TKMS Type 212CD (Victoria class replacement megathread)

[Czech_pivo]

Not a sailor but I can do math. Not having two JSS per coast simply doesn't make sense if preparing for a wartime scenario. Ships will be lost or at best go down mechanically. You can't run two fleets on two (three) coasts thousands of kilometres apart with one ship. You might get away with that in peacetime but not in wartime. Keeping the sea lanes and ports open for commerce is vital. For the same reason I think that we need the CDCs and also a small fleet of mine hunting vessels.

$0.02

Yes, every point is valid.

 

[GK .Dundas]

Years ago I was talking to someone and he felt the minimum number of replenishment vessels was around six if we're being serious.

 

[Underway]

Not a sailor but I can do math. Not having two JSS per coast simply doesn't make sense if preparing for a wartime scenario. Ships will be lost or at best go down mechanically. You can't run two fleets on two (three) coasts thousands of kilometres apart with one ship. You might get away with that in peacetime but not in wartime. Keeping the sea lanes and ports open for commerce is vital. For the same reason I think that we need the CDCs and also a small fleet of mine hunting vessels.

$0.02

Mine hunters are not really an issue. With ships taken up from trade launching UUV's to search for and take out mines. If you can build a lot of minehunting UUV's then the rest is pretty easy.

 

[OldSolduer]

Years ago I was talking to someone and he felt the minimum number of replenishment vessels was around six if we're being serious.

We aren’t all that serious. Are we?

 

[Ganon91]

So has anyone heard more on what the Korean's are doing since we didn't select them? I've seen a few things basically saying there pulling out of a lot of stuff they had planned, even stuff not directly related to the subs in Canada?

 

[oldcpu]

In the end, I decided to copy selected translations from the Portugese language video about the Portuguese Navy's "NRP Arpão (TKMS Type-214 variant AIP-lead-acid battery) submarine under ice journey. I note from what I read, also onboard was:

• Danish naval officer
• Canadian naval officer (submariner) who is now CO of a Canadian Victoria class submarine
• US Navy civilian scientists, who have experiece in under ice travel on SSNs and in part acted as under-ice pilots.

Here are selected Google translations from the video

I don't think those translations are the best, and some details and nuances may have been lost.

Here are the approximate words (I may have missed a few words or have a few words wrong) from the Canadian naval officer (submariner) who was onboard NRP Arpão (where I think this was only 4 days under the ice - but I may have that wrong and need to search more to confirm such - so please do not quote me on this just yet):

[09:15] [English spoken by the Canadian naval officer (submariner) ]
This is the first time in recent history, a conventional naval submarine operated in the Arctic. And this was the first for the nation of Portugal. The Arctic is a harsh operating environment. But I would say there were challenges for the crew of the Arpão of the Portuguese navy as they attacked this problem set with incredible enthusiasm. The significance of NRP Arpão, which is a conventionally powered submarine, to operate under the ice, was quite significant, because, in recent history, operating under the ice has been the venture of nuclear-powered submarines, and the Portuguese Navy wanted to prove that conventional submarines, with the right preparations, can also operate in this harsh environment. I've always come out of each experience humbled and impressed at how different, but how similar, we are in achieving the alliance's mission. The Portuguese Navy was incredibly professional and eager to accomplish this mission. It was a unique opportunity to work side by side and I thought we had some great co-operation.

 

[oldcpu]

I honestly think that once we get going with JSS we're going to unlock a lot of submarine support options we didn't know were available. We'll have to see. If its a choice between fleet./sub tenders and two more JSS its gotta be two more JSS. That would round out the fleet quite well ....

I think we all hope the same.

I confess to having a fear that the shift the RCN will face, going from only 1 operational active sea going submarine (out of quantity 4) to having instead having up to 4 to 5 operational active seagoing more capable AIP/Lithium battery propulsion submarines (out of quantity 12) will be a difficult to adjust to major culture shock internal to the navy reference the new capabilities, with 'ripples' up and down the structure of the command chain, the training chain, and the maintenance chain (and "ripples" through to both recruitment and retention efforts). Its a big and potentially exciting challenge ahead for the navy.

 

[FJAG]

Mine hunters are not really an issue. With ships taken up from trade launching UUV's to search for and take out mines. If you can build a lot of minehunting UUV's then the rest is pretty easy.

I take the point on the use of UUVs. It makes sense. OTOH, I'm not sure why one would go to a STUFT if one could develop smallish purpose-built UUV mine hunting tender ships to move and deploy them. In the long run it should make control and training them easier.