# Arctic countries draft deal on search and rescue operations



## 57Chevy (5 Jan 2011)

Arctic countries draft deal on search and rescue operations

OTTAWA - Eight Arctic countries are poised to sign a multilateral treaty to co-ordinate search and rescue operations in the region, a Canadian official said Wednesday.

The draft agreement will also divide the Arctic into specific search and rescue areas, with each nation legally responsible for its own territory, according to Icelandic officials.

The deal was drawn up by foreign ministers from Canada, the United States, Russia, Denmark, Greenland, Finland, Sweden and Norway — the eight members of the Arctic Council.
article continues......read more here.

                             (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)


----------



## gun runner (5 Jan 2011)

Hundreds of millions,perhaps billions of dollars in preparation! Yeah right! With an election looming..not going to happen. The goverments of the past have never spent much time, money or attention to arctic sovereignty, and now it has come back to bite us in the a$$. This will be an interesting topic to watch.Ubique.


----------



## Journeyman (5 Jan 2011)

57Chevy said:
			
		

> The deal was drawn up by foreign ministers from Canada, the United States, Russia, Denmark, Greenland, Finland, Sweden and Norway — the eight members of the Arctic Council.


I'm baffled on several counts.

1)  What happened to Iceland? The Arctic Council, as established by the "Ottawa Declaration," consists of : Canada, the US, Iceland, Denmark (including Greenland and the Faroe Islands), Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Russia.

2)  When did Greenland get a foreign minister? Denmark granted Greenland home rule in 1979, while retaining responsibility for foreign affairs, security and financial policy. 


In fact, this is so puzzling I think I'll find a tavern that serves cold beer and has the Canada/Russia hockey game on -- now _there's_ an important Arctic country issue!   :nod:


----------



## ballz (5 Jan 2011)

> "The signal to the rest of the world is not one of confrontation or challenge, but rather of reassurance that if you are on a airliner flying from Beijing to New York and you are forced to crash land somewhere in the Arctic, there is a pre-agreed mechanism for the different countries to respond, to pool their aircraft and their ships to co-ordinate to save lives," Byers explained.



If I'm flying from Beijing to NY I want some assurance I won't be flying in the Arctic at all!  :rofl:




> Byers warned that Canada in particular would need to drastically upgrade its capabilities to become rescue-ready in its own Arctic territory.
> 
> 
> "Canada is the worst-equipped of any of the Arctic countries with respect to search and rescue, when you take into account that 40 per cent of Canada is Arctic and Canada is the second largest country on earth." Byers pointed out.
> ...



I wonder what the plan is on this issue....


----------



## SupersonicMax (5 Jan 2011)

ballz said:
			
		

> If I'm flying from Beijing to NY I want some assurance I won't be flying in the Arctic at all!  :rofl:



It is the most direct route.  Why not?


----------



## aesop081 (5 Jan 2011)

The most direct route, the great circle route, between JFK airport in new York and Bejing is directly over the Canadian Arctic.


----------



## Journeyman (6 Jan 2011)

> We rely on aircraft based in southern Ontario and in Nova Scotia and on Vancouver Island


Arctic SAR was primarily an Edmonton responsibility -- shame 1CMBG cratered the runway when 435 Sqn left.


----------



## ballz (6 Jan 2011)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> It is the most direct route.  Why not?



I know the map I'm looking at is flat as opposed to spherical, but it doesn't even look close to being shorter... looks twice as long to go north instead of east.


----------



## Edward Campbell (6 Jan 2011)

ballz said:
			
		

> I know the map I'm looking at is flat as opposed to spherical, but it doesn't even look close to being shorter... looks twice as long to go north instead of east.




See, e.g. here and







It may seem counterintuitive but the "great circle" routes are shorter, faster, cheaper, etc.


----------



## Navalsnpr (6 Jan 2011)

This has been priority of the Government of Canada over the past number of years. The Government has looked into building a sea port in Iqaluit as well as build the AOPS platform for the Navy so that the region can be patrolled.  Being that the Canadian Arctic region is being called the new Panama Canal, Canada would be responsible for patrolling and responding to SAR missions within seaways that we claim as being Canadian sovereign areas.


----------



## aesop081 (8 Jan 2011)

ballz said:
			
		

> I know the map I'm looking at is flat as opposed to spherical, but it doesn't even look close to being shorter... looks twice as long to go north instead of east.



Great cirlce routes are shorter. Always are. You would think that 2 aviators would know what they are talking about.


