Author Topic: Protecting Canada by Sub (split fm Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy)  (Read 34530 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 20,635
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 919
Sub planning and purchasing articles from the Maritime Engineering Journal 2014:

links:  Part 1 starts on page 12 and Part 2 starts on page 10.

This discussion now changes with the Shortfin Barracuda purchase by the Australians.

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 140,695
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,646
It doesn't change his penultimate conclusion that:

"A MOTS submarine, built overseas but maintained in Canada, is the lowest-risk, lower-cost option that will deliver an operationally relevant future submarine capability."

But it actually invalidates his view, at the time correct though, that:

"Historically, Canada has sought long-range, high-endurance submarines for expeditionary operations.  The current MOTS marketplace does not have a clearly identified fit for these demanding requirements."


Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 20,635
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 919
It doesn't change his penultimate conclusion that:

"A MOTS submarine, built overseas but maintained in Canada, is the lowest-risk, lower-cost option that will deliver an operationally relevant future submarine capability."

But it actually invalidates his view, at the time correct though, that:

"Historically, Canada has sought long-range, high-endurance submarines for expeditionary operations.  The current MOTS marketplace does not have a clearly identified fit for these demanding requirements."

Agreed.  The Shortfin will soon (2years?) be a MOTS or at the very least a "well into the design/development stage" option for the RCN.  The Australian requirements are almost exactly the same as the Canadian requirements he lists.  Perhaps a build in Australia option...  His timelines are not surprising either.  I wonder if a build the majority overseas with the finishing touches in Canada option would be valid, though subs need much of their equipment added during the build process vice after (can't just add weapons/sensors after most of the hull is built...).

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 140,695
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,646
You can add weapons or sensors after the hull is built, but it is complex and expensive.

We certainly added sensors to the "O" boats during the SOUP refits, and we certainly changed the weapons system on the Windsor's after we got them from the UK (replaced tubes and launch system from Tigerish to Mk-48's).

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 142,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,493
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Our subs will be long in the tooth by the time there is room to build for us, having them built in France might be difficult as only the Aussies will be fitting US weapons into their.

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 140,695
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,646
Not necessarily Colin.

First of all, the Australians would be more than happy, I am sure to sell some Australian built subs to an especially suitable purchaser such as Canada. Second of all, their plan is already for 12 subs, the last four of which would be replacement for the first four. If Canada was to accept to buy six, and Australia accepted to intersperse, and shorten the production times a bit, you could do this in the same time as that required for, say building 14 boats.

For instance, instead of building one sub every 30 months - i.e. 12 subs over 30 years, you could build 18 subs over 34 years (one every 23 months - quite doable). In order it would be something like AUS, AUS, CAN, AUS, CAN, AUS, AUS, CAN, CAN, AUS, AUS, CAN, AUS, CAN, AUS, AUS, AUS, AUS.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 142,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,493
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
You know that's way to logical, don't you....?

I certainly hope you are right.

Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 20,635
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 919
Rethinking Nuclear Subs article from Frontline magazine.  It has many of the arguments that have been presented here before, but has a good historical overview and world overview of current nuclear submarine powers.  I didn't know Brazil was looking to get into the nuke business but that makes sense given its rising place in the world. 

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 222,085
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,809
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Rethought and moved post to the Status on Victoria-class subs thread.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2016, 00:27:29 by Eye In The Sky »
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.