Replacing the Subs

[Good2Golf]

If only we had an oceanographic survey ship...

Don’t worry, 2025 is just around the cornerish…

 

[FSTO]

If only we had an oceanographic survey ship...

A Bosun in the chains with a Lead Line is all you need!

 

[DBNSG]

IT isn't the dollars, it is the will do do something. The people who control the liberal party make lots of money from the status quo. The orders from on high are to obfuscate, delay, cover-up and if all else fails, to lie but don't do anything to change the way things are now

And don't forget to get as many pensionable years while obfuscating

 

[GR66]

I'm sure there are ways other than a submarine that we could cover the narrow choke points within the NWP. Frankly I doubt that either the Russians or Chinese would risk running a SSN through those areas and no need for a SSBN to put itself at risk by getting that close...they can fire from their own protected waters.

I'd think the approaches to the major East and West Coast ports where the ships transporting the massive amounts of supplies to support a major conflict in either Eastern Europe or the South China Sea will be the most likely AO for Canadian conventional subs during a conflict.

 

[KevinB]

I'm sure there are ways other than a submarine that we could cover the narrow choke points within the NWP. Frankly I doubt that either the Russians or Chinese would risk running a SSN through those areas and no need for a SSBN to put itself at risk by getting that close...they can fire from their own protected waters.

Technically yes. But BMD systems have advanced significantly.
There are now valid reasons a SSBN or SSGN would want to fire from Hudson Bay

I'd think the approaches to the major East and West Coast ports where the ships transporting the massive amounts of supplies to support a major conflict in either Eastern Europe or the South China Sea will be the most likely AO for Canadian conventional subs during a conflict.

I’m sorry, but I just spit my coffee out when I read massive amounts of supplies and Canada used together.

 

[KevinB]

Is part of the problem that all that gravel, silt and clay in the shallower regions is constantly shifting and subject to scouring from deep ice? Kind of like the sand bars on the prairie rivers. Never the same two years in a row.

No idea, but it makes sense.
There are annual dredging operations conducted on the St Mary’s River between Lake Superior and Lake Huron to keep the channel open for shipping.
I only have experience there - but I assume the same goes for the St Laurence in sections and other confined portions that the depth needs to be maintained

I gather most of that doesn’t have to due with ice but more the clearance between the Great Lake Freighters and the bottom and the erosion that occurs from that.

Plus you get wonderful notes like


As you can see some of the channels outside the shipping lanes have some issues.

 

[GR66]

Technically yes. But BMD systems have advanced significantly.
There are now valid reasons a SSBN or SSGN would want to fire from Hudson Bay

I have my doubts about the actual capability of BMD systems against a large scale nuclear attack. Most testing has been against predictable target paths with single targets and limited/no maneuvering and no decoys.

From articles I've read and podcasts with people involved in BMD targeting of ICBMs is a whole different ballgame than intercepting SRBMs. Also, the numbers of available interceptors vs incoming missiles in a short period of time makes me put much more faith in MAD in protecting us from a mass nuclear strike than BMD at this point.

Now you may have a better point with regard to SLCMs needing to launch from closer to their targets but again I'd suggest that the Atlantic and Pacific coasts offer much better approaches to their primary targets and a much less constrained AO to try and work from. Once they launch from Hudson Bay they would have limited options for ways back out to open water.

I’m sorry, but I just spit my coffee out when I read massive amounts of supplies and Canada used together.

LOL. You'll note that I was VERY specific in my wording...."East and West Coast ports" (meaning the major US ports) vice "Halifax and Vancouver"

 

[Kirkhill]

View attachment 78518
Not as many as you think. Two ways in on the west side, one way in on the east side. The other channels are NOT recommended for even icebreakers (particularly south of Baffin Island) as the ice can pile up even in summer.

Between a few subs, few AOPS, and some air assets not to many ways to sneak in. It's just so far north.

There is a new way of doing procurement coming as well. Its called something like Capability Sustainment Procurement. Just go shopping find what works and buy it. Sub program might be to big for that though.

Time for a historical intervention.

At the time Montreal was invading New York and Selkirk's indigent Scots were invading the Red River valley by way of Hudson's Bay, the waters through which those HBC boats passed to get into the Bay were claimed by both the Brits and the Denmark-Norway Kingdom. That Kingdom existed until 1814 and the Battle of New Orleans. One thing had nothing to do with the other.

That Kingdom included:

the Kingdom of Denmark, the Kingdom of Norway (including the then Norwegian overseas possessions: the Faroe Islands, Iceland, Greenland, and other possessions), the Duchy of Schleswig, and the Duchy of Holstein. The state also claimed sovereignty over three historical peoples: Frisians, Gutes and Wends. Denmark–Norway had several colonies, namely the Danish Gold Coast, the Nicobar Islands, Serampore, Tharangambadi, and the Danish West Indies.

