MilEME09
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 7,696
- Points
- 1,210
gotta hand it to the koreans, they know how to do PR

So somehow this is now back on the front burner?
Decision on whether to split submarine contract would be led by Navy, official says
Marvelous idea old chap!!So somehow this is now back on the front burner?
Decision on whether to split submarine contract would be led by Navy, official says
Well the obvious solution to the economies of scale problem of splitting the submarine order is to get 12 of each!So somehow this is now back on the front burner?
Decision on whether to split submarine contract would be led by Navy, official says
TheyNothing can go wrong here.
And 4 maintenance facilities - 2 on each coast!Well the obvious solution to the economies of scale problem of splitting the submarine order is to get 12 of each!
![]()
Where y’all gonna find the people to crew all these?They
And 4 maintenance facilities - 2 on each coast!
They
And 4 maintenance facilities - 2 on each coast!
I wouldn't look into this too deeply, it's politicians passing a hot potato back to the Navy. Nobody wants a split fleet of submarines, not the Navy, not the bidders and not any of the Government who has a lick of common sense left. The PM personally came out against this split fleet idea, so I don't take it seriously.So somehow this is now back on the front burner?
Decision on whether to split submarine contract would be led by Navy, official says
Typo on mobileThey ?
Because during committee meetings politico's try to score points and get scandals going during questions.So somehow this is now back on the front burner?
Decision on whether to split submarine contract would be led by Navy, official says
So somehow this is now back on the front burner?
Decision on whether to split submarine contract would be led by Navy, official says
But it would be a Axworthy/Rock Liberal type of sabotage. That bunch are realizing that Carney is not their type of Liberal and in fact is a small c Conservative. And a "shudder" a BANKER. Whoo ha ha haI wouldn't look into this too deeply, it's politicians passing a hot potato back to the Navy. Nobody wants a split fleet of submarines, not the Navy, not the bidders and not any of the Government who has a lick of common sense left. The PM personally came out against this split fleet idea, so I don't take it seriously.
It's the worst possible way Canada can go about this procurement.
I remember that and maybe discussing it on the Aussie thread. I think the Senator maybe got that info from the gentleseas.blogspot.com site. Where there was a discussion on the efficiency and power requirements of a pump jet vs propeller on nuke boat vs diesel-electric and that the battery endurance would be 20 minutes(?). There were a lot of proponents for nuclear propulsion with respect to Australian subs at the time. Of course in the end the Aussies canceled the French contractBecause during committee meetings politico's try to score points and get scandals going during questions.
OR they ask super smart questions about things they don't understand....
F&ck, explaining to someone that the world is round and not flat.Because during committee meetings politico's try to score points and get scandals going during questions.
OR they ask super smart questions about things they don't understand....
What I've been asking for a couple of years.Where y’all gonna find the people to crew all these?
The article says the special equipment needed to do under ice ops will be installed in Canada after delivery of said boats.Interesting read, applicable to Canada, on how Portugal was able to sail an AIP sub under Arctic waters.
![]()
How Portugal shaped Canada's new submarines and fine-tuned Arctic defence
Portugal is the first country in recent history to operate a conventional submarine under the Arctic ice. The Navy's adaptations for this mission are being studied by Canada, which will incorporate them into its new fleet. Arpão has expanded "tactical options" for underwater combat in the far...www.euronews.com
I remember that and maybe discussing it on the Aussie thread. I think the Senator maybe got that info from the gentleseas.blogspot.com site. Where there was a discussion on the efficiency and power requirements of a pump jet vs propeller on nuke boat vs diesel-electric and that the battery endurance would be 20 minutes(?). There were a lot of proponents for nuclear propulsion with respect to Australian subs at the time. Of course in the end the Aussies canceled the French contract
Colin, I'm guessing the Senator had been briefed going in but didn't quite grasp everything.
this article covers some of the concerns/issues with the choice of pump jet propulsion at the lower speeds of a diesel/electric submarine
![]()
A pump jet for the future submarine? Not so fast (or slow) | The Strategist
A couple of months ago Andrew Davies offered some comments on the pump-jet propulsion system that’s proposed as a key feature of the Shortfin Barracuda. As he observed, there seems a clear case for propellers ...www.aspistrategist.org.au
when you combine that with choice to stick with lead acid batteries for the first batch
Science, not fiction: modern batteries for modern submarines | The Strategist
When we expressed concern about the Royal Australian Navy’s plan to fit the first of its new Attack-class submarines with an outmoded lead–acid main battery system in over a decade’s time, former RAN submarine engineer ...www.aspistrategist.org.au
add the immaturity of the French Barracuda class and the push by some proponents on www.aspistrategist.org.au and gentleseas.blogspot.com to forgo the diesel/electric option and pursue the nuclear and you can see where she was coming from
I wonder if she had been given information that suggested that the Attack class would be limited to 20min at peak speed with the pumpjet on lead acid batteries as there's something that's familiar there
