Author Topic: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty  (Read 316429 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 744,407
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,114
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #425 on: January 10, 2018, 12:39:17 »
When the Harry Dewolf Class starts to regularly operate in the Arctic, there is talk of a plan whereby for the 4 or 5 months of the operating season Aboriginal youth are embarked from the communities as ordinary crew members. This gets the youth out of the communities, teaches them new skills and possibly opens them up to permanent employment in the RCN. This might also open up a sort of Naval Arctic Ranger.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 197,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,812
  • Freespeecher
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #426 on: January 10, 2018, 15:13:53 »
Roads, as the Romans well knew, are the best way to control territory, manage populations, and 'stake a claim'.

If we can't even find the will to build a road to some of these places, no 'Hovercraft Regiment' or equivalent will help us stake an equivalently credible claim.

Realistically, the roadbeds end in Moosonee in southern James Bay, you are boating or flying past that point. I'm not even clear if you could build a full time road from Edmonton to (say) iqaluit using current technology for any sort of reasonable price.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 206,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,021
  • Living the staff life
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #427 on: January 10, 2018, 15:25:05 »
Realistically, the roadbeds end in Moosonee in southern James Bay, you are boating or flying past that point. I'm not even clear if you could build a full time road from Edmonton to (say) iqaluit using current technology for any sort of reasonable price.

Maybe the same way they built the road from Inuvik to Tuk?  Although if going to Iqaluit, wouldn't it make more sense from a road north from say, Quebec City or Chicoutimi?

Either way, I think the distance itself would mean maintenance would be a complete pain. 
“If you run into an a-hole in the morning, you ran into an a-hole. If you run into a-holes all day, you're the a-hole.”

- Raylan Givens, Justified (cleaned up for content)

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 139,469
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,599
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #428 on: January 10, 2018, 15:34:04 »
Realistically, the roadbeds end in Moosonee in southern James Bay, you are boating or flying past that point. I'm not even clear if you could build a full time road from Edmonton to (say) iqaluit using current technology for any sort of reasonable price.

Some Provinces do build roads though, at least the ones that care about exploiting their natural resources and unlocking their wealth.

Quebec has the James Bay Road, Trans-Taiga Highway, and Highway 389 which connects to the Trans-Labrador Highway.  I've driven all of Highway 389 and am planning to drive the James Bay Road this summer. 

Ontario should take a greater interest in it's North but it doesn't for whatever reason  :dunno: and I think the interest stops at Highway 7. 

The territories are Federal responsibility though and we really have no excuse there. 

Maybe the same way they built the road from Inuvik to Tuk?  Although if going to Iqaluit, wouldn't it make more sense from a road north from say, Quebec City or Chicoutimi?

Either way, I think the distance itself would mean maintenance would be a complete pain. 

Any road would need to have some sort of commercial purpose.  Also, driving some of these roads can be treacherous.  I have a truck with an off-road suspension, two spare tires and a jerry can of gas I carry when I go off on one of my road adventures.

I haven't done Trans-Taiga yet but you need Jerry Cans because the distance between gas stations is like 650km in some cases, not to mention you better have a smick about basic auto diagnostics because if you break down, you're screwed.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2018, 15:41:51 by Humphrey Bogart »

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 238,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,287
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #429 on: January 10, 2018, 15:38:34 »
Any Federal institution adds to sovereignty.  SAR is an important aspect of that even if only a small region for regional fishermen etc...  We used to do sovereignty with Post offices in the Arctic.  This is significantly better then that.

I find calling both a single 9m RHIB and a post office 'additions rather silly, when the people who might threaten that sovereignty in the future are using nuclear surface/sub-surface...assets.
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 304,605
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,801
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #430 on: January 10, 2018, 15:48:12 »
I know that the geography is different, but if Norway can run trains and roads right up to their border with Russia, we should be able to manage similar feats of engineering.

And the there’s Tromso, Paris of the North!
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 139,469
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,599
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #431 on: January 10, 2018, 15:55:03 »
I know that the geography is different, but if Norway can run trains and roads right up to their border with Russia, we should be able to manage similar feats of engineering.

And the there’s Tromso, Paris of the North!

Oh we could definitely do it, we would need to drastically increase our SAR bill if we did though.

People will never surprise me with their ability to underestimate mother nature, especially people from suburbia with no experience.