----------



## MarkOttawa (8 Jan 2011)

> Byers estimated that Canada would need to spend "hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions in new investments" to prepare for the task.



The pernicious prof. simply wants the government/CF to spend as much money as possible on anything not related to combat.  Lots more on him here:
http://unambig.com/tag/michael-byers/

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## SupersonicMax (8 Jan 2011)

ballz,

Do you know what a Great Circle Route is? This is one of the first thing taught during flight training.  You'd think that companies that definately look at the bottom line would have the shortest route figured out after oh 60 years.

Do you know anything related to aviation?


----------



## ballz (8 Jan 2011)

Holy crap people take 'er easy, I was just commenting on the way it looks. I realize there's a difference between a flat map and a globe, I just commented on how it didn't even look close. I received an explanation (that I don't understand, but will take for truth.

No I don't know what a great circle route is. No I don't know anything related to aviation. Yes the airlines probably have it figured out. Yes you are all pilots and that's why I'm not arguing despite not understanding.


----------



## Bass ackwards (8 Jan 2011)

Here in Thompson MB, pretty well all of the contrails I see are heading (more or less) north/south.


----------



## I_Drive_Planes (8 Jan 2011)

ballz said:
			
		

> I know the map I'm looking at is flat as opposed to spherical, but it doesn't even look close to being shorter... looks twice as long to go north instead of east.



The reason why it looks so much longer on your map is because your map is likely a Mercator projection (the vast majority of wall maps and other rectangular maps use Mercator projections of one variety or another).  This sort of map projection works well for the majority of the world, but it badly distorts areas far from the equator (makes them look much larger than they are, it's why Greenland looks enormous when it's actually just pretty big  ).


----------



## 57Chevy (9 Jan 2011)

I_Drive_Planes said:
			
		

> The reason why it looks so much longer on your map is because your map is likely a Mercator projection (the vast majority of wall maps and other rectangular maps use Mercator projections of one variety or another).  This sort of map projection works well for the majority of the world, but it badly distorts areas far from the equator (makes them look much larger than they are, it's why Greenland looks enormous when it's actually just pretty big  ).



Interesting
Photo 1:
The Mercator projection is a cylindrical projection.
Mercator projection

Photo2:
Mercator World Map


----------



## Journeyman (9 Jan 2011)

I wonder if the negotiations on this Arctic SAR agreement got equally derailed by "Maps & Charts 101"?   ;D


----------



## I_Drive_Planes (9 Jan 2011)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I wonder if the negotiations on this Arctic SAR agreement got equally derailed by "Maps & Charts 101"?   ;D



Accurate charts and a good understanding thereof are essential to any SAR operation!


So, back on topic.



> Canada is the worst-equipped of any of the Arctic countries with respect to search and rescue, when you take into account that 40 per cent of Canada is Arctic and Canada is the second largest country on earth." Byers pointed out.



I'd really like to see a reference for this one, a comparison of the SAR capabilities of the various Arctic countries.  



> "We rely on aircraft based in southern Ontario and in Nova Scotia and on Vancouver Island to provide search and rescue in places that are many thousands of kilometers away. And that's simply not acceptable from a moral point of view and will not be acceptable from a legal point of view once this treaty if ratified."



This is not entirely accurate, 440 Squadron in Yellowknife provides a secondary SAR capability in the North.  Given the expanse of Canada's Arctic, even if the DND were to provide a permanent primary SAR presence in the North, it would still be "thousands of kilometers away" from many areas in the North.  Given the considerable logistical challenges of locating a SAR squadron in the North, and the fact that most SAR calls occur in the South (and the West specifically) I don't think that having a permanent SAR presence in the North is a reasonable goal.


----------



## George Wallace (9 Jan 2011)

I_Drive_Planes said:
			
		

> This is not entirely accurate, 440 Squadron in Yellowknife provides a secondary SAR capability in the North.



As I believe 444 Sqn is as well in Goose Bay.  It was from "Triple Four" that saw one of the first Griffons crash in the Arctic on a SAR mission.


----------



## aesop081 (10 Jan 2011)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> As I believe 444 Sqn is as well in Goose Bay.  It was from "Triple Four" that saw one of the first Griffons crash in the Arctic on a SAR mission.



444 sqn is a combat support sqn, tasked with providing local SAR in support of 5 Wing flying operations. It is only tasked with maintaining a 12-hour standby posture for national SAR.


----------

