# HMCS Chicoutimi at sea off Korea, CBC story



## jollyjacktar (6 Feb 2018)

A rare glimpse into what goes on during an operational deployment of one of our submarines, now apparently "over there".  Good story and photos from an embed to be found at link.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hmcs-chicoutimi-submarine-canada-pacific-north-korea-1.4511238


----------



## Patski (6 Feb 2018)

Very good article!  I think medias should talk more of the roles our navy provide in the world to regular Canadian citizen (like me) so they can understand why Canada need to modernize the fleet... I remember reading about HMCS St-John arriving to Dominica after Hurricane Maria last september to help... to me, it's something we can all be proud of!  But for that, we need to modernize!


----------



## jollyjacktar (6 Feb 2018)

This is good news and I agree it is good to give the Canadian public some idea of what we do at sea, especially in light of this boat being involved.  

I vividly remember when she had her disaster at sea.  My ship was in refit at this time and we had our shore office/workshop across the harbour on the top floor of the tallest building at Naval Annex Dartmouth.  We watched as CHI was brought into the harbour, welded to the deck of the semi-submersible ship that brought her home.  Nobody expected at the time for her to get well again and actually be out there doing the deed as it were.

To have a reported embedded like this is a first for me, IIRC and actually very surprising to see, in light of how close to the chest the sub community and command keep what they do out of view for those who do not need to know.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (6 Feb 2018)

Great article, good on the RCN and CBC for doing this.


----------



## expwor (7 Feb 2018)

From CBC News
http://www.cbc.ca/news/thenational/inside-a-top-secret-canadian-submarine-1.4524110

Tom


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Feb 2018)

Doesn't releasing video showing members last names and ranks pose a security risk?


----------



## QV (7 Feb 2018)

Then maybe the Outlook address book on DWAN should be better protected.


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Feb 2018)

QV said:
			
		

> Then maybe the Outlook address book on DWAN should be better protected.



Would the Outlook address book for navy persons indicate they're on specific ships or on specific deployments? I know in the army people on tour often get tour accounts.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (7 Feb 2018)

I'll just point out here: anybody seeing anyone from the Navy expressing worries about this?

You don't. Heck! If you are worried about that, you'd have to blank every sailor's name tag/tape in every single picture or video out there, and especially the videos of the families awaiting their return on the jetty  :nod:. I don't think the Navy is that worried.

I can see "opsec" for the Army, and even the Air Force about pics/vids taken while they are deployed in actual fight or operation carried out against an "irregular" enemy or an enemy with  known tendencies to reach out to affect families (like the Russians).

In the Navy we are unlikely to be targeted that way (in fact, I've always wondered if anyone's family has ever been targeted for sure. After all, our more senior leaders are well known and if you are going to reach into Canada, why not go for big fish or, for that matter, after civilian population at large - that's much scarier.)  because the only people we face are usually other seaman.


----------



## Underway (8 Feb 2018)

The blocking out of faces and names is a overreach for security IMHO.  No one in the world seems to do that but us.  First Wifi on ship, now the end to the dumbness of being ashamed for doing our jobs.


----------



## MTShaw (8 Feb 2018)

Underway said:
			
		

> The blocking out of faces and names is a overreach for security IMHO.  No one in the world seems to do that but us.  First Wifi on ship, now the end to the dumbness of being ashamed for doing our jobs.



It's called the silent service for a reason. There is reason to keep our naval's spies from being compromised. It has absolutely nothing to do with shame.


----------



## dapaterson (8 Feb 2018)

I figured that, given the somewhat ripe condition of said sailors after some time beneath the waves, their identities are hidden to help them in their future attempts at dating.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (8 Feb 2018)

MTShaw said:
			
		

> It's called the silent service for a reason. There is reason to keep our naval's spies from being compromised. It has absolutely nothing to do with shame.



They are not spies, Never have been and never will be. 

Let's not confuse the fact that what submarines actually do during any specific deployment and where exactly is kept secret for opec reasons and how they do it is also kept secret for the maintenance of tactical advantages, with a general description of what they can do, which is pretty well public knowledge and who is or not a submariner, something submariners have never been shy to admit, even flaunt, publicly.

But no, they are not naval spies, they are seaman of the country's Navy, just like all the other seaman of the Navy wherever they may serve, and serve onboard submarines because they are seaman and the submarines are naval vessels (in the larger definition of the word). The work they do is naval in nature.


