Replacing the Subs

[deepblue202]

We need to get our order in fast to lock in the early builds.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Any chance of someone placing this article here? Would love to know what is being said

Former Australian PM Morrison says price of entry to AUKUS is higher than Canada’s current defence spending level

Ottawa has said that it wants to join what would be a second pillar of AUKUS, a security pact between Australia, Britain and the United States

www.theglobeandmail.com

Former Australian PM Morrison says price of entry to AUKUS is higher than Canada’s current defence spending level​

 

[Rainbow1910]

Any chance of someone placing this article here? Would love to know what is being said

Former Australian PM Morrison says price of entry to AUKUS is higher than Canada’s current defence spending level

Ottawa has said that it wants to join what would be a second pillar of AUKUS, a security pact between Australia, Britain and the United States

www.theglobeandmail.com

Former Australian PM Morrison says price of entry to AUKUS is higher than Canada’s current defence spending level​

Former Australian prime minister Scott Morrison said he thinks Canada’s defence spending is not currently high enough to qualify for a role in AUKUS, a security pact between Australia, Britain and the United States.

Ottawa has said that it wants to join what would be a second pillar of AUKUS, the non-nuclear component that would collaborate on new military technologies, including artificial intelligence and quantum computing. Last year, Defence Minister Bill Blair said Canada was in discussions about joining an expanded AUKUS deal.

Speaking at a conference in Ottawa Thursday, Mr. Morrison said he could envision Canada and other allies such as Japan partnering with AUKUS, not in its core agreement but in areas where they have “real, demonstrated ability.”

He helped clinch the AUKUS pact for Australia that aims to counter China’s rising power in the Indo-Pacific region.

At its core is an agreement to transfer nuclear submarine technology to Australia. Beyond that, participants agreed to work together on cutting-edge capabilities, including AI but also things such as undersea defence capabilities and hypersonic warfare.

But, Mr. Morrison said, AUKUS participation is not inexpensive and requires hefty defence commitments by participants.

“It’s not a diplomatic luncheon club,” Mr. Morrison told a forum organized by The Canada Strong and Free Network.

“It is a serious partnership designed to build the most advanced defence technology in the world. Why? Because if we have that, that in and of itself is a deterrent in the Indo-Pacific.”

He said AUKUS represents an invitation for Canada but noted the country’s relatively low levels of defence spending.

“With Canada investing less than 1½ per cent – and that’s being generous – of GDP in defence, the price of entry is a lot higher than that,” Mr. Morrison said.

His comments come as doubts have arisen about whether the sale of nuclear subs to Canberra will proceed given the Trump administration’s tariff measures, debate about how they would be used and a looming Australian election that could change the makeup of its Parliament.

Ottawa’s defence spending for 2024-25 is about 1.37 per cent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Under former prime minister Justin Trudeau, the government pledged to reach 2 per cent – a North Atlantic Treaty Organization target – by 2032 and Liberal Leader Mark Carney has said he would aim for 2030.

Stephanie Carvin, a former national-security analyst and a professor at Carleton University, said AUKUS is an information and technology-sharing agreement. She said a key challenge for Canada when it comes to AUKUS is not just our level of defence spending, but also that “it’s not clear we have put anything on the table in terms of what we can offer to join – what capabilities we could bring” to pillar two of AUKUS.

Philippe Lagassé, a Carleton University associate professor whose research includes defence policy and procurement, said Canada must have something tangible to bring to AUKUS. “Token contributions will no longer get us a seat at critical tables.”

Mr. Morrison, whose government had tense relations with China, warned that Beijing seeks to dominate the region around it. “The threat of China is not theoretical to us. It is very real, and we have felt it, and we know what’s at stake,” he said of Australia.

He told the Canadian audience that while Beijing’s tactics may change, the strategy of the ruling Communist Party never does.

“What they first want is no challenge to their regime domestically and to achieve that, they need a buffer ring around them, which basically is to have complete hegemony out to the end of the second island chain in the Indo-Pacific,” he said, referring to a string of islands that includes the U.S. territory of Guam.

The former Australian politician said this explains Beijing’s conduct in militarizing the South China Sea and menacing Taiwan, the self-governed island it seeks to annex. “All of that is about exerting coercion, pressure, influence, to get dominance over those areas. They want the U.S. out.”

Mr. Morrison said foreign interference by the Chinese government is a problem in Australia.

“One of the fundamental strengths of our economies actually comes from immigration, and they seek to use our own system against us by seeking to infiltrate and apply pressure to those diasporas now in Australia,” he said of China.

Personally I think Morrison and many others there are full of crap with their assertions that Canada isn't spending enough to be a valuable contributor to AUKUS Pillar II/we have nothing to offer, we have a variety of private and govt programs throughout the spectrums AUKUS Pillar II is looking into especially regarding drones.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Personally I think Morrison and many others there are full of crap with their assertions that Canada isn't spending enough to be a valuable contributor to AUKUS Pillar II/we have nothing to offer, we have a variety of private and govt programs throughout the spectrums AUKUS Pillar II is looking into especially regarding drones.

Its the exact same vein as what I expect from the UK/France and the EU overall is saying to Canada - if you want to be a part of the EU Defence Rearmament program you will need to seriously step up and spend the money/resources for us to consider letting you in. With the UK and France both now on the record as saying that they are looking at defense spending going north of 2.5% of GDP can we even afford to say that we'll eventually hit 2% 5yrs from now? I expect that we need to be above 2.25% year in and year out to be considered a reliable partner, with the money being spent on infrastructure and capital expenditures, not on pensions and salaries.