Note:  One thing that may be problematic is building in the Taiga where the Forests are swampy.  Norway doesn't have this problem but from my understanding, roads really don't like this type of ground and require fairly regular grading.

« Last Edit: January 10, 2018, 16:04:23 by Humphrey Bogart »

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 147,680
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,792
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #432 on: January 10, 2018, 15:57:50 »
Far from me to trow a monkey's wrench in the discussion here, but anybody looked at where Iqaluit is located?

It's on Baffin Island, across Hudson's strait from mainland Canada. How do you cross either the 165 Kms from Kangiksujuak, Qc (or for those who prefer - Nunavik, the official name of all of the Quebec Northern region) to the Kimmirut Inuit lands, or the 185 Km from Kilinik, Qc, to the southernmost point of Baffin island?

And how do you justify the hundreds of billions of dollars (you think getting six AOPS is expensive - think again) you would need to put thousands of kms of roads to link even just the few, far flung, barely inhabited (other than two or three towns such a Iqaluit, Tuktuyaktuk and Kuujuak, which have a few thousand inhabitants) towns of a few hundred people?

This various towns all have small, gravelled but maintained, and operational airports and usually, at least weekly service from mostly Twin Otters and slightly larger cargo planes. Air, supplemented by ships for heavy cargo during the summer season, is the only logical and logistically efficient system up there, and the only justifiable one.

Here's my dare: I dare anyone who has actually been up there for any reasonable amount of time, to argue otherwise.

I know that the geography is different, but if Norway can run trains and roads right up to their border with Russia, we should be able to manage similar feats of engineering.

And the there’s Tromso, Paris of the North!

Daftandbarmy: Norway, because of the Gulf stream, is not an arctic tundra and all these roads/railroads do not have to run in extreme cold weather, nor has to go over muskeg or permafrost ground. Finally, they have a population of 5.3 millions (because it is inhabitable) in 325,000 square kilometres, whereas the Canadian Arctic - in reverse figures - has only 120,000 inhabitants (mostly in the  Yukon) spread over 3.5 millions square kilometres.



 

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 744,407
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,114
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #433 on: January 10, 2018, 16:07:26 »
Iqaluit would be better served by the construction of a deep water port than what they do there for the annual sea lift now.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 139,469
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,599
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #434 on: January 10, 2018, 16:07:48 »
Far from me to trow a monkey's wrench in the discussion here, but anybody looked at where Iqaluit is located?

It's on Baffin Island, across Hudson's strait from mainland Canada. How do you cross either the 165 Kms from Kangiksujuak, Qc (or for those who prefer - Nunavik, the official name of all of the Quebec Northern region) to the Kimmirut Inuit lands, or the 185 Km from Kilinik, Qc, to the southernmost point of Baffin island?

And how do you justify the hundreds of billions of dollars (you think getting six AOPS is expensive - think again) you would need to put thousands of kms of roads to link even just the few, far flung, barely inhabited (other than two or three towns such a Iqaluit, Tuktuyaktuk and Kuujuak, which have a few thousand inhabitants) towns of a few hundred people?

This various towns all have small, gravelled but maintained, and operational airports and usually, at least weekly service from mostly Twin Otters and slightly larger cargo planes. Air, supplemented by ships for heavy cargo during the summer season, is the only logical and logistically efficient system up there, and the only justifiable one.

Here's my dare: I dare anyone who has actually been up there for any reasonable amount of time, to argue otherwise.

Daftandbarmy: Norway, because of the Gulf stream, is not an arctic tundra and all these roads/railroads do not have to run in extreme cold weather, nor has to go over muskeg or permafrost ground. Finally, they have a population of 5.3 millions (because it is inhabitable) in 325,000 square kilometres, whereas the Canadian Arctic - in reverse figures - has only 120,000 inhabitants (mostly in the  Yukon) spread over 3.5 millions square kilometres.

100% concurrence, Iqaluit would be best served by a port of some sort.  As I stated earlier, a road should only be built for commercial purposes, like Quebec is doing with the James Bay Route, Trans-Taiga and hwy 389.

I've been to Resolute Bay, Iqaluit, Hall Beach, Arctic Bay, Pond Inlet (Summer and Winter in each).  I really see no point in having a road to any of these places.  A port in Iqaluit would probably be helpful and make a lot of sense, my understanding is this is in the works.

