B.C. keeps $1.5b Submarine contract

[Ex-Dragoon]

I wonder if a larger variant of the offshore resupply vessels might be a feasible support vessel for submarine operations?

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

However with our sparse resources and long coastlines it may make more sense for us.

Those sparse resources mean that we can't afford a tender no matter how long the coastlines are.

Only the navy would need 1500 people for a tender, at least half of thoses people would be on mandatory diversity and harassment training at any one time. By the way average crew on a CCG ship is 45, with most on the day watch.

The CCG doesn't operate tenders.

Most of the crew on a tender are related to the tender role. ie clerks, fitters, techs etc. They have nothing to do with actual vessel operations.

As for nukes, I seem to remember that one of the big issues is refueling and the Brits get their boats refueled in the US?

Most new boats have "life of the boat" cores that don't need refuelling. In any case, the RN boats are refuelled in the UK. They get nuclear missiles in the US.

I wonder if a larger variant of the offshore resupply vessels might be a feasible support vessel for submarine operations?

For support they'd probably work. I can't see them able to provide repair though.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Actually 90% of the CCG work is tending navaids and resupply, we refuel light stations with landing craft and even from the main ship if conditons are right. Resupply is by workboat or helicopter. While not equipped to do repair work or handling torpedos, the rest of the resupply would be a cakewalk for them.

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

We had no problem resupplying from the Moresby. The problem is getting proper repair services, and that requires a very large crew.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Two ideas:
1) Purchase/leased of a floating drydock and forward positioning up where our eventual northern naval base will be. Build a mini FMF with housing facilities for workers. They can be flown up from BC and NS when needed.
2) To recover a disabled sub what about a heavy lift vessel (leased) to be forward positioned in the same locale as well? I am also sure if worse came to worse, then our eventual A/OPs could be used to tow the SSK to the closest safe port or back to FMF Freezing my Ass off.
As I don't know the waters at all, not sure how feasible the above are.

 

[Neill McKay]

Two ideas:
1) Purchase/leased of a floating drydock and forward positioning up where our eventual northern naval base will be. Build a mini FMF with housing facilities for workers. They can be flown up from BC and NS when needed.
2) To recover a disabled sub what about a heavy lift vessel (leased) to be forward positioned in the same locale as well? I am also sure if worse came to worse, then our eventual A/OPs could be used to tow the SSK to the closest safe port or back to FMF Freezing my *** off.
As I don't know the waters at all, not sure how feasible the above are.

I wonder if a specialized mini-FMF (possibly to include accommodation spaces) could be put together in a number of shipping containers and pre-positioned at the northern base, to be activated as needed?

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

I think something like that could work, but it would be extremely expensive. There would need to be a comprehensive overhaul of the entire naval stores systems with very large budget increases before we could actually pre-position the spares required to support an FMF. Otherwise the parts would just be poached for use in Halifax/Esquimalt.

There's also the matter of installing and maintaining a syncro-lift in the Arctic. Has anyone done that before? What's involved in syncro-lift maintenance?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

ATL ran a large ship repair facility for years in the Arctic, a floating drydock could be built and positioned there, but would be ice bound for most of the year. I suspect that as the Sub fleet gets more use, the repairs and upkeep will actually fall off a bit as the crews get to know the vessels and problem areas get proper fixes. The current government has made Northern waters more of a pirority, even if they have not followed through with as much funding as needed, this is an area where the navy can shine, showing they can provide flexiable forward support for subs and surface vessels will certainly make the navy more relevant for the new era that is rapidaly appraoching.

Some CCG vessels could assist as required, a role the CCG has to stand up to as well.
http://www.ccg-gcc.gc.ca/eng/Fleet/Vessels?id=1115&info=6

 

[a_majoor]

While politics will probably keep the option off the table, the operational need for Canadian nuclear boats is underlined yet again:

http://strongconservative.blogspot.com/2008/07/about-those-nuclear-subs.html

About those Nuclear Subs...

The Liberals once blasted Prime Minister Brian Mulroney for planning to build nuclear submarines for the defence of Canada. But with Russia's plan to begin patrolling the arctic once again, it seems Mr. Mulroney's plan was ahead of it's time.

If Canada is going to defend its sovereignty in the north effectively, it cannot do so without nuclear submarines to patrol under the ice at all times of the year. Sorry, but I don't think global warming is going to get rid of the ice completely despite what David Suzuki and Al Gore might believe.

CNN reports:

Patrols by the Northern Fleet's Severomorsk submarine destroyer and Marshal Ustinov missile cruiser will begin Thursday, Navy spokesman Igor Dygalo said.
Russia began sending aircraft carriers to the Mediterranean Sea in December and resumed long-range bomber patrols last August.
"We have been talking for a long time about widening our activity in the Arctic," Dygalo said. "There is nothing aggressive in it -- it is in the interests of security."

Now with all the crying by Grits and New Democrats about the loss of manufacturing jobs, and of course Mr. Buzz Hargrove too, the Tories have a perfect opportunity to provide thousands of manufacturing jobs, high tech jobs, and support roles in some of the most economically depressed areas of the country. Simultaneous building programs in BC and the Maritime provinces would be a spark to both economies while providing Canada with some long needed defensive capabilities.

We need nuclear submarines to ensure our sovereignty is respected, we need subs to project power when our sovereignty is violated, and we need to create and implement the technology in Canada to provide jobs and opportunities to struggling communities.

Let's roll.