Norway's "other possessions" included, and include, Svalbard and Jan Mayen. But the claim also included Axel Heiberg, Ellef Ringnes, Amund Ringnes and Jens Munk Island as well as Gjoa Haven on King William Island in Nunavut and Grise Fiord on Ellesmere.

Archaeological evidence and the Vatican's tax records back the claim that Scandinavians - Danes, Norwegians, Frisians, Vikings, whatever - were raiding and trading in that archipelago from the time that the Inuit of Alaska were kicking the local Cape Dorsets to the curb. About the time Erik the Red was setting up camp at l'Anse aux Meadows and possibly Oak Island. Curiously this was the same era when Cnut of Denmark also was collecting taxes from the Brits.

If the Inuit invaders have a recognized claim to the Arctic Archipelago, one that can only be based on right of conquest and lack of surviving complainants, then Norway and/or Denmark have an equally arguable claim to the Arctic Archipelago and the entire Canadian Eastern Seaboard as far south, potentially, as Oak Island. A claim that predates Columbus, Cabot, Davis, Baffin and Hudson.

A claim that was exercised as recently as the year the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan were created out of Rupert's Hudson Bay lands: 1905.

That is the year that Norway was finally recognized as an independent nation by the Danes, now owners of the Faroes and Greenland and claimants to Hans Island. Two years previous, 1903, Roald Amundsen, of Norway, had commenced a transit of the Archipelago by way of

Baffin Bay, the Parry Channel and then south through Peel Sound, James Ross Strait, Simpson Strait and Rae Strait. They spent two winters at King William Island, in the harbor of what is today Gjoa Haven.[8][10] During this time, Amundsen and the crew learned from the local Netsilik Inuit about Arctic survival skills, which he found invaluable in his later expedition to the South Pole. For example, he learned to use sled dogs for transportation of goods and to wear animal skins in lieu of heavy, woolen parkas, which could not keep out the cold when wet.

Leaving Gjoa Haven, he sailed west and passed Cambridge Bay, which had been reached from the west by Richard Collinson in 1852. Continuing to the south of Victoria Island, the ship cleared the Canadian Arctic Archipelago on 17 August 1905. It had to stop for the winter before going on to Nome on Alaska's Pacific coast. The nearest telegraph station was 500 miles (800 km) away in Eagle. Amundsen traveled there overland to wire a success message on 5 December, then returned to Nome in 1906. Later that year he was elected to the American Antiquarian Society.[11]

At this time, Amundsen learned of the dissolution of the union between Norway and Sweden, and that he had a new king. The explorer sent the new king, Haakon VII, news that his traversing the Northwest Passage "was a great achievement for Norway".[12] He said he hoped to do more and signed it "Your loyal subject, Roald Amundsen."[

Roald Amundsen - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You can also check the activities of

Otto Sverdrup of the Sverdrup Islands and Fridtjof Nansen, whose brand new frigate the Norwegians recently carelessly sunk.

Otto Sverdrup - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Fridtjof Nansen - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Sverdrup Islands is an archipelago of the northern Queen Elizabeth Islands, in Nunavut, Canada. The islands are situated in the Arctic Ocean, west of Ellesmere Island from 77° to 81° North and 85° to 106° West.

Sverdrup Islands - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Now in normal times, such as have prevailed for the last 118 years, and there was little interest in fighting over barren rocks and ice in the Arctic because they lacked commercial or strategic value, then those interests were minor interests and claims weren't pushed.

But now?

Here's a Richard Rohmeresque plotline for you.

Russia is sufficiently weakened by Ukraine that it can't hold the Amur and China occupies everything east of the Urals and takes up position on the Asian Arctic Coast.

Russia also loses the Kola to Norway and/or Finland or Sweden.

The US or the EU or NATO or JEF or Arctic Council or the Nordic Council backs the Kola play but opposes the Siberian play.

The Circumpolar nations now comprise China, Russia (a thin wedge between the Urals and the east coast of the Kola Inlet), Finland, Sweden and Norway, as well as the Unites States and Nunavut represented by Canada.

The Inuit of Nunavut recognize Canada but Canada recognize the Arctic Archipelago as Inuit lands. At least one point of contact, Hans Island, is in dispute between Greenland, represented by Denmark, and Nunavut, represented by Canada. Currently the dispute amounts to swapping Jubilaeum's for CC but there is still a dispute.

