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.