EDIT:

As I said earlier, one of the only provinces that's taking northern development seriously is Quebec.  Here is a transportation plan from 2002 for Northern Quebec, it's pretty detailed and in english.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110716212313/http://www.mtq.gouv.qc.ca/portal/page/portal/Librairie/Publications/en/regions/abitibi/nord_prediagnostic_en.pdf
« Last Edit: January 10, 2018, 16:51:34 by Humphrey Bogart »

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 206,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,021
  • Living the staff life
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #435 on: January 10, 2018, 16:38:29 »
A port in Iqaluit would probably be helpful and make a lot of sense, my understanding is this is in the works.

Agreed.  My comment about the road was more of the "can" vice "should".
“If you run into an a-hole in the morning, you ran into an a-hole. If you run into a-holes all day, you're the a-hole.”

- Raylan Givens, Justified (cleaned up for content)

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 85,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,085
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #436 on: January 10, 2018, 17:01:41 »
daftandbarmy: Thing is, no country has any claim on our Arctic land territory (Hans Island aside)--and our claim to sovereignty over NW Passage is disputed by almost everyone (Russia aside), not just the US.  Meanwhile, what about our sovereignty over, e.g., Labrador?  All this nationalist frenzy was whipped up by Harper with no factual basis and then accepted by the clueless media--more from 2011:

Quote
The Misguided Fixation on the Arctic and Our Military
http://www.cdfai.org.previewmysite.com/the3dsblog/?p=365

NORAD air defence in the Arctic is not a matter of sovereignty, rather simply the geographical location of a military threat to to the continent as a whole--plus broader considerations here:

Quote
Arctic Tensions Not Really About the Region but Relations With Russia
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2015/05/27/mark-collins-arctic-tensions-not-really-about-the-region-but-relations-with-russia/

Mark
Ottawa


Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 238,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,287
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #437 on: January 10, 2018, 17:14:54 »
Far from me to trow a monkey's wrench in the discussion here, but anybody looked at where Iqaluit is located?

Yup...been there recently.  $69 for fish and chips!!!   :orly:

Quote
It's on Baffin Island, across Hudson's strait from mainland Canada. How do you cross either the 165 Kms from Kangiksujuak, Qc (or for those who prefer - Nunavik, the official name of all of the Quebec Northern region) to the Kimmirut Inuit lands, or the 185 Km from Kilinik, Qc, to the southernmost point of Baffin island?


See attached pic?    ;D
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 147,680
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,792
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #438 on: January 10, 2018, 17:29:59 »
That, Eye in the Sky, would be my way to get to Iqaluit too.  :nod:

Mark: You are oversimplifying the situation in your post:

Everybody except the Russians is contesting Canada's position that all the waters contained within straight base lines enclosing the Arctic archipelago are internal waters of Canada under the law of the sea.

Nobody (not even the US) is contesting that Canada's territorial waters extend 12 NM from every piece of land in the Arctic that is recognized as Canadian. This means that many parts of the NW passage fall completely within Canadian territorial waters, as they are narrower than 24 NM.

Similarly, nobody contests that Canada's EEZ in the Arctic extends to at least 200 NM from any piece of land in the Arctic that is recognized as Canadian, which means all the waters within the archipelago and outwards to 200 NM since there are no parts of the archipelago that are wider than 400 NM.

The distinction on what powers a nation may exercise in territorial waters as opposed to internal waters, in particular restrictions on peaceful passage,  is the real issue that causes international problems, and is therefore contested.

Finally, when it is open, because the NW passage links two international bodies of water, the US, and some but not all other nations, claim that, on top  of all that, the rules relating to freedom of navigation (this is distinct from issues of sovereignty) in international straits must apply at all time, so Canada would have no power at all to impede in any way peaceful passage.

« Last Edit: January 11, 2018, 09:24:40 by Oldgateboatdriver »

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 238,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,287
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #439 on: January 10, 2018, 17:56:18 »
Canada would have no power at all to impede in any way peaceful passage of any kind, in reality.

 :Tin-Foil-Hat:
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline YZT580

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 28,985
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 827
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #440 on: January 10, 2018, 18:00:50 »
No one in his right mind would ever believe that we risk having an invasion from the north that would require some form of significant military response.  The development that is needed is in infrastructure and job opportunities to service our most northern residents/citizens and to provide some form of realistic response to assist those who run into serious problems: be they local fishermen/hunters, yachtsmen attempting the ridiculous or cruise ships intent on making money.  For all of those groups having locally based and knowledgeable assets in position to reach out is important and it validates our claim to sovereignty in those areas.  We, that is Canada,stands to profit significantly from the resources that are buried in the Arctic but those treasure troves are not going to be located and exploited without significant investment and risk.  The ideas expressed here are actually quite cheap as infrastructure development projects go and could easily be funded by the proposed infrastructure investment that features in the Liberals election platform.  And for a change it would actually serve a valid purpose and save lives. 

