Replacing the Subs

[Czech_pivo]

Sounds about right. I would go a step further in dream land. Get a yard built and do the next set of 12 ourselves with Korean help. Its what Korea did.

Interestingly if Canada got these 12 we would become NATO's 2nd largest operator of submarines (tied with Turkey).

In addition to that, if we stick with the 88 F35's we'd have the 3rd largest fleet in the world I believe.

 

[k.numbers]

So if everything goes according the ideal and we get 12 KSS III with a full loadout of ballistic or cruise missiles, where does that put our sub fleet? On par with the Royal Navy? The French Navy? Russia? What kind of effects would this have on canadian power projection and naval prestige (notwithstanding the other naval procurements ongoing).

A bit difficuct to compare with the Royal Navy or French Navy. They are all-nuclear submarine forces and include their at sea nuclear deterant. For power projection afar and deterance, they would be ahead.

Still quite aways behind Russia in quantity, they have large fleets of both nuclear and conventional submarines. Sub for sub, ahead of the Russian Navy in quality, but as they say "quantity has a quality on its own".

It would be the premier conventional submarine force in NATO- with whatever naval prestige comes with achievement. For defending our own waters and conventional naval fires, it would be a serious capability add. If we put the resources into it, it would allow the RCN to be the leader in NATO submarine training and doctrine development (for conventional subs). It would allow near continious deployment of a submarine to a NATO task group, a Pacific deployment, and a continental/arctic defense deployment. Simulaniously.

My opinion, at least. I would welcome other takes.

 

[GK .Dundas]

A couple of notes , the Victoria class are still some of the most advanced and effective conventional submarines out there. But their aging out and there aren't enough of them to really influence things.
The other thing the Royal Navy has begun talking about acquiring conventional submarines again .
Because as effective as they are the British SSN fleet isn't as large as they need it to be .

 

[Navy_Pete]

Withough going into to much detail:

We go by Operational Deficiency Categories which are NATO standard. CAT 1 deficiency ship cannot sail. CAT 4 is basically nuisance (I've never even staffed one that I can recall).

If a system doesn't have an OPDEF attached to it then its availalbe to do its job with no restrictions. Interestingly enough you can have equipment that isn't working but you're still sailing because it doesn't impact the mission.

Otherwise we're basically just like what you stated. Its working as advertized, does it have an OPDEF, is it U/S (unserviceable).

OPDEFs are a bit different compared to what you would look at for commercial fleets, as there is also the nuance that some things relate to combat capability, and at some point things get flagged as the ship falling below commercial marine safety standards so additional things kick in. Some countries have a much higher threshold than just 'accept the risk' at that point so what gets a ship to Cat 1 isn't consistent across countries.

Did some time as acting fleet technical officer, and part of that was to figure out what some of the other ships OPDEFs actually meant, and some countries had Cat 2s for things we'd have as cat 3, and we had cat 2s that other countries would have had as cat 1s. The Brits were surprised we were sailing at all with the state the ship was in, let alone crossed the Atlantic during the stormy season like that.

 

[Underway]

I'm pretty sure you just called me a capstan...

Better than a Bosn'

 

[Czech_pivo]

Interesting article out of SK about its recent, formal bid for Poland’s new subs.

Hanwha Ocean bids for Poland’s Orka submarine program

South Korean shipbuilding giant Hanwha Ocean announced Wednesday that it is making a strong push to win Poland’s Orka submarine project, a key naval modernizat

m.koreaherald.com

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Interesting article out of SK about its recent, formal bid for Poland’s new subs.

Hanwha Ocean bids for Poland’s Orka submarine program

South Korean shipbuilding giant Hanwha Ocean announced Wednesday that it is making a strong push to win Poland’s Orka submarine project, a key naval modernizat

m.koreaherald.com

If we get into the KS-III program and also start on making munitions for them, we could be setting up our manufacturing base quite nicely. Add in ensuring we can make high quality sub-components that need regular replacement (Valves and such) and you start fleshing out your industrial base.

 

[MilEME09]

If we get into the KS-III program and also start on making munitions for them, we could be setting up our manufacturing base quite nicely. Add in ensuring we can make high quality sub-components that need regular replacement (Valves and such) and you start fleshing out your industrial base.

Building submarine launched ballistics missiles as well could create expertise needed for development of civilians rockets for space launch as well

 

[PHughes]

Building submarine launched ballistics missiles as well could create expertise needed for development of civilians rockets for space launch as well

Is there any requirement in the CPSP for the ability to launch ballistic missiles?

 

[MilEME09]

Is there any requirement in the CPSP for the ability to launch ballistic missiles?

Yes, there is a land attack requirement

 

[Underway]

But no specific ballistic missile requirement. Could have been cruise missiles instead. Or a big ol artillery deck gun WW1 style. That would have been cool.

 

[MilEME09]

But no specific ballistic missile requirement. Could have been cruise missiles instead. Or a big ol artillery deck gun WW1 style. That would have been cool.

True but that's what the Koreans have so unless we pay money for something like a tomahawk to get modded in, we would get the korean Huynmoo 4

 

[PHughes]

True but that's what the Koreans have so unless we pay money for something like a tomahawk to get modded in, we would get the korean Huynmoo 4

If the KSS III is selected.

Other contenders like the 212CD have tube launched NSM cruise missiles for Sportsnet both land and surface ship attack missions

Seems odd to buy a sub with a technology . . . . Ballistic missile launch . . . that is not explicitly required by the CSPS SOR

 

[Colin Parkinson]

But no specific ballistic missile requirement. Could have been cruise missiles instead. Or a big ol artillery deck gun WW1 style. That would have been cool.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

If the KSS III is selected.

Other contenders like the 212CD have tube launched NSM cruise missiles for Sportsnet both land and surface ship attack missions

Seems odd to buy a sub with a technology . . . . Ballistic missile launch . . . that is not explicitly required by the CSPS SOR

Because Canadianizing stuff has worked out so well for us, right?

 

[Furniture]

If the KSS III is selected.

Other contenders like the 212CD have tube launched NSM cruise missiles for Sportsnet both land and surface ship attack missions

Seems odd to buy a sub with a technology . . . . Ballistic missile launch . . . that is not explicitly required by the CSPS SOR

I'm more a TSN fan...

I suspect the 212CD might be a hard sell, if they can't actually fit us into the build schedule.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I just want something that can leave Halifax, operate for a month or two in the Arctic and then return to Halifax on its own.

 

[PHughes]

I'm more a TSN fan...

I suspect the 212CD might be a hard sell, if they can't actually fit us into the build schedule.

I'm more a TSN fan...

I suspect the 212CD might be a hard sell, if they can't actually fit us into the build schedule.

TKMS has built out a 2nd production facility in Germany and has discussed using the Fincantierra yard on Italy to increase even more

 

[GK .Dundas]

I'm more a TSN fan...

I suspect the 212CD might be a hard sell, if they can't actually fit us into the build schedule.

That's never stopped someone from trying to sell to us and to be honest given past Canadian procurement history. I think you'd be hard pressed to tell me we wouldn't then still sign up for something that can't be delivered on.
Afterall the end result is sometimes secondary to other considerations, regional employment, diplomatic considerations etc.

 

[calculus]

That's never stopped someone from trying to sell to us and to be honest given past Canadian procurement history. I think you'd be hard pressed to tell me we wouldn't then still sign up for something that can't be delivered on.
Afterall the end result is sometimes secondary to other considerations, regional employment, diplomatic considerations etc.

Especially with this apparent "rapprochement" with Europe on defence matters. I fear the sub decision will get swept up in this.