Personally I've very happy that we are consistently being called out as being cheap, maybe, just maybe we'll start to spend accordingly - by adding personnel to the ranks, by adding capability again, by modernizing our infrastructure and weapons systems.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Its the exact same vein as what I expect from the UK/France and the EU overall is saying to Canada - if you want to be a part of the EU Defence Rearmament program you will need to seriously step up and spend the money/resources for us to consider letting you in. With the UK and France both now on the record as saying that they are looking at defense spending going north of 2.5% of GDP can we even afford to say that we'll eventually hit 2% 5yrs from now? I expect that we need to be above 2.25% year in and year out to be considered a reliable partner, with the money being spent on infrastructure and capital expenditures, not on pensions and salaries.

Personally I've very happy that we are consistently being called out as being cheap, maybe, just maybe we'll start to spend accordingly - by adding personnel to the ranks, by adding capability again, by modernizing our infrastructure and weapons systems.

Most of us have been saying this for years. If we want a seat at the adults table we have to pony up and act like an adult; and that mean robust defence spending.

Its funny its taken this long to be recognized.

 

[YZT580]

Most of us have been saying this for years. If we want a seat at the adults table we have to pony up and act like an adult; and that mean robust defence spending.

Its funny its taken this long to be recognized.

not really. Everyone except the Poles, I think, was doing defense on the cheap. Our paltry contributions were pretty much on par. I know that Germany had rust out going back to at least 2005. We were just part of the crowd.

 

[GK .Dundas]

Most of us have been saying this for years. If we want a seat at the adults table we have to pony up and act like an adult; and that mean robust defence spending.

Its funny its taken this long to be recognized.

Twenty odd years ago Rick Mercer infamous rant on Defence spending enters the chat.
Everybody say hello to Iceland.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Twenty odd years ago Rick Mercer infamous rant on Defence spending enters the chat.
Everybody say hello to Iceland.

We so utterly failed you all and I'm deeply ashamed. Please accept my deepest apologies.

 

[MilEME09]

How serious are the koreans? very, they just created a website just for the canadian program

Hanwha KSS-III

Canadian Patrol Submarine

kss-iii.ca

 

[calculus]

How serious are the koreans? very, they just created a website just for the canadian program

Hanwha KSS-III

Canadian Patrol Submarine

kss-iii.ca

Interesting. The web site does not seem to indicate the sub on offer has a VLS capability. EDIT: VLS is indicated, at the bottom of the page with the graphic. My mistake.

Also, there is a claim that if a contract is signed by 2026, the first sub would be delivered by 2032, with a further 3 by 2035. I don't think any of the other potential competitors could touch that schedule.

 

[MilEME09]

Interesting. The web site does not seem to indicate the sub on offer has a VLS capability. Also, there is a claim that if a contract is signed by 2026, the first sub would be delivered by 2032, with a further 3 by 2035.

VLS capability is near the bottom, and states right at the top its the same sub being used by the RoK, nothing removed as a "export version"

 

[calculus]

VLS capability is near the bottom, and states right at the top its the same sub being used by the RoK, nothing removed as a "export version"

Yeah, I was typing up my retraction the same time you were typing up your response. Thanks for picking it up in any case. We keep each other honest on this site!

 

[OldSolduer]

Question: is VLS a necessity?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Question: is VLS a necessity?

There is a bigger cost to remove them and to alter any weapons or sensor suites. I would want to see the least amount of Canadianization possible. You can keep the VLS and not load them for now, but personally I think it brings quite a potent ability to the RCN.

 

[Czech_pivo]

There is a bigger cost to remove them and to alter any weapons or sensor suites. I would want to see the least amount of Canadianization possible. You can keep the VLS and not load them for now, but personally I think it brings quite a potent ability to the RCN.

Its a strong argument to keep our seat at the adults table, having VLS ability. Especially if we obtain 12 subs.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Interesting. The web site does not seem to indicate the sub on offer has a VLS capability. EDIT: VLS is indicated, at the bottom of the page with the graphic. My mistake.

Also, there is a claim that if a contract is signed by 2026, the first sub would be delivered by 2032, with a further 3 by 2035. I don't think any of the other potential competitors could touch that schedule.

The statement that the crew size is 30 thanks to automation. Is that the 'bare' minimum number required to adequately crew the vessel or is that the 'normal' everyday running number? How does that number stack today against our Vic's? Higher, same, less than?

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Had a laugh when I saw this, "Officers and petty officers are provided with larger bunks for enhanced comfort."

 

[Czech_pivo]

Interesting. The web site does not seem to indicate the sub on offer has a VLS capability. EDIT: VLS is indicated, at the bottom of the page with the graphic. My mistake.

Also, there is a claim that if a contract is signed by 2026, the first sub would be delivered by 2032, with a further 3 by 2035. I don't think any of the other potential competitors could touch that schedule.

The only thing I can think of that would put the 'cherry on the top' on their website is for them to offer a 'French language' toggle to the entire site. It may not seem like much, but sometimes, these little things go a long, long way.

 

[Underway]

Question: is VLS a necessity?

No. But it completely changes potential use cases and threat vectors for the enemy. Right now the only missile capable of being launched from those tubes is a land attack ballistic variant (2000lb bunker busting warhead, 500km range), but given a small amount of time, german anti air missile inserts, drones of various types (subsurface and air), anti ship missiles.

Submariners I know who talk about the KSS III seem rather excited about the possibility of new missions that these sorts of additions can provide.

 

[MilEME09]

I've also heard the RCN wants land attack capabilities