On both sides of Hans Island the lands are occupied by the Inuit. One people separated by Canada and Denmark.

Now suppose.....

Just suppose.....

Canada's position on matters of critical interest to its friends and neighbours did not align with their critical interests. Might they be tempted to look at the rule books to see what rules they could exploit in their favour?

Self-Determination perhaps?
Re-unification of peoples perhaps?
Resolution of unresolved claims perhaps?

How would Canada fare if 50,000 Inuit in Nunavut decided they wanted to rejoin their brothers and sisters on Greenland and received not only the blessing and backing of Denmark but also Norway, Iceland, the Faroes (owned and operated by Denmark), Sweden and Finland with their new minor partners Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Which way would Poland, Ukraine, the Czechs and the Slovaks fall? More importantly which way would the UK fall? Would they take the Dutch with them? And most importantly which way would the US fall?

Far fetched? Possibly.

But we already know that the Inuit of Greenland were and are willing to make a deal with China, independent of the wishes of Denmark. A deal that Trump was willing to match or better figuring it would be relatively easy to buy out the 50 or 60,000 people on Greenland and take full possession for the US.


This scenario does read like the plot line of a novel. But I point it out only to suggest that in our current world old assumptions, old positions, may no longer be what they were.

Canada has vulnerabilities in the Arctic.

And if we aren't interested enough to enforce our claims up there others might feel that their need for those islands is greater than ours. The Inuit, if they feel vulnerable, might also look elsewhere for a more effective Champion to protect them and their lands.

 

[Kirkhill]

PS -

Historical Ties

www.norway.no

Re - the Sverdrup Islands - the dispute over ownership was only resolved in 1930 when Canada paid $67,000 and received all the Norwegian survey work.

Sverdrup would claim the Sverdrup Islands for Norway, which led to a sovereignty dispute that was finally settled when Norway ceded the claims in 1930. The same year Sverdrup sold the records of his expeditions to the Canadian government for $67 000. He would die on 26 November 1930, only two weeks after the deal was struck.

And as a side note Henry Larsen, famous Canadian of the Northwest Passage, was a Norwegian...

Henry Larsen
Henry Larsen was born in Norway on 30 September 1899. His childhood hero was Roald Amundsen, and inspired by the tales of Roald Amundsen and the Canadian Arctic, he travelled to the West Coast of Canada and served as navigator on a vessel in the Arctic waters. Larsen became a Canadian citizen in 1924, and joined the RCMP in 1928, the same year he was appointed master of the ship St. Roch.

As his most notable achievement, Henry Larsen completed two voyages with St. Roch through the Northwest Passage. The first was eastbound in 1940-1942, as part of Canada's war effort. It followed nearly the same route as Amundsen’s 1903 expedition. In 1944, Larsen and the St. Roch traversed the passage on a westward course, using a more northerly route through Prince of Wales Strait. This was the third ship crossing of the Northwest Passage, the second east-west crossing and the first to be made in one season (7295 miles in 86 days).

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Technically yes. But BMD systems have advanced significantly.
There are now valid reasons a SSBN or SSGN would want to fire from Hudson Bay


I’m sorry, but I just spit my coffee out when I read massive amounts of supplies and Canada used together.

Actually Prince Rupert and Vancouver do move a huge volume of goods.

Vancouver = 141 million metric tonnes in 2022
Prince Rupert = 24 million tons

Los Angles is a 178 million tonnes

Vancouver is the 4th busiest port in North America

 

[GR66]

Actually Prince Rupert and Vancouver do move a huge volume of goods.

Vancouver = 141 million metric tonnes in 2022
Prince Rupert = 24 million tons

Los Angles is a 178 million tonnes

Vancouver is the 4th busiest port in North America

I think he was more referring to Canada not having "massive amounts" of any type of military hardware or munitions to ship out in support of a conflict rather than our port capacity.

 

[Happy Guy]

IT isn't the dollars, it is the will do do something. The people who control the liberal party make lots of money from the status quo. The orders from on high are to obfuscate, delay, cover-up and if all else fails, to lie but don't do anything to change the way things are now

I've been through both CPC and Lib gov'ts when the issue of northern sovereignty were raised in parliament and both times CANADA COM / CANOSCOM / CJOC were tasked to provide options. Both times, information was passed to the MND and nothing heard afterwards. Vacillating on difficult questions is something that I have seen from the CPC and the Libs. Again, I believe the enormous cost is the biggest factor in any decision being made and now coupled this with recruiting, training and retention challenges and procurement inefficiencies, this makes resolution even more difficult.