As for roads, forget it.  Even up until the end of WW2 most of Georgian Bay was serviced by ship, not by road.  The CPR relied on ferry service from Port McNicol and grain trains ended at the Lakehead.  The entire BC coast was only accessible by boat.  Until such time as there are significantly large settlements, the north will have to rely upon ship and air.  Both need SAR standing by not located in Trenton 8 hours away

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 238,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,287
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #441 on: January 10, 2018, 22:09:05 »
Because there are no natural resources up there...at all?  I don't think any 'invading force' would want the land itself...but...

http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/the-north/science/geology-energy-minerals/10717

Quote
Canada’s Arctic is one of Earth’s last frontiers for natural resource development. As a result mining and oil and gas development will be a key economic development instrument. The region is rich in diamonds, gold, oil and gas, base metals and iron ore. However, much of Canada’s North has not been studied to a sufficient level to encourage and sustain resource investment and to inform land-use decisions such as the creation of parks and other protected areas. Recent and on-going activities, primarily as part of the Earth Sciences Sectors’ Geo-Mapping for Energy and Minerals Program, are improving our knowledge of Canada’s North through the acquisition and rapid release of new geoscience information for targeted areas with high potential for base metals (copper, nickel, iron, zinc and lead), precious metals (gold, silver, platinum), diamonds, and multiple commodities including rare metals.

And it isn't only Russia with an eye on the Arctic.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/chinese-ship-making-first-voyage-through-canadas-northwest-passage/article36142513/

Maybe not today, but sometime tomorrow "down the road" as natural resources dry up globally, someone guarantee me wars won't be fought for these extra resources.  Anyone?
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 304,605
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,801
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #442 on: January 10, 2018, 23:18:49 »
Because there are no natural resources up there...at all?  I don't think any 'invading force' would want the land itself...but...

http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/the-north/science/geology-energy-minerals/10717

And it isn't only Russia with an eye on the Arctic.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/chinese-ship-making-first-voyage-through-canadas-northwest-passage/article36142513/

Maybe not today, but sometime tomorrow "down the road" as natural resources dry up globally, someone guarantee me wars won't be fought for these extra resources.  Anyone?

This book seems to think so:

Canada's Arctic Sovereignty: Resources, Climate and Conflict

Until now, Canada's claim to the frozen expanses of the Arctic has gone largely unchallenged. No longer. Suddenly our great white North is on everyone's radar, and five other countries are all interested in redefining our international boundaries. As known global oil and gas reserves dwindle, these nations are rushing to stake their claims on the Arctic's impressive, untapped mineral and energy reserves. Unprecedented global warming means that natural resources previously trapped by ice under the region's seabed are more accessible. Melting sea ice is also opening the Canadian Northwest Passage, a coveted trade route that has been almost impassable for most of recorded history. Journalist Jennifer Parks explores the issues related to Canada's Arctic in this timely, thought-provoking treatment.

https://www.amazon.ca/Canadas-Arctic-Sovereignty-Resources-Conflict/dp/1926736001
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 166,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,288
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #443 on: January 11, 2018, 10:47:14 »
Having been involved in infrastructure projects for years, having roads, airports, ports, communications and powerlines, makes a huge difference in the region they are built. Canada has a lot of resources, but generally to far away to be economically viable for most companies. Once the road/rail is in place, then projects suddenly become viable. It is the job of government to create these opportunities and set up the conditions for growth. We have no overarching Northern strategy, other than "permanent ignore". I applauded Harper's efforts to make it more of an issue and the needle has moved a bit.

Ports and Airport improvements are the first step, along with investments for renewable energy and improved communications. These produce a quicker bang for the buck. But they are still limited in what they can do. The next step is develop rail/road routes that follow the best geography and allow the greatest potential for connections with resource projects and remote communities. The road/rail payoff are measured in decades and that makes them politically uninteresting, unless your name is W.A.C. Bennett. I only wish he had manged to finish the rail line to Dease Lake. We lack visionary leaders and voters who would vote for them.     

