels, some of the senior members do their best to block any attempt to do so. I used to be against it, but the world has changed and I think that at the very least, all major CCG ships should be equipped with at least 2x .50cal and provisions made during normal refits to add hardpoints for a larger weapon systems (40-75mm). These are often the only Government presence in the Northern Waters and should be able to show even some teeth and provide a support platform for RCMP, military boarding parties.
 
I used to be against it, but the world has changed and I think that at the very least, all major CCG ships should be equipped with at least 2x .50cal and provisions made during normal refits to add hardpoints for a larger weapon systems (40-75mm). These are often the only Government presence in the Northern Waters and should be able to show even some teeth and provide a support platform for RCMP, military boarding parties.
I agree.

I believe it is high time we, as a nation, decide just where "Canada" truly is. It seems to me that just as there appears to be "second class" citizens in a society, there also appears to be an analogous, cumulative attitude toward "second class" sections of this country.

Hearts and minds; if â Å“no oneâ ? cares, what's the point in trying to keep it?

Popular opinion is how politicians stay in office. On the other hand they also seem to do quite well when they play to large corporations. So I suppose the fate of our northern hinterland hangs in the balance between â Å“the will of the peopleâ ? and the ability of our government to make these lands open and legally accessible to big business. If we don't, other countries will.

And then there are the environmental considerations...

Oy!


:cdn:
 
Back
Top