I get the general tactical features of the C-130 (robust, short runways, austere conditions, etc.), as someone who knows little about matters military and even less about aerial refueling, specifically in remote areas, I suppose I'm missing how they are considered suitable for our NORAD role as a tanker. First, to clarify; am I correct that the only RCAF aircraft we refuel are our CF-18s (and perhaps other NORAD/NATO fast jets that use drogues)? If we race off from Cold Lake/Bagotville to do an intercept, how is a Herc/T lumbering out from Wpg the most appropriate choice? I get that with all the surveillance assets we have access to, foreign probing into our airspace likely does not come as a complete surprise and a little pre-planning is available, but some unforeseen suspicious/nefarious/unknown commercial flight on a polar route implies fast response, long loiter, escort, etc., in the high arctic, perhaps depleting fuel before a Herc could get there. I suppose the FOLs might allow a pit stop if weather allows, but is calling a time out for gas really this best response?
Given our geography and the location of fighter assets, range comes into play with all of the contenders for the new fighter acquisition. Some argue for turning FOLs into FOBs but that is a whole 'nuther discussion involving staffing, recruiting, etc.
No doubt I am missing a whole lot.