 

[GR66]

I've been through both CPC and Lib gov'ts when the issue of northern sovereignty were raised in parliament and both times CANADA COM / CANOSCOM / CJOC were tasked to provide options. Both times, information was passed to the MND and nothing heard afterwards. Vacillating on difficult questions is something that I have seen from the CPC and the Libs. Again, I believe the enormous cost is the biggest factor in any decision being made and now coupled this with recruiting, training and retention challenges and procurement inefficiencies, this makes resolution even more difficult.

I'm all for increasing military capabilities in the Arctic, but I also strongly feel that a far better way to secure our sovereignty in the North is to expand our civil infrastructure and presence.

Government services, law enforcement, environmental regulation enforcement, CCG patrols, resource development, navigational aids, health care facilities, airports and sea ports, etc. that are there year round are what establish our sovereignty. Periodic presence by the CAF simply enforce our sovereignty.

 

[KevinB]

I'm all for increasing military capabilities in the Arctic, but I also strongly feel that a far better way to secure our sovereignty in the North is to expand our civil infrastructure and presence.

Government services, law enforcement, environmental regulation enforcement, CCG patrols, resource development, navigational aids, health care facilities, airports and sea ports, etc. that are there year round are what establish our sovereignty. Periodic presence by the CAF simply enforce our sovereignty.

110%

Possession is 9/10ths the law. Armed Possession being the other 10th

WRT the subs, I think there are much better options (and mix of options) to cover/control gaps with that are not a manned submarine.

 

[Stoker]

In 2015 our ship deployed in the Arctic to support DRDC Northern Watch Technology Demonstration Project which was off the shelf sonar array deployed at a chokepoint in the NW passage and to slave the data back to Halifax. We were involved with deploying the array. I know they were still working on this but given more funding this could be a reality with arrays covering the NW passage.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Modern subs will be an important force multiplier and not just for the Arctic. Good sensor nets are important as well, but may not be able to track the target for long. If are sensor net picks up a Russian sub, up that way, how long to get aircraft, surface ships and subs into position to continue that tracking, how long can we sustain the tracking?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I'm all for increasing military capabilities in the Arctic, but I also strongly feel that a far better way to secure our sovereignty in the North is to expand our civil infrastructure and presence.

Government services, law enforcement, environmental regulation enforcement, CCG patrols, resource development, navigational aids, health care facilities, airports and sea ports, etc. that are there year round are what establish our sovereignty. Periodic presence by the CAF simply enforce our sovereignty.

I have always advocated a "All of government" approach to the Arctic, that includes provincial and territorial governments. We need to improve the network of communications, energy, roads, ports, airports and rail to and in the Arctic.

 

[Stoker]

Modern subs will be an important force multiplier and not just for the Arctic. Good sensor nets are important as well, but may not be able to track the target for long. If are sensor net picks up a Russian sub, up that way, how long to get aircraft, surface ships and subs into position to continue that tracking, how long can we sustain the tracking?

Easy, station acoustic mines in the area or a shore based weapon system that will drop rocket assisted torpedo's right onto the sub. Couple that with P8's stationed in the Arctic. If they're in our territory uninvited they will soon get the message.

 

[Kirkhill]

Interesting alternate history. Cnut the Great's Arctic Trade Zone ca 800 to 1400 AD.

 

[KevinB]

Easy, station acoustic mines in the area or a shore based weapon system that will drop rocket assisted torpedo's right onto the sub. Couple that with P8's stationed in the Arctic. If they're in our territory uninvited they will soon get the message.

I tend to doubt acoustic mines would be an option in peacetime. But UAS systems, and shore based batteries could easily launch a strike quickly.

Modern subs will be an important force multiplier and not just for the Arctic. Good sensor nets are important as well, but may not be able to track the target for long. If are sensor net picks up a Russian sub, up that way, how long to get aircraft, surface ships and subs into position to continue that tracking, how long can we sustain the tracking?

Well given we have a fairly decent net in the Atlantic, I don’t think that it would be too hard to have surveillance a significant area of the Canadian Arctic in that manner. Even if you just you have entrance and egress points from channels - you would know a fairly detailed area of where a subsurface asset had gone and while you may not have a current track, they’d been within a fairly small box.

If tensions were high, I would assume that there would be assets on short notice to move or on station that could bring systems to bear very rapidly.

Worse case it’s ~3,000miles from Trenton to the furthest part in the Arctic Ocean of Canadian territory. Which would be a 5hr 30min flight for a P-8A (including 2 aerial refueling ‘stops’ the second unnecessary unless one wanted more then just several hours on station) with a full stores load.
* I picked Trenton as it’s about as far away as possible - Comox or Greenwoood are ~2,500 miles for worse case range requirements