Replacing the Subs

[Czech_pivo]

They are hooped if this demand is firm:

Canada's $12-billion submarine order needs auto plant in return: Joly

Germany and South Korea are in the running; Hyundai says it won't build a plant, but Germany seems open to it

driving.ca

Bad news if we go with the Germans - their timelines will kills us.

 

[ytz]

Bad news if we go with the Germans - their timelines will kills us.

It's hard to tell if Joly is just doing the bad cop part of a routine or she's actually imposing a hard requirement which is supported by cabinet. I think the ambiguity is purposeful.

 

[YZT580]

It's hard to tell if Joly is just doing the bad cop part of a routine or she's actually imposing a hard requirement which is supported by cabinet. I think the ambiguity is purposeful.

Until there is another government south of the border there is no market for Korean cars made in Canada. We can't hope to absorb all the output. Be better to agree on an assembly line for tanks. Goodness knows there will be enough GM/Stellantis plants available the way Trump is going

 

[SeaKingTacco]

It's hard to tell if Joly is just doing the bad cop part of a routine or she's actually imposing a hard requirement which is supported by cabinet. I think the ambiguity is purposeful.

She is, honestly, becoming a menace.

I am all for a defence industrial strategy.

I am not for trading off defence outputs in exchange for pork barrel politics.

 

[Good2Golf]

I don't accept this. Pretty much most of Europe and the US use defence spending first as job creation and prioritize capability. It's ridiculous to always expect Canada to be the boyscout on policy like this.

And I say this as someone who is entirely sympathetic to the Koreans. Treating a $60B order as nothing but a standard arms export deal is poor form on their part. Especially knowing the situation Canada is in.

I think you misinterpreted my point, which was exactly that you make. Canada’s position is aiming for a duality of prosperity and capability. My post was to counter the plaintive sentiment of a small group in Korea referred to in Kirkhill’s post.

It's hard to tell if Joly is just doing the bad cop part of a routine or she's actually imposing a hard requirement which is supported by cabinet. I think the ambiguity is purposeful.

She’s not imposing anything. She’s a messenger and a less and less important one at that, as Carney positions members of Team Trudeau for the final cull. I suspect she’ll be gone with some Diplo graft and we won’t have to see her vacuously fronting others’ ideas and direction.

 

[IKnowNothing]

What was said in the speech:
"Fundamentally what we want is a car plant" + lots of verbiage about levering defense spending to catalyze economic investment
vs.

What is being presented as said by the author:
"Canada's 12 billion dollar submarine order needs a car plant in return"
"Canada will have to get a new auto plant in return for buying up to a dozen new submarines from either Germany or South Korea"
"Canada must get a new auto plant if it’s going to sign a contract with either Germany or South Korea to buy up to a dozen new submarines"

Want =/= need.

The quoted elements of the speech don't provide any new information, or support the author's inference and conclusion. Everyone that is paying attention knows that we want to lever this to get a car plant. But it's not like we're going to cancel the project if neither of them ante's up.


The worry remains that it is overweighted, but the speech only reinforces that worry, it doesn't prove it- especially to the degree written.

 

[calculus]

Another reason to go with the Korean option - a potential upgrade path to full nuclear:

South Korea is already preparing for nuclear-powered submarines - Naval News

South Korea’s ambition for nuclear-powered submarines received a boost when President Donald Trump announced on 29 October 2025 that the US government had given a green light for Seoul to build such boats on American soil.

www.navalnews.com

 

[OldSolduer]

She is, honestly, becoming a menace.

I am all for a defence industrial strategy.

I am not for trading off defence outputs in exchange for pork barrel politics.

I fully agree and if the Koreans walk away then......

