Replacing the Subs

[NavyShooter]

There's a German sub in Kiel that might suit our needs:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_submarine_U-995 

There's also another sub here that we might be able to get at a good price:

http://www.hmcsojibwa.ca/

 

[Dale Denton]

Telling that there isn't a project to replace.

Politically, Sweden is a 'safe' country to buy from - and they recently bought 2 A26s for $1B USD, with deliveries in 5-6yrs.
Anyone see any issues with tack on 6 of the ER models and have RIBenefits for Saab (who already have a small presence here, partner them up with Davie for the maintenance contract?

More likely this capability will lapse and there wont be replacements due to too many large projects going on at the same time.

 

[dimsum]

Anyone see any issues with tack on 6 of the ER models and have RIBenefits for Saab (who already have a small presence here, partner them up with Davie for the maintenance contract?

The big question would be whether there are other countries that use it.  Also, fitting NATO equipment, interoperability, etc. 

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

The big question would be whether there are other countries that use it.  Also, fitting NATO equipment, interoperability, etc.

Damen has partnered with SAAB to build on the next Sub replacement.  The Dutch Government has not announced a winner or anything but given Damen is a Dutch company, it might be a good bet.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I honestly think that Canada would rather chew off its arm then try to do business with the French on submarine procurement.  The FREMM was self rejected because they wanted all the control and Canada doesn't do ships that way.  We have the control over the IP or its a no deal.  Similar issues with ITAR information being available to the French who would have no issues stealing that particular IP for their own devices.

Unless something changes Japanese or German submarines are probably the leader.

We could deal directly with Australia and they are already adapting US tech into the design. With 12 subs on order, the Aussies might find that they can't run all the boats they want, Canada might want to step in and take over 4-5 of the hulls half way through the program build and Australia would/could extend the contract to 17 hulls eventually or just operate 7-8 of them. Either way I suspect it would make them very happy and we would be getting the most advanced diesel electric subs in the world and work with a trusted ally.

 

[dimsum]

We could deal directly with Australia and they are already adapting US tech into the design. With 12 subs on order, the Aussies might find that they can't run all the boats they want, Canada might want to step in and take over 4-5 of the hulls half way through the program build and Australia would/could extend the contract to 17 hulls eventually or just operate 7-8 of them. Either way I suspect it would make them very happy and we would be getting the most advanced diesel electric subs in the world and work with a trusted ally.

The Attack class is a SSK derivative of a French SSN.  I suspect there will be some unforeseen issues in changing the propulsion system and swapping out French systems for other ones.  I think it'll be pretty close to our experience for the Cyclone, to be honest.

 

[daftandbarmy]

The Attack class is a SSK derivative of a French SSN.  I suspect there will be some unforeseen issues in changing the propulsion system and swapping out French systems for other ones.  I think it'll be pretty close to our experience for the Cyclone, to be honest.

Question from the cheap seats to 'those who know': Will we be ready for drone subs like the Orca in 10 years or so?

"The unmanned submarines, called Orcas, will be able to undertake missions from scouting to sinking ships at very long ranges. Drone ships like the Orca will revolutionize war at sea, providing inexpensive, semi-disposable weapon systems that can fill the gaps in the front line—or simply go where it’s too dangerous for manned ships to go."

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a26344025/navy-extra-large-unmanned-submarines-boeing/

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The Attack class is a SSK derivative of a French SSN.  I suspect there will be some unforeseen issues in changing the propulsion system and swapping out French systems for other ones.  I think it'll be pretty close to our experience for the Cyclone, to be honest.

I agree with you and that's why i suggest their hulls after about #5-6 as they want to recoup some costs and most of the issues should be resolved by then, plus that will likley be a decade after the start of the program at which point our boats are going to be hurting.

 

[Lumber]

I anticipate "events" will force an expansion/modernization of Canada's submarine capability.

Yea sure buds, like we're going to buy billions in subs just 'cause YOU decided to become a sun dodger.

 

[JMCanada]

The sad part of the story is that, according to published costs (well, I would like to know what is or is not included in the contracts...) nine new Virginia class SSNs are expected to cost 22.2 bn USD (approx. 3.3 bn CAD each). Ready for operations under ice, proven,  risk-free design. 12 Attack class, yet to be launched 1st unit by mid 2030s, not under-ice-capable, are expected to cost 50 bn AUD (approx. 3.8 bn CAD each).

The good part is that it would be possible to build an under-ice capable AIP modified Attack class SSK (problem would be cost), assuming Naval Group's announcement to have developed the FC2G (fuel cell 2nd generation). Would "only" (*) require to fit three or four AIP modules, 250kW each, into the hull, plus build it strengthened as to break the ice to show up.

