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

Replacing the Subs

Underway said:
You're making assumptions. What about TKMS building out a yard here. Like they've done in half a dozen other countries. They are quite good at it.

Other thoughts if this is the case then its a slam dunk for TKMS. It further supports my point from earlier about Canada wanting direct defence jobs instead of milk plant or natural gas investment.

Nope.

But... There was a German language article where TKMS spoke about Canada as being a partner not a customer. It was a very clear change in tone within the interview as they were talking about other TKMS projects/programs. The CEO corrected the interviewer. The overtones I took from things were TKMS were looking to diversify their industrial base as a hedge against Russian aggression and German economic/demographic headwinds.

Easy to attack German infrastructure from Russia, much hard to attack Canadian infrastructure from Russia.

Their bid on having us build the submarines ourselves reflects that.

From a geopolitical and strategic perspective TKMS building submarines in Canada (though fraught with risk) is a power move. It secures a manufacturing base/supply line away from Russia's easy reach into Europe, and does the same for German sub users in Asia against China (Singapore as an example off the top of my head). A number of South American countries also use German subs and this may mean that some of those countries (Chile for example) may be want to use our maintenance facilities.

This will allow Canada to be able to repair and resupply German submarines should their safe harbours come under threat and will allow us to integrate into any future TKMS submarine wins in the supply line.

It meets the criteria I set out in a previous post regarding industrial offsets actually applying to the defence contract it was supposed to work with. Also, outside chance this creates an NSS style continuous build program for submarines. If the RCN is going to become a submarine navy equivalent to the surface navy then this is very important.

Torp manufacturing I think was part of the bid as was Naval Strike Missile manufacturing (Norway threw in some incentives I'm pretty sure).

Fair enough. The sub circle is pretty small, and I know a few were pulling for KSSIII. Yah proof in the pudding. We'll see how the negotiations work out.
Click to expand...
Is this what you are referring to?

www.tkmsgroup.com

TKMS and Marmen sign strategic Teaming Agreement to support production of 212CD submarine segments in Canada

TKMS and Marmen sign a strategic Teaming Agreement to collaborate on producing selected 212CD submarine segments in CanadaMarmen will apply its high-precision manufacturing expertise to support one of…
www.tkmsgroup.com www.tkmsgroup.com

TKMS and Marmen sign strategic Teaming Agreement to support production of 212CD submarine segments in Canada​

  • TKMS and Marmen sign a strategic Teaming Agreement to collaborate on producing selected 212CD submarine segments in Canada
  • Marmen will apply its high-precision manufacturing expertise to support one of the world’s most advanced conventional submarine platforms
  • The agreement strengthens Québec’s role as a key contributor to Canada’s defence and maritime industrial base
TKMS and Marmen, one of North America’s most respected high-precision manufacturing companies, have signed a strategic Teaming Agreement to collaborate on the production of major submarine workshare for the Royal Canadian Navy.

Under this agreement, Marmen will manufacture selected submarine sections and complex assemblies for the 212CD submarine platform, bringing its expertise in complex, high-precision fabrication to one of the most advanced conventional submarines in service.
 
If TKMS wins, I see us getting 6 boats and a future government saying: "Good enough" and the timelines for those 6 will be long enough that people will have forgotten the intial ask and justification. Plus the people involved will have retired/moved on.

A little piece of my heart is still praying for a shiny new KSS sub.....
 
One thing I hope for, if it is germany, with doubt about timeline, I hope the contract has a penalty for delay clause. Hit them with significant penalties for each month of a delay
 
MilEME09 said:
One thing I hope for, if it is germany, with doubt about timeline, I hope the contract has a penalty for delay clause. Hit them with significant penalties for each month of a delay
Click to expand...

If we're going TKMS then the contract should read TKMS boats at the SK delivery schedule.

You want our business TKMS ? We come first.

With severe penalties for serviceability faults and delivery delays.
 
Underway said:
Buddy, I just want to hang out with you, split a pitcher, eat some wings and swap salty stories. I'm not going to get all hung up on something that will or will not be completed well after I retire. If the contract gets reduced or whatever it gets reduced. It won't be the first or last time.
Click to expand...
Maybe drop a line out when this happens and you might get a table full of us speculators mooching off yer wings!
 
Swampbuggy said:
Maybe drop a line out when this happens and you might get a table full of us speculators mooching off yer wings!
Click to expand...
Episode 9 Joey GIF by Friends
 
Underway said:
You're making assumptions. What about TKMS building out a yard here. Like they've done in half a dozen other countries. They are quite good at it.

Other thoughts if this is the case then its a slam dunk for TKMS. It further supports my point from earlier about Canada wanting direct defence jobs instead of milk plant or natural gas investment.

Nope.

But... There was a German language article where TKMS spoke about Canada as being a partner not a customer. It was a very clear change in tone within the interview as they were talking about other TKMS projects/programs. The CEO corrected the interviewer. The overtones I took from things were TKMS were looking to diversify their industrial base as a hedge against Russian aggression and German economic/demographic headwinds.

Easy to attack German infrastructure from Russia, much hard to attack Canadian infrastructure from Russia.

