# Hillier hands out a unit commendation to HMCS Corner Brook



## Navy_Blue (24 May 2008)

Funny How when the Subs do there job and get recognized it barely makes a blip in the media.  

Yesterday after coming alongside in Halifax I had a rare but memorable opportunity to watch the CDS present the HMCS Corner Brook a unit commendation for the boats work this past year.  Most of the work will never completely be made public let alone understood by all but a chosen few who have servered in Boats.

Some interesting points:

-The Boat did over 220 days at sea/away in the last year
-The crew trained and qualified 30 new submariners (including myself)
-In the time Hillier has been the CDS he has only given out 4 of these commendations (2 now have been to Subs)

After his presentation and speech he took a moment and insisted he shake all of our hands.  I could only muster a firm shake and "Thank you Sir."  I had much more I wish I could have said and I was saddened that his time is drawing to a close in only a few months.  There are very few people at the top in the CF that I have truly felt proud to work for...he is at the top of that list.

 Thanks again Sir you will be missed


----------



## Rick Delaney 1 (24 May 2008)

This is the first that I heard of this and I live in Corner Brook.Well Done.


----------



## SeaDog (25 May 2008)

I'm embarrassed to say that it is one thing to be told that you did a good job, but when Gen. Hillier calls you a good Canadian it makes you blush. I was surprised that there was absolutely no civilian media there. Our fault, perhaps, for bad PR. Definitely a good moment, however, that I will cherish for a long time.


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (26 May 2008)

Dolphin 72A!

I take it there were no embarassing "wall-crunching" moments immediately beforehand?


----------



## SeaDog (26 May 2008)

None at all. Pretty smooth approach and alongside if I do say so myself!

 :skull:
Dolphin 38


----------



## Richie (27 May 2008)

Navy_Blue said:
			
		

> Funny How when the Subs do there job and get recognized it barely makes a blip in the media.



It was mentioned in passing in some media (<a href="http://www.cbc.ca/cp/Atlantic/080523/t052313A.html">CBC</a>).

I'm glad to hear that Corner Brook spent so much time at sea, hopefully Windsor and Victoria are doing the same. I also recall reading an article about HMCS Corner Brook surfacing very unexpectedly and very near to HMS Illustrious. Sounds like you guys had some fun!


----------



## X-mo-1979 (27 May 2008)

So what was the unit commendation for?Being away 220 days?


----------



## SeaDog (27 May 2008)

No, not really. It was more for the particular breadth of operations we were able to plan for and successfully carry out in that period.  An extensive European deployment, an Artic Sovereignty mission, several international and domestic exercises, plus an operational mission in the Carribean. To be able to accomplish that, despite heavy manpower and equipment issues as well. To paraphrase the CDS, as well, the fact that when he started his tenure the very nature of submarine service was in question - and that in very short time we were able to turn around the service and become one of the higher tempo units in the CF. No slight compliment - it's only the fourth such commendation he has given since he took command. I have an actual copy of the commendations wording at work. I'll try and dig it up.


----------



## cameron (10 Aug 2008)

Good job guys you deserve the commendation.  While I still have my doubts about the wisdom of purchasing the Victoria class subs i've never doubted Canada's submariners


----------



## geo (11 Aug 2008)

Cameron... if the Fed Gov't hadn't dragged their feet, we could have gotten the subs a lot sooner - obtaining the subs before or shortly after they were decommissioned from the RN.


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (11 Aug 2008)

When we got them wouldn't have made a significant difference now. Most of the delay has been on:


Spares
Canadianisation
Periodic recert


----------



## geo (11 Aug 2008)

... to a certain extent true BUT, machinery that isn't used for a time becomes "wonky" and prone to failure.  The wear and tear PLUS the initial teething problems encountered wouldn't have happened (much).  Chicoutimi might not have had the fire - regardless of where that electrical relay was located.... but again - lots of speculation.

The Upholder / Victorias is not a bad design - it would've been lots of bang for the buck if the transfer had been done earlier... IMHO as a landlubber & sapper


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (11 Aug 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> ... to a certain extent true BUT, machinery that isn't used for a time becomes "wonky" and prone to failure.



Definitely. However, those issues were dwarfed by other issues, and would have been fixed during the "Canadianisation". Anything left would have and has been fixed during recert.  



			
				geo said:
			
		

> The wear and tear PLUS the initial teething problems encountered wouldn't have happened (much).  Chicoutimi might not have had the fire - regardless of where that electrical relay was located.... but again - lots of speculation.



That fire would have happened anytime the control room had a few inches of water on the deck, which happens fairly often on submarines. That's not speculation, its the way that particular fire happened.



			
				geo said:
			
		

> The Upholder / Victorias is not a bad design - it would've been lots of bang for the buck if the transfer had been done earlier... IMHO as a landlubber & sapper



Maybe..maybe not. With the way we've set up that program, they're unlikely to ever be fully combat-capable, and that has nothing to do with the timing.


----------



## cameron (12 Aug 2008)

drunknsubmrnr makes a point that is a major concern to me too.  The Victoria class may never be fully combat capable, which is a shame because Canada's submariners are second to none and deserve much better.


----------



## geo (12 Aug 2008)

well, at least we have some boats that permit us to maintain some of the expertise till the next class of boats are purchased.


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (12 Aug 2008)

Sure, but we can only keep those boats running until 2020. For various technical reasons, that's an absolute limit. Canada First runs beyond that, and there's no provision for new submarines. It can always be rewritten to put submarines in, but without new money that means something would have to come out. Given the price tag involved, that would almost definitely be the TRUMP replacements or half the frigate replacements. I'd say the frigates and destroyers are more important to the country long-term than submarines.