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> ...they are seaman of the country's Navy, just like all the other seaman of the Navy wherever they may serve, and serve onboard submarines because they are seaman and the submarines are naval vessels...



Umm, we like to say seapersons...

 ;D


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 Feb 2018)

Plural, wouldn't that be seapeople?  Wait till Aquaman, l mean Aquaperson hears about this.


----------



## MTShaw (8 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> They are not spies, Never have been and never will be.
> 
> Let's not confuse the fact that what submarines actually do during any specific deployment and where exactly is kept secret for opec reasons and how they do it is also kept secret for the maintenance of tactical advantages, with a general description of what they can do, which is pretty well public knowledge and who is or not a submariner, something submariners have never been shy to admit, even flaunt, publicly.
> 
> But no, they are not naval spies, they are seaman of the country's Navy, just like all the other seaman of the Navy wherever they may serve, and serve onboard submarines because they are seaman and the submarines are naval vessels (in the larger definition of the word). The work they do is naval in nature.



It's my understanding that among the tasks of a Canadian SSK is Sigint. Sigint is intelligence: as in Signal Intelligence. If I were order naval personnel to do Sigint, I would not have a frigate perform that task.


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Plural, wouldn't that be seapeople?  Wait till Aquaman, l mean Aquaperson hears about this.



Like: fish (sing. one type) / fish (pl. one type) / fishes (mult. types), I understood person, persons, people to be the same (sing., pl., multi-group)?

#callGrammarManPerson


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 Feb 2018)

:stars:


----------



## Cloud Cover (8 Feb 2018)

MTShaw said:
			
		

> It's my understanding that among the tasks of a Canadian SSK is Sigint. Sigint is intelligence: as in Signal Intelligence. If I were order naval personnel to do Sigint, I would not have a frigate perform that task.



All Canadian frigates have ELINT capability, thats public record. A submarine has the stealth that a frigate does not. Not going to say more than that.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (8 Feb 2018)

MTShaw said:
			
		

> It's my understanding that among the tasks of a Canadian SSK is Sigint. Sigint is intelligence: as in Signal Intelligence. If I were order naval personnel to do Sigint, I would not have a frigate perform that task.



I know what Sigint and Elint are, and as alluded to above, all naval vessels are capable of such. And as you yourself note, they are tools of military intelligence, not spying - two very different things, with very different consequences for the person involved if captured. 

BTW, I think I may have sailed on submarines before you were born.

Enough said.

And, my apologies to all the people I may have offended by using seaman. It got me thinking, however: when are the NDA and QR&O's going to be corrected and updated? I mean, we obviously now have Ordinary Seaperson, Able Seaperson, Leading Seaperson and Master Seaperson. The ranks table has to be modified.  ;D


----------



## Cloud Cover (8 Feb 2018)

how about the word "being", like human being. Although there will be a squabble over whoever gets to become the "supreme being".


----------



## MTShaw (8 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> BTW, I think I may have sailed on submarines before you were born.
> 
> Enough said.
> 
> And, my apologies to all the people I may have offended by using seaman. It got me thinking, however: when are the NDA and QR&O's going to be corrected and updated? I mean, we obviously now have Ordinary Seaperson, Able Seaperson, Leading Seaperson and Master Seaperson. The ranks table has to be modified.  ;D



Off by one year OGBD.  ;D
Thanks for addressing my statement. Asking these type of questions/statements is one way for me to learn about the military in general, and the navy in particular.

Plus I love warships 2000-ish and up and our frigates of course.


----------



## Underway (8 Feb 2018)

Seakind is the correct term.  Rhymes with be kind.  *out virtue signals everyone*


----------



## kratz (8 Feb 2018)

Life in the RCN is not a video game.    :facepalm:


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 Feb 2018)

If it is, l want a better looking avatar.  The one l have now, sucks.


----------



## winnipegoo7 (8 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> All Canadian frigates have ELINT capability, thats public record. A submarine has the stealth that a frigate does not. Not going to say more than that.



Sub:
http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/business-defence-acquisition-guide-2015/naval-systems-904.page


Frigate: 
http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/business-defence-acquisition-guide-2015/naval-systems-905.page

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/business-defence-acquisition-guide-2015/naval-systems-906.page


----------



## dimsum (9 Feb 2018)

MTShaw said:
			
		

> It's called the silent service for a reason. There is reason to keep our naval's spies from being compromised. It has absolutely nothing to do with shame.



