[Canadian_Mind]

first icebreakers, now this. both will fall through the roof.

[bootlegga]

ridenrain ridenrain:

Ok.. My name is Ride and I'm an Ekranoplan supporter.
Years ago I was seduced by the Caspian sea monster and since then, have dreamed of carrying hundreds of tons, quickly and efficiently, over water. I've even dreamed that this could be used to replace BC ferries.

Don't laugh too hard, the Soviets actually planned on building these things and using them as a strike force for their marine forces!

[ridenrain]

I know. They are a good idea and I'd like to see them developed for the BC ferries. I'd bet they'd be more efficient than something like the english channel hovercraft fleet.
These need a lot of power to get them up to speed but once there, they can cruise quite efficiently.

[Scape]

ridenrain ridenrain:

Ok.. My name is Ride and I'm an Ekranoplan supporter.

What? Your name is Rain and your a Episcopalian that supports the first female bishop to lead the church?

[-Mario-]

Scape Scape:

ridenrain ridenrain:

Ok.. My name is Ride and I'm an Ekranoplan supporter.

What? Your name is Rain and your a Episcopalian that supports the first female bishop to lead the church?

Off topic medal wannabe !!!

[Scape]

<-- run's to the front of the thread and claims it in the name of Allah!!

[-Mario-]

Have your heard of the guy that went in the lion's cage -> in the name of allah!

[Scape]

Dirka dirka dirka, Mohammad Jihad!!

[-Mario-]

$1:

dirka dirka interj. a mimicry of spoken Arabic; also attributive, connoting things Muslim, Arabic, or Middle Eastern, or those related to terrorists or terrorism. Arabic, English, Derogatory

is really working hard for that off topic medal...

back on topic, Canada could use a flat top.

http://www.tarawa.navy.mil/default.html

[BartSimpson]

A Canadian carrier with modest capability to extend Canadian airpower out into the Atlantic and Pacific makes a lot of sense. And let's start the discussion by noting the obvious that Canada needs TWO carriers - one for each pond.

You don't need a fleet carrier, but just something that can carry, launch, and recover helicopters and Harrier-type VTOL fighters. And defend itself to some degree or another.

I'd not say the idea is for Canada to be able to send a strike force anywhere but to be able to extend air cover over her own ships within her own sphere of influence.

Right now Canada's strategy for defense against a naval strike force obviously includes the Canadian Navy taking orders from the USA.

So with the whole Northwest Passage thing going on I beg to ask the question, as an American, what do you people do when faced with the US Navy transiting your claimed waters in force and you don't have bupkis to stand in their way?

[-Mario-]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

A Canadian carrier with modest capability to extend Canadian airpower out into the Atlantic and Pacific makes a lot of sense. And let's start the discussion by noting the obvious that Canada needs TWO carriers - one for each pond.

Actually, three, the way Canada does things -> is one for each coast, and one spare for when they do refits.

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

You don't need a fleet carrier, but just something that can carry, launch, and recover helicopters and Harrier-type VTOL fighters. And defend itself to some degree or another.

Canada has spent a lot of money to be part of the F-35 JTF program. Once we start replacing the F-18s, it would be easy to add a few VTOL versions of that bird.

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Right now Canada's strategy for defense against a naval strike force obviously includes the Canadian Navy taking orders from the USA.

To some degree, mostly during joint exercices.

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

So with the whole Northwest Passage thing going on I beg to ask the question, as an American, what do you people do when faced with the US Navy transiting your claimed waters in force and you don't have bupkis to stand in their way?

Quite frankly, it pisses us off, in the 90ies when one of your icebreakers went up north and did its thing, Canada could only sent Auroras to monitor and observe. Mulroney promised a Polar 12 after that incident. I'm still waiting.

[Wada]

Floating the idea is relatively easy. Just don' buy Brit as we don' need another sub.

[-Mario-]

Wada Wada:

Floating the idea is relatively easy. Just don' buy Brit as we don' need another sub.

More like not to ask the brits to put it on hold for a decade.

[Wada]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

A Canadian carrier with modest capability to extend Canadian airpower out into the Atlantic and Pacific makes a lot of sense. And let's start the discussion by noting the obvious that Canada needs TWO carriers - one for each pond.

You don't need a fleet carrier, but just something that can carry, launch, and recover helicopters and Harrier-type VTOL fighters. And defend itself to some degree or another.

I'd not say the idea is for Canada to be able to send a strike force anywhere but to be able to extend air cover over her own ships within her own sphere of influence.

Right now Canada's strategy for defense against a naval strike force obviously includes the Canadian Navy taking orders from the USA.

So with the whole Northwest Passage thing going on I beg to ask the question, as an American, what do you people do when faced with the US Navy transiting your claimed waters in force and you don't have bupkis to stand in their way?

Wave!...........with all 5 fingers. Then again "if" our southern neighbors we're good neighbors they might ask politely and respect whatever answer we give them.

[BartSimpson]

-Mario- -Mario-:

Quite frankly, it pisses us off, in the 90ies when one of your icebreakers went up north and did its thing, Canada could only sent Auroras to monitor and observe. Mulroney promised a Polar 12 after that incident. I'm still waiting.

I guess I understand both sides of the NW Passage issue - Canada claims it because it transits a lot of her unprotected northern reaches and the rest of the world says it is legally international waters under the Treaty of the Seas to which Canada is a signatory.

Both are right to one extent or another.

The thing is that several nations have the naval force to transit the passage without Canadian consent and Canada has nothing to stop them.

Nothing.

My point of view is that if someone gets used to the idea of crossing Canada without Canadian permission then eventually someone will want to TAKE Canadian territory without Canadian permission.

We need only have a change of political masters down here and it'll be the USA sniffing around.

Otherwise the obvious players will be Europe or China.

Hmmm.

Wouldn't it be interesting to see the Union Jack flying over Ottawa again?