Joly is a mental midget.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Another reason to go with the Korean option - a potential upgrade path to full nuclear:

South Korea is already preparing for nuclear-powered submarines - Naval News

South Korea’s ambition for nuclear-powered submarines received a boost when President Donald Trump announced on 29 October 2025 that the US government had given a green light for Seoul to build such boats on American soil.

www.navalnews.com

It's possible that the model shown in the article is the KS-III Batch III, the planned follow-on to the Batch III subs Canada is looking at. Information on the Batch III subs is limited but is expected to have many improvements over the Batch II subs.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

It's possible that the model shown in the article is the KS-III Batch III, the planned follow-on to the Batch III subs Canada is looking at. Information on the Batch III subs is limited but is expected to have many improvements over the Batch II subs.

I suspect if they pulled the VLS and Diesels they would have enough room in the current KS-III hull form for a reactor and associated equipment.

 

[Underway]

I suspect if they pulled the VLS and Diesels they would have enough room in the current KS-III hull form for a reactor and associated equipment.

It will be a clean sheet design. You don't just convert a diesel over even it is larger. The experience gained in making diesel submarines though, that's going to show.

 

[Czech_pivo]

It will be a clean sheet design. You don't just convert a diesel over even it is larger. The experience gained in making diesel submarines though, that's going to show.

IF we end up going with the SK's for their subs, how little or how large a role could any of the CDN partners/suppliers play in that development and/or build in the future?

 

[OldSolduer]

we won’t have to see her vacuously fronting others’ ideas and direction.

Empty headed food trough whopere......

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Another reason to go with the Korean option - a potential upgrade path to full nuclear:

South Korea is already preparing for nuclear-powered submarines - Naval News

South Korea’s ambition for nuclear-powered submarines received a boost when President Donald Trump announced on 29 October 2025 that the US government had given a green light for Seoul to build such boats on American soil.

www.navalnews.com

Considering they learned the submarine building trade from the Americans originally, I find interesting that for the nextgen (future) submarine, they are moving away from the American practice of Kiosk mounted diving planes to the British practice of bow diving planes.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Considering they learned the submarine building trade from the Americans originally, I find interesting that for the nextgen (future) submarine, they are moving away from the American practice of Kiosk mounted diving planes to the British practice of bow diving planes.

I thought they got their experience from German subs

For building up a submarine force, the ROK Navy acquired its first submarine (other than midget submarines), ROKS Chang Bogo (SS 061), from Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft of Germany in 1992
launched the first locally designed 3,000-ton submarine, Dosan Ahn Changho (SS 083) in September 2018.<a href="Republic of Korea Navy - Wikipedia"

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Quite right. I missed that.

Then it is a bit surprising that they switched to the American practice for their own boats, and are now reverting to the British approach also used by HDW.

 

[JLB50]

I think it was about four or five years ago that the Royal Navy made an offer to cooperate with and assist Canada with our arctic security needs. At the time I don’t think the offer was seriously considered. But in light of Trump’s threats, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and China’s push as a so-called near-arctic country, I wonder if it’s worth re-examining the British offer until Canada fully re-equips the CAF. The Astute-class subs with partial Canadian crewing?

 

[suffolkowner]

It will be a clean sheet design. You don't just convert a diesel over even it is larger. The experience gained in making diesel submarines though, that's going to show.

yep pretty hard to make the reactor fit the sub. Ill be curious if the SK would stick with an American reactor

 

[Furniture]

I think it was about four or five years ago that the Royal Navy made an offer to cooperate with and assist Canada with our arctic security needs. At the time I don’t think the offer was seriously considered. But in light of Trump’s threats, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and China’s push as a so-called near-arctic country, I wonder if it’s worth re-examining the British offer until Canada fully re-equips the CAF. The Astute-class subs with partial Canadian crewing?

Those discussions a few years back lead to a few agreements that are of little interest to the public or most posters here, but Canada and the UK have been cooperating more closely in the arctic than before.

It's not secret, but it is dry and not particularly related to subs.

 

[calculus]

Meanwhile, more money being spent upgrading the Victorias (digital periscopes):

Canada Taps Safran for Victoria-class Submarine Modernization - Naval News

On February 26, 2026, Canada's MoD announced that it awarded a contract to Safran Trusted 4D Canada Inc. to provide digital periscopes.

www.navalnews.com