(*) of course it's not as easy as to say it.

 

[Uzlu]

The good part is that it would be possible to build an under-ice capable AIP modified Attack class SSK (problem would be cost), assuming Naval Group's announcement to have developed the FC2G (fuel cell 2nd generation).

The only type of air-independent-propulsion submarine to have demonstrated an ability to operate under ice is nuclear.

 

[Swampbuggy]

I don't know. It seems to me there's an opportunity here. If the Gov were to try and purchase new US nuclear subs, it would get Trump off our backs in two ways. Might even help with CUSMA or whatever the hell they're calling it.

 

[JMCanada]

The only type of air-independent-propulsion submarine to have demonstrated an ability to operate under ice is nuclear.

There is always a first time. As it was for SSNs as well.
For an AIP submarine, as for any other, to operate under ice, the main three requirements are (AFAIK):

1- Sufficient endurance, depending on the expected patrol missions.

2- Ability to provide oxygen for the crew. Nuclear subs use surplus power to extract O2 from seawater (hydrolisis). AIP subs must carry a big amount of LOx (liquid oxygen) either for the fuel cell or the Stirling engine. LOx for the crew would be minimal compared to that required for propulsion.

3- Strengthened hull and a minimum buoyancy to allow breaking the ice at some point (to be determined by naval architects).

 

[OldSolduer]

I don't know. It seems to me there's an opportunity here. If the Gov were to try and purchase new US nuclear subs, it would get Trump off our backs in two ways. Might even help with CUSMA or whatever the hell they're calling it.

The last time we even thought of purchasing nuclear propelled subs the hue and cry from the "Anti everything military" crowd and  the budding environmental movement shtyecanned the idea - that's why we have the current ones.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Btw, NORAD Agreement now extends in to Maritime Domain Awareness.  There is a 1* Canadian Submariner in NORAD right now.

I anticipate "events" will force an expansion/modernization of Canada's submarine capability.

That is not actually a new development;  it was signed off in May 2006 so over 13 years ago. 

I'll believe the GoC is serious about ensuring the right assets are procured when I see it.  Until then...I believe, like the 140 fleet, the SSK fleet will be extended...and then extended...

Strong.  Secure.  Engaged.   right?

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

That is not actually a new development;  it was signed off in May 2006 so over 13 years ago. 

I'll believe the GoC is serious about ensuring the right assets are procured when I see it.  Until then...I believe, like the 140 fleet, the SSK fleet will be extended...and then extended...

Strong.  Secure.  Engaged.   right?

Tracking, but how many other people are?  I don't think it is a very well known fact.

On your other point, I don't think it will be a deliberate action at all.  Some unforeseen event will send the Govt of the Day in to a massive panic. 

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I suspect the people are tracking, like the people who care, are small in numbers.  I think the arctic will be a contested area, personally, and there are other countries that are operating up there now.  I don't have to see that on the news in a few years, I've been launched to go say "hi!" to some of them in the past.

Panic reaction time will be 'too little, too late', IMO. 

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Personally, I think Canada will never buy nuclear submarines, which is what we need up there for the real enforcement of our sovereignty.


.... But, I think we could spring leasing US nuclear subs. The Americans would love nothing better than to pump out more subs out of their specialized yard, even at the cost of being saddled with decommissioning them at the end, if it meant they could have that many more available to them upon request should the immediate need arise.

And I can see how that could work to the advantage of both nations: Canada would be immediately propelled to the rank of first line navies with complete capability to protect our three ocean area's, while the Americans, within NORAD, would get the benefit of a certain number of submarines with American capabilities but "British" tactical outlook in use and employment - which the American lack due to their "over-engineering outlook" blinkers inherited from Adm. Rickover, and never discarded even though he has long been dead. 

 

[Cloud Cover]

Perhaps one series of steps would be leveraging the NORAD maritime domain aspect, offer up some cash to pay for entire cost of  some arctic operations, propose to integrate officers and NCM onto their boats, fund R&D for Arctic submarine surveillance and weapons. Very expensive, subject to probably very vigorous foreign control,  but not as expensive as owning the boats and gets us into a place we have little chance of going alone.

Politically we could agree to not own any nuclear submarines in exchange for having access to the US sub program under the auspices of NORAD and perhaps some other mutual defence programs not linked to NORAD.

Edit: are there any articles that have studied this as an integrated force?

 

[tomahawk6]

Does the RCN have an under ice capability ?