Their bid on having us build the submarines ourselves reflects that.

From a geopolitical and strategic perspective TKMS building submarines in Canada (though fraught with risk) is a power move. It secures a manufacturing base/supply line away from Russia's easy reach into Europe, and does the same for German sub users in Asia against China (Singapore as an example off the top of my head). A number of South American countries also use German subs and this may mean that some of those countries (Chile for example) may be want to use our maintenance facilities.

This will allow Canada to be able to repair and resupply German submarines should their safe harbours come under threat and will allow us to integrate into any future TKMS submarine wins in the supply line.

It meets the criteria I set out in a previous post regarding industrial offsets actually applying to the defence contract it was supposed to work with. Also, outside chance this creates an NSS style continuous build program for submarines. If the RCN is going to become a submarine navy equivalent to the surface navy then this is very important.

Torp manufacturing I think was part of the bid as was Naval Strike Missile manufacturing (Norway threw in some incentives I'm pretty sure).

Fair enough. The sub circle is pretty small, and I know a few were pulling for KSSIII. Yah proof in the pudding. We'll see how the negotiations work out.
Click to expand...
And Irving thought that a repair base would steal workers what will they think of an entire construction yard? And those will be super-skilled workers too.
 
YZT580 said:
And Irving thought that a repair base would steal workers what will they think of an entire construction yard? And those will be super-skilled workers too.
Click to expand...
From wikipedia:
  • Seaspan Shipyards signed a teaming agreement with TKMS to get a sovereign capability for the sustainement and through-life support of naval ships.
  • Magellan signed an agreement for the production of heavy torpedoes and their maintenance, and participates in the development and production of anti-torpedo torpedoes.
  • Strategic Teaming Agreement signed with EllisDon related to long-term infrastructure to support the CPSP.
  • TKMS signed agreements related to indigenous Canadians developments with:
    • Songhees Development Corporation, Des Nedhe Group Defence and Glooscap Ventures,
    • Inuit Development Corporation Association

Songhees and Seaspan both have property on Esquimalt Harbour. Colwood is designated for the sub maint facility on the west coast and there is plenty of room. If I was a betting man Irving won't have many workers stolen, that's going to be more of a Victoria/Vancouver problem.

As for timelines:

At CANSEC on 28 May 2026, Germany and Norway jointly urged Canada to select the Type 212CD, offering four boats by 2036; with the German and Norwegian fleets this would form a 24-boat NATO operator community.

That means Germany and Norway would have to give up some of their own boats in the production line. Delivery schedule currently looks like this.

Norway - 2029, 2030, 2033, 2035 / Germany - 2031, 2033
 
I hope down the line we don't reduce the number of subs in half unless we simply really can't get the crews for them (that one matter, that barring conscription, can't be solved no matter how fast a sub can be built or local industry build to maintain them/do it ourselves can fix)
 
I'm still perplexed as to why there are two announcements, in different ports at roughly the same time? Does not compute!?
 
ytz said:
I don't know what the Koreans can bid on after this. The next big tranche of contracts are all army stuff. But the CA has a lot of preferences for European and American kit.
Click to expand...
The K9 Thunder is turning out to be very popular in NATO. Estonia, Finland, Norway, Poland, Romania, Turkey all currently operate it, Spain just placed an order, and Sweden and Czech Republic are evaluating it. Outside NATO, Australia operates it, as well as Egypt who developed a forward observation vehicle, the K11, from the K10 ammunition carrier.
 
Maxman1 said:
The K9 Thunder is turning out to be very popular in NATO. Estonia, Finland, Norway, Poland, Romania, Turkey all currently operate it, Spain just placed an order, and Sweden and Czech Republic are evaluating it. Outside NATO, Australia operates it, as well as Egypt who developed a forward observation vehicle, the K11, from the K10 ammunition carrier.
Click to expand...
K9 Thunder is very unlikely to happen given GDLS-Canada's LAV 10x10 based AGM bid, which is almost certainly going to sweep the competition given the initial requirements were literally made for that platform. If the Hanwha submarine bid had been successful and K9 production had been set up in Canada, that might have given them a better chance, but I'd say they are a wide margin second place.

Retired AF Guy said:
I'm still perplexed as to why there are two announcements, in different ports at roughly the same time? Does not compute!?
Click to expand...
Halifax with Carney for the primary contract announcement and Esquimalt with Fuhr for the large, associated west coast infrastructure section of the contract.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kirkhill
    • Like
Littoral Operations
3 4 5
Replies
88
Views
6K
MacNav63
M
Kirkhill
    • Like
Turks Arabs and Pakistanis
2
Replies
22
Views
3K
Brad Sallows
Brad Sallows
Mike Bobbitt
    • Like
  • Sticky
Official Army.ca Costs and Funding
2 3
Replies
42
Views
12K
Mike Bobbitt
Mike Bobbitt
Kirkhill
Mine Warfare
Replies
10
Views
2K
HavokFour
HavokFour
Oldgateboatdriver
    • Like
Type 31 for Canada?
Replies
18
Views
11K
FJAG
FJAG
Back
Top