----------



## Sub_Guy (12 Aug 2008)

drunknsubmrnr said:
			
		

> When we got them wouldn't have made a significant difference now. Most of the delay has been on:
> 
> 
> Spares
> ...



1. Wouldn't be more logical that the earlier the boats would have been acquired that the more likely a good source of spares could have been secured?

2. Periodic Recert has been around for quite some time and I doubt that it is playing any part in getting these boats up and running.

3. Canadianization, yeah that took a little longer than expected, but right now the main issue is spare parts.

My time in the submarine community was rather short 02-05, everything was behind schedule then, the Chicoutimi incident set things back even further.  At the time I thought the boats were a decent buy but now its been just over a decade since the announcement and the submarine community has lost (continues to lose more) many of its most valuable asset, personnel.  It is the loss of these qualified and experienced personnel that worry me the most, if I had to go to sea right now on the Victoria I would be a little nervous.

It was nice to see some good news about the Corner Brook, but I feel that the submarine community is slowly going to disappear from the Canadian Navy.  You can pump all the trainees out of CFNOS all you want, but if there is no platform for them to train on it is a complete waste of money.


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (12 Aug 2008)

Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> 1. Wouldn't be more logical that the earlier the boats would have been acquired that the more likely a good source of spares could have been secured?



No. There's no way around the fact that these are the only 4 boats of their class in the world, and have a lot of unique parts. Maybe getting them before they were retired from the RN would have helped, but once they were laid up the spares issue was going to happen no matter when they were reactivated.



			
				Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> 2. Periodic Recert has been around for quite some time and I doubt that it is playing any part in getting these boats up and running.



It's one of the major drivers behind the availability of the boats. Having to rip them apart and replace time-limited parts tends to eat up a lot of their lifespans. The O-boats were no different.



			
				Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> 3. Canadianization, yeah that took a little longer than expected, but right now the main issue is spare parts.



Concur.



			
				Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> My time in the submarine community was rather short 02-05, everything was behind schedule then, the Chicoutimi incident set things back even further.  At the time I thought the boats were a decent buy but now its been just over a decade since the announcement and the submarine community has lost (continues to lose more) many of its most valuable asset, personnel.  It is the loss of these qualified and experienced personnel that worry me the most, if I had to go to sea right now on the Victoria I would be a little nervous.



I wouldn't be nervous...isn't she still in recert until next year?



			
				Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> It was nice to see some good news about the Corner Brook, but I feel that the submarine community is slowly going to disappear from the Canadian Navy.  You can pump all the trainees out of CFNOS all you want, but if there is no platform for them to train on it is a complete waste of money.



I agree, but what's the point? The boats are eating up a LOT of the maintenance budget right now. Are the domestic ISR and clockwork mouse roles that important?


----------



## Sub_Guy (12 Aug 2008)

My main point is that the expertise is leaving the submarine community, whether it be by promotion out of subs or retirement.  You can survive on a skimmer with limited experience, but on a submarine one small mistake could send the entire crew to the floor.

The guys I sailed with on the Victoria are top notch fellas, most of them with over a decade of submarine service.  Now you are going to get a crew with limited submarine experience (compared to 10 years ago).  So the fact that the Victoria is sitting in drydock is meaningless, we had the Corner Brook go balls to the walls for one year, one year out of 10 is not anyway to produce and maintain our expertise.  So yes I would be nervous going to sea on the Victoria/Windsor/Corner Brook whenever they go to sea next, not because of the boats but the personnel (lacking sea time) who are on them.  We can muster together one solid crew, but throwing together two experienced crews is not going to happen.  

I am starting to feel (don't get me wrong I want submarines in our Navy) that we would be better off if we could redirect the funds that the submarines are eating up to the surface fleet.


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (12 Aug 2008)

I want submarines in our Navy too, but only if they're going to be effective. Submarining is too dangerous and too expensive for prestige purposes.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (12 Aug 2008)

So maybe instead of LPDs maybe we should refocus those efforts towards a viable and sustainable submarine capability.


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (12 Aug 2008)

Now thats an interesting thought...you could make the boats completely combat-capable for around the same price as an LPD capability. Maybe less, considering the air wing etc the LPD's would need.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (12 Aug 2008)

And while I think it would be nice to have an amphib capability I feel we need submarines even more.


----------



## cameron (13 Aug 2008)

And God I hope that purchase wouldn't be too far in the future.  BTW Geo I like how you always see the half full side of the glass


----------



## geo (13 Aug 2008)

Umm... is that supposed to be the top or bottom part of the glass ???

The top part is after all, full of air


----------



## cameron (14 Aug 2008)

Well actually what I really had in mind was a glass with the bottom half filled with Guinness ;D


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (14 Aug 2008)

There are Guinness tankers that go back and forth between Ireland and the UK. I always wanted to board one of them. Maybe swim to the bottom of a tank to "check it for contraband".


----------



## cameron (14 Aug 2008)

drunknsubmrnr said:
			
		

> There are Guinness tankers that go back and forth between Ireland and the UK. I always wanted to board one of them. Maybe swim to the bottom of a tank to "check it for contraband".



That sounds like a mission i'd definitely sign up for, hell they wouldn't even have to pay me. ;D


----------



## geo (17 Aug 2008)

drunknsubmrnr said:
			
		

> There are Guinness tankers that go back and forth between Ireland and the UK. I always wanted to board one of them. Maybe swim to the bottom of a tank to "check it for contraband".



stand in line with the rest of us Mate!

CHIMO!


----------

