CASR

Canadian
American
Strategic
Review

-
Canadian
Defence Policy,
Foreign Policy,
& Canada-US
Relations

-

 

Back to Part 1

2006 Campaign
Defence Policies

CASR Home

Contact CASR

Defence Policy  –  Conservative Party  –  December 2005

Stephen Harper announces the new defence policy
put forward by the Conservative Party of Canada – Pt 7


Dianne DeMille & Stephen Priestley  –  this article has been expanded from
'briefing  notes'  prepared  by  CASR  for  the  CBC  on  22  December  2005

Rapid Emergency Response  or  Making 44°N to 82°N Seem Like a Quick Trip

Other than training staff and about 500 more Canadian Rangers, the Conservative Party plan envisions needed Land Force deployments North being accomplished by their planned “airborne battalion and airlift capacity stationed at CFB Trenton [for] a rapid emergency response capability throughout the entire Arctic region.”

The merit of the Conservatives’ scheme to recreate Airborne will be debated elsewhere. It is simpler to ask: are paratroops an efficient way of maintaining a presence in the Arctic? The Tories see Airborne as a  “rapid emergency response”  force. It would have to be. Consider the distances involved. As an example,  the air distance from CFB Trenton to CFS Alert, on the northern tip of Ellesmere Island, is approximately 4200km (roughly the same flying distance as from Vancouver to Gander in Newfoundland).

Airborne are meant to be tough but who could be ready to parachute into combat (or any emergency) after a flight of 4000km or more? Of course, in the nearly thirty years that the Canadian Airborne Regiment was in existence, it never deployed by parachute.  So why have the Conservatives singled out paratroopers for an Arctic role? It might have more to do with promises made at Trenton than with the Arctic.

In his 13 Dec 2005 announcement at Trenton, Mr. Harper promised airlifters of all sizes:  the smaller fixed-wing SAR, tactical replacements for the Hercules , and a new strategic airlifter. The latter, invariably, refers to Boeing’s C-17. The Tory preferences for all  three categories –  which are shared by most Air Force planners  – reflect an upward size creep. [9]

Bigger isn’t always better. The nimble, lightweight Twin Otters would be replaced by new FWSAR aircraft almost as big as a Hercules. The Hercs themselves would be replaced by the Airbus A400M  (or, at least, stretched C-130J model Hercules ). Biggest of all would be strategic C-17s – 53m long and weighing up to 265 tonnes.

Carrying a payload of over 70t , the C-17 can land in an extremely impressive 853m ( thanks to its ‘blown’ flaps and reverse thrust ).  However,  with that same payload, the C-17 will need over 2300m of runway to take off again. In other words, a C-17 flying troops to the Arctic might be able to land at small northern air- strips. Less certain is whether the fuel-ladened C-17 will be able to take off again. And this is where a revived Airborne force comes in.

In the event that overly large airlifters cannot get in and out of short airstrips, it’s handy if the passengers can find their own way to the ground.  Seems like a good compromise ... but only if all of your plans centre around Trenton in the far south. Build more small military airfields further north and the strategic airlifter option for the Arctic suddenly looks less attractive.  There are two possible solutions to the staggering distances of the Arctic.  Long and fast (the strategic airlifter approach) or shorter but plentiful (build airbases in the North for smaller aircraft). Beefing up the Canadian Rangers north of 60 may be less dramatic than mass parachute drops or strategic airlift, but  the commuting distance will  be so much  more  manageable.
[9] The Tory favorites appear to be the C-27J Spartan for FWSAR  (and northern utility), the A400M as Hercules replacement  (or, at least, complaints were voiced about the “rush” to buy ’J model Hercs), and the Boeing C-17 as strategic airlifter.

[Update: in the spate of defence spending promises made at the end of June 2006, no mention was made of either FWSAR or the Arctic Utility/CC-138 replacement.]
Dianne  DeMille  is  the  editor  of  the  Canadian  American  Strategic  Review.
Stephen Priestley is the creator of  DND 101 - A Visual Guide to CF Equipment .


<   Part 6  —  Permanent Presence:  Canadian Rangers in the Arctic