Lake ontario

[guns_and_roses]

I forgot all about this topic. So basically any ship could be based on the lakes but carriers. I wonder if they were to make the locks bigger could carriers be based there. Then all training with the big guns could be done on the ocean with the US and other NATO members.

 

[Kunu]

The St Lawrence Seaway fits into the last category - "history from 1600 - present".

As an aside, I graduated from high school five years ago, and would say that looking holistically upon my whole time up to Grade 13, Canadian history is the most poorly taught of all subjects.  In a nutshell, here what was taught to me:

1.  Canada was first settled in the early 1600s.
2.  There were French-English struggles.
3.  We kicked the Americans' asses in the War of 1812.
4.  Mention of Wilfred Laurier.
5.  A short mention of the causes of WW I.  During the war, Canada was gassed during Ypres, but was lucky enough to win a little battle at Vimy Ridge.  Nothing was mentioned of the significance of Vimy Ridge, and if you read between the lines of textbooks, the authors were trying to insinuate that Canada's role in the war was minimal and token.
6.  Lots of time spend on the Great Depression.  Man, isn't capitalism evil!
7.  A short mention of the causes of WW II. 
8.  And that's it!  We won WW II, and nothing happened afterwards to this day!

And the sad part is, I feel I actually had, for the most part, relatively knowledgeable history teachers!  It seemed as if it were mandated that certain areas of history (especially post WW II) not be covered for political reasons.  I also noted that teachers of other subjects, such as economics, were horribly ignorant when it came to elements of history in their classes. 

Just my opinion from my one personal experience. 

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

I forgot all about this topic. So basically any ship could be based on the lakes but carriers. I wonder if they were to make the locks bigger could carriers be based there. Then all training with the big guns could be done on the ocean with the US and other NATO members.

Why would we base carriers there? Why put ships in an area that could be easily sealed off due to sabotage? Beyond patrol forces and mine counter measures units, why have a naval presence there at all?

 

[Timmy!]

I forgot all about this topic. So basically any ship could be based on the lakes but carriers. I wonder if they were to make the locks bigger could carriers be based there. Then all training with the big guns could be done on the ocean with the US and other NATO members.

Have you even seen an aircraft carrier up front? I'm sure your view will change quick...  ;D

 

[AJFitzpatrick]

Have you even seen an aircraft carrier up front? I'm sure your view will change quick...  ;D

How many a/c does a ship have to carry to be an "aircraft carrier" ? 

 

[Michael OLeary]

I forgot all about this topic. So basically any ship could be based on the lakes but carriers. I wonder if they were to make the locks bigger could carriers be based there. Then all training with the big guns could be done on the ocean with the US and other NATO members.

Hmmm, let's see, a 45,000-ton class big-deck amphibious assault ships for squadrons of the new F-35Bs will cost about $2 billion. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_carrier)

Cost to build a small airport - about $10 million (http://www.franklincountyva.org/misc_pdfs/combined_airport_docs.pdf)

So, for the cost of one modern carrier to police the Great Lakes (not counting costs to upgrade waterways and port facilities), the same money could build up to 200 small airfields.  I think the airfields might be a better deal.  (If you could possibly come up with a valid reason to do it in the first place)

 

[Roy Harding]

As an aside, I graduated from high school five years ago, and would say that looking holistically upon my whole time up to Grade 13, Canadian history is the most poorly taught of all subjects.  In a nutshell, here what was taught to me:

1.  Canada was first settled in the early 1600s.
2.  There were French-English struggles.
3.  We kicked the Americans' asses in the War of 1812.
4.  Mention of Wilfred Laurier.
5.  A short mention of the causes of WW I.  During the war, Canada was gassed during Ypres, but was lucky enough to win a little battle at Vimy Ridge.  Nothing was mentioned of the significance of Vimy Ridge, and if you read between the lines of textbooks, the authors were trying to insinuate that Canada's role in the war was minimal and token.
6.  Lots of time spend on the Great Depression.  Man, isn't capitalism evil!
7.  A short mention of the causes of WW II. 
8.  And that's it!  We won WW II, and nothing happened afterwards to this day!

And the sad part is, I feel I actually had, for the most part, relatively knowledgeable history teachers!  It seemed as if it were mandated that certain areas of history (especially post WW II) not be covered for political reasons.  I also noted that teachers of other subjects, such as economics, were horribly ignorant when it came to elements of history in their classes. 

Just my opinion from my one personal experience. 

That's a sin.  Thinking back on my own boy's school experience it shouldn't have surprised me.

Merry Christmas to you.

 

[geo]

Why even contemplate placing any major surface warship on the great lakes...... two countries who are pert much married at the hip and agree to dissagree & will drop everything to come to the other's aid if and when needed?

There are tons of major cities and airfields as it is.... why bother upgrading?  Have you thought thru what you posted?

Didn't think so.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Why even contemplate placing any major surface warship on the great lakes...... two countries who are pert much married at the hip and agree to dissagree & will drop everything to come to the other's aid if and when needed?

There are tons of major cities and airfields as it is.... why bother upgrading?  Have you thought thru what you posted?

Didn't think so.

+1...I think we have bigger concerns for a military then even worrying about fortifying the Great Lakes. :

 

[Michael OLeary]

+1...I think we have bigger concerns for a military then even worrying about fortifying the Great Lakes. :

It's not a concern, just the hypothetical discussion of Future_soldiers' initial post.
(And probably about ready for Radio Chatter.)

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

It's not a concern, just the hypothetical discussion of Future_soldiers' initial post.
(And probably about ready for Radio Chatter.)

Agreed and moved.

 

[medaid]

Fortify the area with Air Soft players... some of them have more HSLD gear then most of us combined.. (with exception to BigRed and KevB it seem ;D)

 

[NL_engineer]

How many a/c does a ship have to carry to be an "aircraft carrier" ? 

more then we have; but then again we are short carriers too  ;D

 

[time expired]

I mentioned this on an other thread  but it may be of some interest
to readers of this one,the largest deployment of warships on the
Great lakes was in 1958.The official opening of the St.Lawrence
Seaway bought the Royal yacht Britannia,a RN frigate and HMCS
Rostigouche and Gatineau.They went as far as Chicago I believe.
At the same time the USN deployed the largest fleet to sail the
Great lakes,this was led by the USS Macon,a14000Ton cruiser
which was the largest warship to ever sail the lakes
                                        Regards