Search results

Still need almost twice as many sailors for the KSS III compared to the 212CD. And if we decide to go with Blue/Gold double crew system that challenge gets much bigger. The RCN is struggling now to train enough sailors for the current surface fleet. Training new submariners will be a...

In related news, a significant/biggest constraint the RCN has acquiring new subs isn’t the delivery date for new boats . . . It is the ability to generate a boatload of newly trained crews for these new boats The 2x crew size for the KSS III boats must be a significant factor in the...

Seems a bit odd the RCN would be considering a submarine that has a significant portion of its cost, technology, crew requirement and maintenance load devoted to a dozen missile launching tubes that Canada has no requirement for. The RCN has a requirement for land attack that can be met with...

The KSS III is bigger but also has almost a twice the crew size compared to a 212 CD. Bigger hotel loading. And a considerable amount of that tonnage and space is devoted to those ballistic missile tubes Patrol durations are not publicly available but are likely very close to each other.

TKMS has development an antiairfaft missile system that is 4 packed into a standard 21 inch torpedo tube for the Type 21x family of subs https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDAS_(missile)

Why would Canada want to buy a missile boat like the KSS III? What would the RCN do with subs designed primarily for the strategic retaliation mission?

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

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