Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watcgl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watcgl!jchapman
From: jchapman@watcgl.UUCP (john chapman)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: A naval presence in the arctic
Message-ID: <2517@watcgl.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 17-Sep-85 10:04:37 EDT
Article-I.D.: watcgl.2517
Posted: Tue Sep 17 10:04:37 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 18-Sep-85 05:38:41 EDT
References: <1386@utcsri.UUCP> <5952@utzoo.UUCP> <820@water.UUCP> <793@lsuc.UUCP> <5960@utzoo.UUCP> <2182@mnetor.UUCP>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 38

.
.
.
> 
>     To locate nuclear subs uncer artic ice, there must be other ways.
> True visibility is impaired, acoustics is not much better due the
> continual grinding of the ice.  Magnetics is short range, only.
> But accoustics can be improved by use of signal processing techniques.
> We could drop mines that respond to the accoustical, (and other),
                ^^^^^
> properties of nuclear subs. Then all we do is warn people to keep out.
> The system is automatic & self policing.  If the sub goes through, it
> get blown up.  This is effective and *cheap*!
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,      Fred Williams,
> UUCP: {allegra, linus, ihnp4}!utzoo!mnetor!fred
> BELL: (416)-475-8980 ext. 318

I think that mines are an excellent idea.  Although it would be kind
of nice to have our own class8 icebreaker (and it would provide a lot
of jobs to canadians as well as increasing our knowhow) we could put
an awful lot of smart mines in the arctic for a lot less money.

This would also seem to be slightly less likely to produce an 
unfortunate conflict; we just deposit the mines and announce
that we have done so in accordance with our claims to sovereignity.
This seems a lot more feasible than chasing soviet/us subs or waiting
for the US to send another ship through that we then have to confront.


-- 

	John Chapman
	...!watmath!watcgl!jchapman

	Disclaimer : These are not the opinions of anyone but me
		     and they may not even be mine.