Hell, submariners wear "dolphins" on their uniforms.  If you know what they look like (and they're on a pretty conspicuous part of the uniform) then it's like a neon sign saying "I'm a submariner".  Not really something that "spies" would do.


----------



## Sub_Guy (9 Feb 2018)

MTShaw said:
			
		

> It's my understanding that among the tasks of a Canadian SSK is Sigint. Sigint is intelligence: as in Signal Intelligence. If I were order naval personnel to do Sigint, I would not have a frigate perform that task.



SIGINT?   I doubt it.   They don’t even have a NESOP onboard.  At least they didn’t when I was on boats.   Your average radar detector in your car is probably more complicated than the ESM suite on the Victoria class.. 

As for the silent service bit, I had always assumed that it was because we snuck around under the waves undetected, you know, silently...


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (9 Feb 2018)

Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> SIGINT?   I doubt it.   They don’t even have a NESOP onboard.  At least they didn’t when I was on boats.   Your average radar detector in your car is probably more complicated than the ESM suite on the Victoria class..
> 
> As for the silent service bit, I had always assumed that it was because we snuck around under the waves undetected, you know, silently...



Thw Navy's very own SCREEN and GUARD force  ;D

Armoured Recce screens the battlespace, submarines screen the battlespace; therefore armoured recce = submarines!

Premise, Premise, Conclusion!  

As a result, all TAPVs will henceforth be referred to as Land Boats!


----------



## dapaterson (9 Feb 2018)

TAPV.  VASA.  Compare.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (9 Feb 2018)

Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> SIGINT?   I doubt it.   They don’t even have a NESOP onboard.



First of all DH, Sigint is usually done by communications people, not sensor op. Second, there are all sorts of levels and involvement with Sigint. Nobody is suggesting that either  a ship or a submarine can actually collect, compile, code break, analyze and develop the intelligence information all by themselves.

But there are all sorts of things that anyone can do to contribute to Sigint, and some more than others for various reasons.

Heck! In the early 80's, on the Gate vessels of all ships, we had this beautiful (all lamps - no transistors - and hand tuned) Marconi multi-freq general purpose receiver. Whenever we were near those Soviet fishing vessels and fishing processing ships, we always tried to tune in to their comms and when we did manage, we simply recorded on small tape recorders with particulars of day, time and location to turn in to Marcom HQ upon return. That's Sigint at its simplest level.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (9 Feb 2018)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> therefore armoured recce = submarines!



Sure! That will be so only when the TAPV's can take out an enemy tank regiment by itself and live to see the end of the day.

A submarine can take out the enemy's carrier, possibly a couple of the escorts and still have a better than even chance of escaping from its escort's attempt at revenge.  ;D


----------



## jollyjacktar (9 Feb 2018)

The TAPV does have a " boat shaped hull", maybe they can have an associate membership?


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (9 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Sure! That will be so only when the TAPV's can take out an enemy tank regiment by itself and live to see the end of the day.
> 
> A submarine can take out the enemy's carrier, possibly a couple of the escorts and still have a better than even chance of escaping from its escort's attempt at revenge.  ;D



Why use military logic when you can use Trump logic?

"We are going to build a wall with Mexico! China's got a wall, they don't have a Mexican Problem!"

See! Premise, Premise, Conclusion!



			
				jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> The TAPV does have a " boat shaped hull", maybe they can have an associate membership?



Honorary Captain Status!  Splendid!


----------



## Underway (9 Feb 2018)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Why use military logic when you can use Trump logic?
> 
> "We are going to build a wall with Mexico! China's got a wall, they don't have a Mexican Problem!"
> 
> ...



Captain(N) or just second black hatter Captain.


----------



## Sub_Guy (10 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> First of all DH, Sigint is usually done by communications people, not sensor op. Second, there are all sorts of levels and involvement with Sigint. Nobody is suggesting that either  a ship or a submarine can actually collect, compile, code break, analyze and develop the intelligence information all by themselves.



I know who does SIGINT, I’m also aware that SIGINT can be performed using the simple pieces of kit.  You could use a Motorola PTT from Canadian Tire if you wanted to.

SIGINT/COMINT/ELINT are areas in which we are severely lacking in the CAF.  The point I was trying to make was that if we aren’t going to take the simple function of ESM seriously on the Vic, then I seriously doubt that there are Comms Research folks onboard or analyzing comms recordings from the Chi back home.


----------

