Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS

[aesop081]

4. Don't you think it would be more practical to arm the Aurora with other than torpodoes , then it could be used anywhere rather than just the Arctic ,

We are already being used everywhere in the world, not just the arctic.  We can be armed with other things than torps as it is now, always have been.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Old medic:  We're only talking about the Arctic.  I forgot about Hans Island.  I admit also that I forgot the Beufort Sea maritime boundary dispute with the US.  But that's it.  To reiterate nobody is claiming the NW Passage as theirs, they're just saying it isn't ours but rather international.  There are likely to be conflicting claims to the seabed but no formal claims have yet been made by any country.  Other than Hans there are no land claims against Canadian territory.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Disenchantedsailor]

What exactly do you call planting a national flag or representation thereof if not a land (seabed) claim?

 

[Kirkhill]

The Fenians are an interesting case.

Non-State actors, they were civilians in uniform with military training and experience and the best modern military equipment available at the time.

Were they criminals, terrorists, religious fanatics or freedom fighters?  Given that they operated freely in the US, organizing and collecting donations, would Canada and Britain have been justified in attacking the US (the Fenians in Ireland were a threat to the territorial integrity of the United Kingdom and an armed insurgency)?

Would the Geneva Conventions, first approved in 1864, two years before the first of the Fenian Raids, have applied to this armed NGO?

The Fenians also had an on-again/off-again relation with Louis Riel but ultimately Riel organized arms against the Fenians.  Suppose that the two parties had managed to find common ground against the fledgling liberal democracy that Canada was?

1864-1875 was a fairly fraught period for Canada.  Not all of the interested parties were states.

History has a way of repeating itself with new casts of characters.

 

[MarkOttawa]

ArtyNewbie: The flag planting was not a legal claim, it was a demonstration. 
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2007/08/DA431318-92ED-493C-8797-9C2C38CD6344.html

They [Russians] had a go at this already in 2001, where they put a claim in to the commission that examines these claims, and they weren't able to supply enough information to support the claim. So it looks like right now they are trying to get more data to support a resubmission.

Once again from The Economist (the "claims" mentioned are not yet formal legal ones under the Law of the Sea Convention):

All the parties with a claim to a slice of the Arctic are intensely conscious of the terms of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which is supposed to regulate almost all human uses of the high seas, from fishing to mining. Under the convention, governments can lay claim to an economic zone up to 200 nautical miles (370km) from their coast—or further, if they can prove that the area in question is an extension of their own continental shelf. Precisely such a claim is made by Russia with respect to the Lomonosov Ridge, which stretches from the Russian coast to Greenland. And this week's Scandinavian expedition may lend support to a claim by Denmark that the ridge is connected to Greenland, which is under Danish sovereignty. “There are things suggesting that Denmark could be given the North Pole,” as the country's science minister, Helge Sander, eagerly puts it. The Canadians, for their part, say the ridge could be an extension of their own Ellesmere Island.

Such a cacophony of arguments could keep lawyers and geographers busy for decades. So why the hurry? Because any country that wants to make a claim under the Law of the Sea must do so within a decade of ratifying it. Russia's deadline is 2009 [emphasis added]. Canada must set out its case by 2013, and Denmark by 2014.

At this point Canada does not say that any of the seabed is formally our "territory"--whereas all the land surface areas in the Arctic  that we say are part of Canada (Hans aside) are internationally recognized as such.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Disenchantedsailor]

Symbologicaly planting or erecting a flag for the "motherland" signifying occupation of that patch of grass or seabed or whatever it may be. I agree it is a demonstration, a demonstration that had better say wake up Canada time to start paying attention to the north.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

I was no aware that Russian sub was even an SSN or SSK I was under the impression it was a research sub so why would it have been armed in the first place...?

 

[aesop081]

I was no aware that Russian sub was even an SSN or SSK

It wasnt.....

 

[Disenchantedsailor]

MY bad I was reading 2 articles at the same time ignore the armed sub

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

MY bad I was reading 2 articles at the same time ignore the armed sub

Attention to detail will kill you every time.....

 

[Disenchantedsailor]

indeed thanks for pointing it out

 

[3rd Herd]

I stand corrected

There were also some Japanese shootings (from a submarine I might add) on the west coast during WWII
http://www.pinetreeline.org/rds/detail/rds99-34.html

Sometimes a site search is better than an internet search:

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/60381/post-562273.html#msg562273

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/62924.0.html

 

[Greymatters]

Since we're on the subject... another Canada-US conflict of the past...

The San Juan island 'Pig War' of 1859
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig_War

 

[3rd Herd]

Since we're on the subject... another Canada-US conflict of the past...

The San Juan island 'Pig War' of 1859
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig_War

Covered in the question of the hour.
I hate wiki!!!!!!!!!

 

[Greymatters]

Covered in the question of the hour.  I hate wiki!!!!!!!!! 

Unfortunately, the way Google is designed keeps it at the top of the search results... but agree it is not the best source to quote...

 

[Navy_Blue]

Well I looked last week and sure enough we have a project web site for the Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship.  I Glanced through the draft SOR and was surprised to see we are going to make it a noncombatant.  It would seem so much more useful to make a patrol boat with some teeth.  A 20mm - 40mm for warning/disabling shots is a pathetic gesture.  Along with that 14 - 20 knots.  I know moving through Ice is a slow time evolution but what about fisheries? 

I was also very surprise to see how quickly we have gone from the government announcement of the program to its present state. 

Anyways just thought you may be interested.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/admmat/dgmpd/aops/index_e.asp

NB

 

[YZT580]

I am not navy, but I can read and it would appear that you will be receiving an vessel capable of some command and control functions plus the capacity to at least scare the pants off someone who is trespassing.
Project M1216 will deliver to the Canadian Forces, six to eight fully supported Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships capable of:

conducting armed sea-borne surveillance of Canada's waters, including the Arctic;
providing government situational awareness of activities and events in these regions; and
cooperating with other elements of the Canadian Forces and other federal government departments to assert and enforce Canadian sovereignty, when and where necessary.
Just thought you'd like to know.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Well I looked last week and sure enough we have a project web site for the Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship.  I Glanced through the draft SOR and was surprised to see we are going to make it a noncombatant.  It would seem so much more useful to make a patrol boat with some teeth.  A 20mm - 40mm for warning/disabling shots is a pathetic gesture.  Along with that 14 - 20 knots.  I know moving through Ice is a slow time evolution but what about fisheries? 

I was also very surprise to see how quickly we have gone from the government announcement of the program to its present state. 

Anyways just thought you may be interested.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/admmat/dgmpd/aops/index_e.asp

NB

See sub-para i here; it says, in the list of Proposed Ship Capabilities: "gun armament".

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Well considering a good percentage of  OPVs generally have 20-40mm guns I am not sure why its considered a pathetic gesture. Had we gun with 57mm or 76mm we would have to place a fire control radar onboard. I guess this means no NESOPs will be posted north.

 

[Sub_Guy]

According to Annex A of the Statement of operational requirement there will be 1 NESOP sailing on her.

I did notice that they will be capable of carrying a smaller helo (limited support for the Cyclone), so I guess we are either going to lease or buy smaller helicopters for this thing.

If we can manage to get 8 of these I will be impressed.