 

[jimderfuhrer]

Canadian navy primary role during World War two was for escorting/search&destroy any German submarines/vessels.  In 1945 Canada had the 3rd largest navy fleet in history. During cold war the Canadian experience for anti-submarines was used against Russian submarines who passed over the Canadian/u.s ocean, the Canadian navy don't really gave importance for submarines(This is for why our fleet was never large like U.S submarines fleets). In 2000's Canada acquired 4x second handed Submarines for his fleet when Canadian navy acquired CH-124 Sea King and CP-140 for anti-submarines patrol aircraft and the Destroyer City-class for anti-submarine capabilities. I mean why Canada waste money on Submarines if since over 60years the Canadian fleet where built against submarines/ship capabilities. 

I don't like minister of defence like O'gornor (British) who buy some submarines without inspection ,and without know if Canada really need a waste of money like that..Canada need combat/patrol vessels not submarines.

This is our waste of money , in reparation since 4 years.

 

[aesop081]

In 2000's Canada acquired 4x second handed Submarines for his fleet when Canadian navy acquired CH-124 Sea King and CP-140 for anti-submarines patrol aircraft and the Destroyer City-class for anti-submarine capabilities. I mean why Canada waste money on Submarines if since over 60years the Canadian fleet where built against submarines/ship capabilities. 

If i were you i would take the crack back to your dealer and ask for a refund......

 

[cp140tech]

Seems to me that the crack is working just fine. 

 

[GAP]

:rofl:

 

[jimderfuhrer]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/cdnsubs/chicoutimitimeline.html  
Fire on HMCS Chicoutimi
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/cdnsubs/
Between 2000-2006 Canadian submarines had problem with hull/fire accident and many another problems.
http://www.corlobe.tk/article9603.html
problem with Lead found in 2006 in the HMCS Victoria (French article)
http://www.corlobe.tk/article9576.html
HMCS Victoria / HMCS Windsor is right now in maintenance for 2009 and the HMCS Chicoutimi will be receive reparation in 2010 to 2012 and HMCS Corner Brook still in maintenance. (French article)
http://www.corlobe.tk/article9245.html
Only 1 submarine will be fully operational in 2009. (French article)
http://www.corlobe.tk/article8043.html
some people in canadian navy still claim the SSK victoria is a good investiments, when we know the German submarine it is aproximatly 600 Million/each or for 6x nuclear submarine from Australia cost $5 Billion dollar. The 4x SSK victoria class = 900 millions CAN$ but that is without maintenance in 2010-2012 for the three another submarines. In reality canadian submarine cost more $2 Billion dollar ( Not exactly sure )

 

[aesop081]

Listen,

I'm not saying that buying the Upholders was a good idea. What i am saying is that you are out to lunch when it comes to our Navy and ASW. We had submarines before we bought these from the UK. There were an integral part of the readiness of our ASW forces and provided one more capability to the Navy. We need to be able to control what goes on above the surface, on the surface and below it. We need our own submarines to train our ASW forces and for a multitude of other roles.

 

[aesop081]

for 6x nuclear submarine from Australia cost $5 Billion dollar.

Australia does not build nuclear submarines does it ?

 

[Sub Standard]

some people in canadian navy still claim the SSK victoria is a good investiments, when we know the German submarine it is aproximatly 600 Million/each or for 6x nuclear submarine from Australia cost $5 Billion dollar. The 4x SSK victoria class = 900 millions CAN$ but that is without maintenance in 2010-2012 for the three another submarines. In reality canadian submarine cost more $2 Billion dollar ( Not exactly sure )


[/quote]

Australia does not have and does not build nuclear subs.  The 6 Collins Class Subs they have are diesel/electric just like the Victoria class.

 

[GAP]

So we should, because you read a french magazine with reprinted articles from the Ottawa Sun, just wander away from our submarine program.....


Yep, the crack is working just fine  :

 

[jimderfuhrer]

what ever they use nuclear or not what i mean for newer and better you can spend less money on it...you can be proud of Canadian submarines but for my part is a terrible waste of money...why not buying some newer and better submarines and anyway Canada can create his own submarines like our own ship. $1.5 Billion dollar isn't 1$ is billion dollar, for only maintenance, Canadian Governments has cancelled the JSS because the project cost $2.9 Billion ,and i hope they don't cancel another project like the Amphibious Class ($1 Billion dollar programe) just because they want a b/s submarine who since 8years is only in maintenance. did you imagine 8years in maintenance, one sank himself in Scotland by a fire (2004) in 2006 they found lead, for 2010-2012 another maintenance and modernization for arctic patrol because the Sonar are not built for detect iceberg (because iceberg don't reflect any sound)  so another million of modernization for our Sonar on board...only 1x of 4 victoria still working...isn't a good submarines is a waste of money and waste of times. I'm not an expert but i know wasting on submarine when you can get a newer,better and faster for less prices.

German Submarines are very strong between U.K made, and anay a U.K second hand Victoria i guess cost
- 280 Million each  ( aproximatly 900 Million )
- 1.5 Billion for maintenence and modernisation

German submarines, 600 Million each and is a better/faster and newer (New not second hand) so for the same price you have better and newer submarines. Its only a waste of money ,you need to understand my point i'm a former of canadian forces and try to returned for end 2008 in regular forces (I was a reservist in Montreal) so when is about canadian forces that made me sick canadian waste on crap submarines and cancelled the Joint Support Ship for still used a 40years old boat, the only remaining steam boat in the world. That made me sick some responsible Minister of defence waste on crap just because the prices is cheap.

 

[aesop081]

what ever they use nuclear or not what i

Maybe start by getting your facts straight before coming here and bitching.  For my part, i cant wait until more of the Victorias are up and running so i can train against them more often.