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 304,605
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,801
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #444 on: January 11, 2018, 22:19:47 »
Meanwhile, in Russia:


Jane's Defence Weekly
New airbases significantly expand Russia’s Arctic geographical presence
Bruce Jones

Russia’s Northern Fleet has announced in a New Year’s press release that during 2018 its pilots will “significantly expand the geography of its Arctic air presence” through the use of new polar airbases. Russia’s staple maritime patrol and anti-submarine warfare aircraft are the Tu-142 ‘Bear’ and Il-38 ‘May’.

Official Russian defence sources provide more detail on Arctic airbase developments from west to east.

The ongoing reconstruction of the Northern Fleet’s main airbase of Severomorsk-1 on the Kola Peninsula includes a new runway, taxiways, lighting and communications’ systems, and a new command-and-control centre. It will be capable of handling a wide range of aircraft, including the Il-96 long-haul wide-body airliner. Almost co-located Severomorsk-3 airbase has already been modernised.

The new Nagurskoye airfield on Alexandra Land Island in Franz Josef Land, will have a 2,500 m runway and be able to station a fleet of MiG-31 ‘Foxhound’ interceptors, Su-34 ‘Fullback’ bomber-strike fighters, and Il-78 ‘Midas’ refuelling aircraft.

Reconstruction has been carried out at airbases at Rogachevo on the Novaya Zemlya island group, and at Naryan-Mar, in the Nenets province on the Barents Sea.

Upgrades and modernisation are continuing at Vorkuta, a city built to administer the gulag system, inland from the Kara Sea; Norilsk-Alykel, serving the closed Arctic city of Norilsk in central Siberia; Severnaya Zemlya Island, part of Krasnoyarsk Krai, on the Kara Sea; Tiksi, on the Laptev Sea; Anadyr, on the Bering Straits opposite Alaska; Cape Schmidt, on the Chukchi Sea, towards Alaska and the Bering Straits; and Wrangel Island, on the Chukchi Sea, straddled by the international dateline.

Temp airbase on Kotelny Island in the New Siberian Island group is expected to be in service by the end of 2018.
Aircrews serving in the polar regions receive considerable additional specialised training in order to deal with challenging navigational, communications, meteorological, and flight-planning requirements.

All off-lying island bases have detachments of Aerospace Forces’ (VKS) Radio-Technical Troops on 24-hour duty maintaining long-range communications links, radar, and early warning systems.

They are equipped with very recent Nebo-M, Podlet-M-TM, Kasta-2E2, and Gamma-S1 mobile air and missile defence radar systems and the Fundament signals processing system, which is integrated with the S-400 missile system.

These systems cover different ranges and altitudes and are claimed together to be “able to track 200 targets at altitudes of more than 35,000 ft [7,600 m] at a range of 200 km,” in all weather, including conventional and stealth targets.

ANALYSIS

Because of the drop in energy prices and the effects of economic sanctions following its annexation of Crimea and activities in Ukraine, Russia is not expanding its militarisation as much as in recent years. Much, however, has and continues to be achieved.
The overarching obstacle facing these developments has been the role of the Federal Agency for Special Construction, Spetsstroy, which was liquidated on 27 September 2017 after being cited for alleged “multi-billion-dollar embezzlement”. This has resulted in delays and confusion over the actual status of projects.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
The expansion of Russian bases comes while there is pressure within NATO, including the United States in Alaska, to reduce its commitments within the polar circle. At the same time there is a vast shrinkage in NATO ’hull numbers’ in the Atlantic, while Moscow’s grow exponentially. NATO furthermore no longer enjoys naval supremacy around or north of the Greenland-Iceland-UK (GIUK) Gap.

Russia’s expansion of High North bases creates nodal networks of airfields and staging bases, enabling troops and equipment to be moved and deployed in parallel, east to west or vice versa simultaneously, en masse and with speed and surprise, along shorter high latitude routes. Russia it should be remembered is adopting the pre-positioning of weapons and stores co-located at major bases to await large numbers of reinforcing troops.

The bases create a further symbolic possibility, particularly using mid-air refuelling and stand-off missiles, of being able to strike targets in North America.

MiG-31 ‘Foxhound’ fighter-interceptors, Su-34 ‘Fullback’ bomber-strike fighter and Il-78 ‘Midas’ refuelling aircraft are to be stationed at Russia’s Nagurskoye base. From Nagurskoye to US Thule AFB, Greenland, and Canadian Forces’ Station (CFS) Alert on Ellesmere Island is 1,000 miles, from Wrangel Island to Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, 700 miles.

