The "Diefenbreaker"

[Colin Parkinson]

Absolute rubbish!

The Arrow, had any government allowed it to go ahead, would have disarmed Canada.

The project was opposed by, inter alia, the Treasury, the Naval Staff, the General Staff and a goodly proportion of the Air Staff - for good reasons. Diefenbaker, as he should have, followed the best available financial and military advice. He made the correct decision.

It was a good airplane, probably even a very good airplane but not one that could be sold to anyone else. It would have been a HUGE white elephant. The Chief made the politically and militarily correct decision. Canada did not need the Arrow; Canada could not afford the Arrow; the Arrow met the fate it deserved: the scrap heap.


Edit: I added a bit because I hit the Post button when I meant to hit Preview.

Stopping the program was one thing, how they went about it was criminal. The prototypes could have flown as test aircraft, no need to scrap them, destroying the plans etc. They could have wound it down in such a manner that it cancellation would have not had the same impact on our aviation industry.

 

[Ammo]

First the "Diefenbunker" and now the "Diefenbreaker".

The seven Emergency Government Headquarters (commonly referred to as Diefenbunkers) are nuclear fallout shelters that were built across Canada at the height of the Cold War, during the infancy of the ICBM threat. The nickname, "Diefenbunkers", was coined by federal opposition politicians of the early 1960s, and was derived from the name of the prime minister of the day, John Diefenbaker, who authorized their construction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diefenbunker

 

[George Wallace]

I'm not too concerned.  I am positive that they will not turn out to be "Bennett Buggies".

 

[FSTO]

Ok what happened to Canada's ability to design and produce our own fighter aircraft? Did not the Chief replace it with the BOMARC because he felt manned fighter aircraft were obsolete? I feel because of his actions, a lot of people went elsewhere to work in the aerospace industry.

He wasn't alone in that thought. With the launch of sputnik (sp) governments around the world were re-assessing their fighter jet needs and requirements. Canada could not afford to continue with a project that may or may not be even useful in a few years.

Now was the government of the day a mite brutal in ending the project? Yes, but there was overiding concerns regarding the Soviets getting the plans. Could the government have gone in a different direction and kept that expertise? Yes, but what?

What is less known is that at the same time we had a military shipbuilding industry that was producing some of the most innovative warships of the day. Just as devestating was the slow death of that legacy.

As a side note, I went to the comment section of that G&M story. Over 500 replies that lay out in stark relief the ignorance and stupidity of what appears to be a vast majority of Globe and Mail readers.

 

[George Wallace]

As a side note, I went to the comment section of that G&M story. Over 500 replies that lay out in stark relief the ignorance and stupidity of what appears to be a vast majority of Globe and Mail readers.

It sometimes is like reading the "Funnies" and at other times very dishearting to read the comments in those types of forums.  It is a means that some of these wack jobs use to force their views on the less read/knowledgeable in the public.  One can go to youtube.com to see the work and effort Mike Sparks has put towards his fanatical one man efforts in claims that the M113 is called a "Gavin".  He has even gone through the efforts of creating multiple accounts and personalities to further his agenda, and has even moved on to Wikipedia to carry out his efforts.  There are a lot of "Crazy people" out there, who are not institutionalized (but should be), and posting on the Net.

 

[Snafu-Bar]

Looks like the US isn't too keen on the prospects of our new ship.

http://www.canada.com/ch/chchnews/story.html?id=187be7c6-54df-4655-a404-7c45add3eb35

 

[aesop081]

Looks like the US isn't too keen on the prospects of our new ship.

http://www.canada.com/ch/chchnews/story.html?id=187be7c6-54df-4655-a404-7c45add3eb35

No big surprise there. The US does not consider the NWP as Canadian waters so of course they are going to express their concern over the manditory registration. The title of that article is missleading as the new icebreaker is not even mentioned. Sounds like the media looking to create controversy from nothing with their headline.

 

[Snafu-Bar]

"we will be discussing the proposal with Canada" to ensure it doesn't violate international law.


That's the part of the article that caught my attention. I some how doubt the US will care two hershey squirts about bending the borders in thier favour, nor do i doubt thier intentions to make sure we fall in step or face the concesquences.

Cheers.

 

[MarkOttawa]

The US in not concerned about the "Diefenbreaker", which is unlikely to be in the water in less than a decade.  It's concerned about the immediate application of mandatory NORDREG reporting to the Canadian Coast Guard--which could prove difficult to enforce currently.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/MarineSafety/TP/Tp13670/DFOCCG.htm

A couple of articles worth reading:

Arctic sovereignty
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/opinion/story.html?id=39be70fc-ce84-426b-953b-c9e7c378530b

Guarding Canada's northern coast
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/opinion/story.html?id=1c73cfd5-d71b-4b28-8670-43f374e8dc88

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Sub_Guy]

That's the part of the article that caught my attention. I some how doubt the US will care two hershey squirts about bending the borders in thier favour, nor do i doubt thier intentions to make sure we fall in step or face the concesquences.

