• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

HMCS Chicoutimi {MERGED}

Alex252 said:
This is embarrasing and a waste of the taxpayers money!!!!!! We should worry about subs after we restructure the Army, Airforce and Navy. Id also like to send my best wishes to the crew

Mate, pisss off the politics, and let the dust settle before you make such silly comments. we should be more concerned about the crew, and their welfare.
 
we should be more concerned about the crew, and their welfare.

Well said. People always rush to comment on the equipment, "its a lemon", and very rarely do people actually ask about the welfare of the crew(s).
 
Ive got a question, may seem a little dumb but if a sub has no power how does the thing stay afloat? Also it said on the news something like a tug was coming to get them. What are they doing about the smoke inhalation victims?
 
Ex-Dragoon said:
Well they are diesel electric submarines which means they are powered by electricity from the subs batteries. If there is no electricity there is no power. Shutting down the power is done so they don't run the risk of destroying the battery and the oft change of producing chlorine gas if exposed to seawater.


what does this have to do with the fire onboard. Any mechanical casualty through enemy action or mechanical failure during wartime runs the risk of having the sub detected and sunk.

Sorry Ex, that diesel/electric thing means they run on batteries submerged at depth, diesel engines at snorkle depth and either batteries or diesel on the surface. At any rate, it must've been a fire in a pretty vital spot, to leave them with no propulsion either diesel or electric.
Must've been spooky for them too, knowing the peridite coating inside is toxic at off-gassing temps of only 200 degrees. Plus, we have to remember a relatively small fire on a boat can produce very lethal gases in short order. There's lots of PVC, Hydrocarbons, paints ect. I would not have wanted to go through that, and my hat's off to those guys for doing what they do.

For Alex252, they blow water out of tanks with high pressure air. When the water goes out, the boat rises. When they want to submerge, they let water into the tanks. The HP air is held in big bejesus bottles, and without power, they'd only get the use of the air in the bottles, as they would not be able to run the compressors to fill them back up.
 
do I detect sarcasm?  :)

they were cheap because the Brits didn't want them anymore, or at least thats my completely uneducated take on it.  They were really new when their MoD decided to go with an all nuclear force. 

My 2 cents, at least.

 
Sheerin said:
do I detect sarcasm?   :)

they were cheap because the Brits didn't want them anymore, or at least thats my completely uneducated take on it.   They were really new when their MoD decided to go with an all nuclear force.  

My 2 cents, at least.

Not to mention the UK wanted access to training areas here in Canada and wanted to see a Commonwealth country have first dibs.
 
I was really starting to think today about how absolutely awful it must be out there.

Freezing temps.
No propulsion, hence the ocean of the motion would be awful.
Seasickness in such tiny areas.
Little light.

There's no emoticon for a sick face but this where I'd put that.
 
Alex252 said:
This is embarrasing and a waste of the taxpayers money!!!!!! We should worry about subs after we restructure the Army, Airforce and Navy. Id also like to send my best wishes to the crew

Just for the record I don't understand why you guys jumped on Alex for his comments.

Everyone I know understands the concept of opportunity cost and in this case I would argue
that there are a number of needs that would have been much better filled with a $1billion
capital infusion, than on submarines that are limited in range to patrolling our coastal areas
for rogue fishing boats when the same task could've been much better accomplished with
Patrol Aircraft or UAV's.

Where to start:
Option 1)  Strategic Airlift (C17's)
Option 2)  Strategic Sealift (Simplified San-Antonio Class without VLS)
Option 3)  Artic Patrol Ships (Ice Breakers)
Option 4)  Expanded Combined Arms Training Facility

Bottom Line:   We know we don't have enough money so we better be sure we pick the
right priorities and to me I'd much rather at least have the option of deploying small contingents
to Darfur or Afghanistan or Haiti with our own airlift than in defending our coasts with an asset
that is less efficient than its current alternatives simply because that's what we've done in the
past.

JMHO....

Cheers all.



Matthew.  :salute:

 
I was watching the news and it turns out one of the sailors on that sub died. Aparrently the fire was way worse than thought of at first.Id like to send best wishes to the family and my prayers to the other members of the sub
 
Lt Saunders had a wife and two children.

May he rest in peace.

And let's give a moment to pray for those other seriously injured sailors.  Some of them, apparently, are also in critical condition.
 
Tragic update to CHICOUTIMI's fire.

The Prime Minister has just announced in the House of Commons that one sailor has died from smoke inhalation. This was the same sailor reported as being in critical condition earlier today.

Thoughts, prayers, and condolences to the family of yet another Canadian hero.

Sam
 
See the prior discussions on submarine capabilities and you will see why Alex was disagreed with.
 
Wow.  That is certainly a change of what the offical word was just a day ago.
http://sympaticomsn.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1096991616876_92400816?hub=topstories
 
One sailor dies from fire injuries

Steve MacLeod and Keith Bonnell
Canadian Press and Global Television

October 6, 2004

The Canadian sub HMCS Chicoutimi, shown in a file photo from the early 1990s. (CP)
Lt.-Cdr. Jim Pope, right, exhibits an oxygen generator as Cmdr. Randy Truscott looks on at a nerws conference concerning the fire on HMCS Chicoutimi, in Halifax on Wednesday. (CP/Andrew Vaughan)
ADVERTISEMENT

HALIFAX -- One of the crewmembers injured in a fire aboard HMCS Chicoutimi is dead. Prime Minister Martin announced the death in Ottawa today.

Three injured sailors, including one reportedly in critical condition, were arlifted from a heavily damaged Canadian submarine late Wednesday as the rest their crewmates remained adrift off the coast of Ireland for a second night.

The men were declared the most in need of medical attention after a major fire Tuesday left HMCS Chicoutimi dead in the water.

"They were the worst of the casualties," said Richard Buckland, a commander with the British Navy.

Buckland said the navy had planned to take the injured men by helicopter to a hospital in northern Ireland, but the chopper was diverted to a closer hospital in Sligo, in southern Ireland after one of the men's condition worsened.

Officials at Sligo General Hospital said one of the men was listed in critical condition while his two shipmates had been able to walk in, the Associated Press reported from London. No further details were available.

Canadian navy officials in Halifax couldn't confirm the report.

The diesel-electric submarine, one of four used subs recently leased from the Royal Navy, was on its maiden voyage to Canada when the fire broke out.

A British frigate pulled alongside the sub Wednesday and dropped off a doctor and an assistant.

Canadian officials admitted the fire, which is believed to have started between the commanding officer's cabin and an electrical room, was more serious than first thought.

"This was a major fire," Commodore Tyrone Pile told a news conference in Halifax.

"The fire was of sufficient strength that most of the submarine's portable firefighting equipment was used to put it out."


© Canadian Press and Global Television 2004
http://www.canada.com/national/story.html?id=3a79238f-328a-4258-bb9a-9f3379919449
--------------------------------
RIP :salute: :cdn:
 
Back
Top