Russian military doctrine has always favoured making use of challenging terrain and climatic conditions to other options, because it does not fire back.

http://janes.ihs.com/Janes/Display/FG_713879-JDW
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 238,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,287
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #445 on: January 11, 2018, 23:08:41 »
Article Link, April 2017

Russia's new Arctic Trefoil military base unveiled with virtual tour 

Visitors to the Russian defence ministry website can now take a "virtual tour" of a new military base in a remote region of the Arctic.

Such media openness contrasts markedly with Russia's traditional military secrecy. However, the tour does not show any new military hardware.

The Arctic Trefoil permanent base is in Franz Josef Land, a huge ice-covered, desolate archipelago.

The Russian military sees the resource-rich Arctic as a key strategic region.

President Vladimir Putin visited the new base, on Alexandra Land, last month.

It is built on stilts - to help withstand the extreme cold - and will house 150 personnel on 18-month tours of duty. Winter temperatures typically plunge to minus 40C.

Covering 14,000sq m (151,000sq ft), it is the second Putin-era Arctic base to be built for air defence units. The first base to be completed was Northern Clover on Kotelny Island, further east.

A military airstrip is also under construction in Franz Josef Land, called Nagurskoye.

Russia is building four other Arctic military bases - at Rogachevo, Cape Schmidt, Wrangel and Sredniy.

Experts say the melting of Arctic sea ice - generally attributed to climate change - is making the polar seas more accessible for shipping. That could make it easier to prospect for untapped energy and minerals in the region.

The 360-degree virtual tour shows the main living quarters at Arctic Trefoil, including a central five-storey atrium. The "trefoil" name refers to the main block's three wings.

The base is self-sufficient in electricity, and equipped with a clinic, library, chapel, gym and cinema.

A military expert quoted by RIA news agency, Col (Rtd) Viktor Litovkin, said Russia was pursuing several strategic goals in the Arctic:
◾Control of international shipping on the Northern Sea Route, including providing alerts about icebergs and severe weather
◾Protecting Russian oil and gas resources in the Arctic
◾Defending Russia against any intrusion by foreign warships and missile threats.

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Franz+Josef+Land/@80.6896657,46.3452741,743115m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x453d135600f66d7f:0xe41ee8cc6c1f61dc!8m2!3d80.799898!4d55.2478176
« Last Edit: January 12, 2018, 15:26:18 by Eye In The Sky »
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline YZT580

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 28,985
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 827
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #446 on: January 12, 2018, 09:35:34 »
Can you imagine the retention issues if we were to attempt to deploy squadrons of F18s to even Yellowknife for extended periods of time?  Cold Lake would seem like paradise....

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 304,605
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,801
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #447 on: January 12, 2018, 09:52:54 »
Can you imagine the retention issues if we were to attempt to deploy squadrons of F18s to even Yellowknife for extended periods of time?  Cold Lake would seem like paradise....

But it would be a great place for all those pilots ;)
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 216,625
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,975
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #448 on: January 12, 2018, 15:50:25 »
Just a point about roads -

A number that keeps coming to my mind is 70%.  That is the land mass of Canada that a Manitoba study determined was not accessible by road.  That means something like 7,000,000 km2 of area.  That is something like 4x the area of the prairies (~5,900,000 people and 473,000 km of paved and gravel roads).  It is also something like 1000x the area of the Greater Toronto Area (also ~5,900,000 people but only 5200 km of roads).

The point is that to economically exploit an area requires a network of roads - not a single, spidery, vulnerable connector 1000 km long to a "Field of Dreams" (pace Kevin Costner).

Maintaining the Prairie road network is a financial challenge for the 5,900,000 locals. 

What would be the challenge of an equivalent network 4x the size (4x 473,000 km = 1,892,000 km) borne by the 113,000 inhabitants of Nunavut, the Yukon and the Northwest Terrritories?  Forgetting the challenge of rivers, lakes, 'skeg and pingos (monstrous great zits that erupt on the landscape - not muddy footed troops on ships).

"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

"If change isn’t allowed to be a process, it becomes an event." - Penny Mordaunt 10/10/2019

“Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards” ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 166,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,288
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
« Reply #449 on: January 12, 2018, 17:38:44 »
In BC

Over 620,000 kilometers of roads on the British Columbia landbase are considered resource roads.