What concesquences?  We have the oil, what we need is someone in office who has a big set. 

With next to no military presence up north its pretty much wide open anyway.

 

[blacktriangle]

Like Mark said considering the icebreaker is a decade at least away... I don't think the US is very worried. They could probably start today and have a fleet of icebreakers up there to meet ours at its launch, if they deem it worthwhile...  >

 

[MarkOttawa]

In fact the government hasn't actually yet done anything to strengthen our maritime claim--the fine print:
http://pm.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?id=2246

...the Prime Minister announced his Government’s intention [emphasis added] to introduce new legislation extending the enforcement zone of the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act (AWPPA) in the next sitting of Parliament.

In addition the Prime Minister announced that his Government was also bringing in new regulations extending the range at which Arctic bound ships must report to Canadian authorities through the NORDREG reporting system...

The proposed amendments [emphasis added] announced by Prime Minister Harper include:

# Extension of regulatory zone defined as “arctic waters” under the AWPPA from its current limit of 100 nautical miles to 200 nautical miles. This will extend the range at which Canada can enforce the anti-pollution provisions in the act.

# Similarly extending the NORDREG reporting zone to a 200 nautical mile limit.

# Moving from the “encouraged” reporting provisions under the current NORDREG system to a mandatory reporting system for all incoming shipping traffic.

Legislation on the AWPPA will obviously take some time--and if there is an election? Will even new NORDREG regulations be issued promptly?

Lots more here:
http://benmuse.typepad.com/arctic_economics/2008/08/the-northwest-passage---at-least-the-southern-route---is-open-again-this-year-arctic-shortcuts-open-up-decline-pace-stead.html#more

Mark
Ottawa

 

[jollyjacktar]

I won't hold my breath for this one to come off the slips.  Plenty of mismanagement and politics between concept/announcement/commissioning/operational.  The present masters are great at bluster and fanfare but don't deliver in the end....so far.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Something stinks.  See the Update at this Torch post
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2008/08/diefenbreaker-in-2017.html
--incredibly vanishing links to vessels of the CCG at the government site:
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2008/02/at-last-one-new-icebreaker-for-canadian.html

On the other hand maybe it's not nefarious--just a consequence of trying to implement the feds' "Common Look and Feel for the Internet 2.0":
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/clf2-nsi2/index-eng.asp

Bureacratic madness--without any additional funding from Treasury Board. So the content of sites is often reduced.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Links to CCG vessels can still be found, how I could not see:
http://www.ccg-gcc.gc.ca/e0000439

See josh's comment (#4) here:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=22793240&postID=4867302016193217925

Mark
Ottawa

 

[observor 69]

   

Harper announced that he is naming the new ship the Diefenbaker.  Here's how it should go:

"Do the R&D

Build the prototypes and make them the best in the world

Announce our success and the fact we have beat everyone, especially the Americans

Build the ships (maybe six?)

Line them up on the dock

Cut them up and destroy the remnants

Buy American Ice Breakers

The Diefenbaker way”

http://tinyurl.com/62n4k7

 

[observor 69]

And this is the sad option we got stuck with:

The Diefenbaker government also infuriated the US administration by refusing to honour its commitment to accept nuclear warheads, thereby rendering the Bomarc-B, the Voodoo and hundreds of millions of dollars worth of other weapons systems virtually useless. In the 1962 election the hapless Diefenbaker government was reduced to a minority, and in 1963 it fell after a non-confidence vote condemning its ill-considered and badly-managed conduct of Canada's foreign policy and defence policy.

http://scaa.usask.ca/gallery/arrow/aftermath.htm

 

[FSTO]

Like Mark said considering the icebreaker is a decade at least away... I don't think the US is very worried. They could probably start today and have a fleet of icebreakers up there to meet ours at its launch, if they deem it worthwhile...  >

Looks like the US is not quite as efficient as you may assume.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3ae2557a55-2008-46d4-8cc1-414530e03820


"Defense Technology International - One of the Coast Guard’s duties is to patrol the freezing cold waters off the northernmost coast of our United States. And they can't do it in shoddy boats. Two of the three USCG polar icebreakers – the Polar Star and Polar Sea – have exceeded their intended 30-year service lives. And on the service’s current schedule, the first replacement ship might not enter service for another decade."

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The USCG is famous for running really old ships. Generally with crews that were born after their midlife refit.

 

[Greymatters]

Love the thread title - it would be a howl if they actually named it that!